Speaking of Rome...

We didn't have much in terms of history lessons in school - and, anyway, all I cared about was arts and music (and biology, for some odd reason).
 
But recently, as other interests called for it I started digging into history books and/or documentaries, and I watched and read a couple of things about Rome.
 
One character in a long line of odd balls that got my attention was an "eccentric" (a euphemism, even for a Roman empreror) young emperor by the name of Elagabalus (203-222 CE).
 
He was reputed for his limitless cruelty - but that's not uncommon among emperors and kings in those days. What's a bit more out of the ordinary, is that, allegedly, young Elagabalus:
 
Had the hairs plucked from his body in order to appear more female.
Showed up in public wearing make-up and women's clothing.
Is said to have offered half his empire to any physician who could equip him with female genitalia. 
He is credited with saying: "I am delighted to be called the mistress, the wife, the Queen of Hierocles".
He referred to his charriot driver as his "husband".
 
Though he did have wives and mistresses, too.
 
It is also said that he walked around backwards carrying a pet rock, praying to the sun.
 
Fortunately for him, FOX News and the rest of those guys weren't around in those days. Can you imagine what they would have had to invent to make him look worst? :P
 
I'm pretty sure nowadays he'd be one of the main guys on a certain reality TV show. (I refuse to even type the name, but it sounds strangely similar to everyone's favorite species on Star Trek.)
 

 
 
Anyway, I know that, like me, many of you guys feel depressed when you look at the world around us. So next time you worry about our youth's role models or our political leaders, remember Elagabalus.
 
We're getting closer to that level but not quite there just yet. :P

For the benefit or everyone and as a safeguard, so that any potential discussion doesn't get dragged into the mud: FOX News and the rest of those guys. 

I mentioned FOX because that's one of the ones I see most often and I'm not familiar w/ news stations in the US. I guess I could have added CNN. That's the two that come to mind.
 
Anyone feel free to add their own.
 
As for I, my preference and like or dislike for specific new stations is irrelevant in this context and besides the point as it would only bring forth inevitable political issues and arguments and that is against the TOS. 
 
So if any FOX or CNN or Channel 4 news or whatever news station of whatever allegiance was offended - all apologies.  
 
I do trust that the majority actually understood it w/o the need for me to get into lengthy explanation, but, there...

At school we had a choice - either Latin or Roman History.

Looking back it was fascinating, at the time boring.

As with most subjects, if only ............

Cheers,
Jerry

bitflipper
I should point out that the T.O.S. prohibits discussion of politics, and as it does not specify a cutoff date it would seem that poking fun at a politician from the third century is also off-limits. 
 
This rule does not apply to Donald Trump, as he is an entertainer.

As those outsiders are always insisting "I'm not a politician!"

Nothing new under the sun.  Except flying monkeys.  Not even the romans had those.

This is the type of stuff that makes me think the "Rome" series could have, and still could be, an extremely popular franchise for HBO or any of the other high quality cable networks.
 
Just think of all the crazy stories that could be portrayed from throughout the Roman empire. They could run multiple series as once and never run out of quality material. Like the whole CSI franchise except not so vapid and much more interesting.
 
Of course production costs for these types of shows are enormous but apparently so is demand. It'd probably be good for the overall education of society too if it gets people interested in history. There is certainly a lot to be learned by modern western society from the successes and failures of the Roman empire.

1) I come from a union family (auto, not film) so yeah... don't get all union busty on me, brah
 
2) I worked in the film industry for a bit (I was not in the union but was trying to be until the towers fell and so did the industry in Canada). Those were good careers for folks and they worked HARD for their wages. Many of them could be dicks fer sure and the unions were fudged up but it was extremely good for the city, those workers and me personally (the grunt scrabbling for scraps).
 
Independent film is different but an entity like HBO or the other cable networks rake in enough profits to pay union wages and should.
 
I am talking about corporate production. Not indie films. I think indie filmakers should be allowed to avoid union chicannery if they truly are independent. If it is a for profit exercise there is a REASON those unions exist that goes back to the dawn of the original film studios and their vulturous labor practices.
 
You of all people should know this, Moshie. Being on set, in any capacity, is long, frustrating and gruelling work.

One word.  Sangiovese