As a helpful chap, I just thought I’d get my Oh So PC local critics comments out of the way in today’s title so as to save them the bother!
I have spent £2.41 purchasing a second hand two DVD set of a film I have just watched on a single Blu-Ray disc I recently purchased.
Why? I hear you ask, Dear Reader.
#1: Because it was only £2.41 postage included and 2#,some Amazon reviews said the DVD was rubbish quality and that purchasers should buy the Blu-Ray disc whilst others said the Blu-Ray disc was rubbish quality and that purchasers should buy the DVD! I found the broadcast quality of the Blu-Ray disc very good although the aspect ration had not been adjusted for the 16:9 screens we have nowadays. So I’ve gone and bought the DVD set to see if that is better! After all, it is less than fifty shillings! Mind you, in the days when the film was made, fifty shillings (£2.50 for our younger readers) a chap could but a made to measure suit for that!
The film in question was the MGM epic production Quo Vadis that was filmed in Rome in the summer of 1950 and released on 8th November, 1951. The film had a stellar cast with Robert Taylor as Marcus Vinicius , Deborah Kerr as Lygia (in image) Peter Ustinov as Emperor Nero and Patricia Laffan as Poppaea Sabina, the second wife of the Emperor Nero. The film featured many uncredited supporting parts and cameos, including Elizabeth Taylor as a Christian prisoner in arena, Sophia Loren as a Lygian slave and Christopher Lee as a chariot driver.
The 1951 epic film was in fact based on the novel Quo Vadis: A Narrative of the Time of Nero written by Henryk Sienkiewicz in Poland (at the time part of the Russian Empire). The novel tells of a love that develops between a young Christian woman, Lygia and Marcus Vinicius, a Roman patrician. It takes place in the city of Rome under the rule of emperor Nero, c. AD 64. Sienkiewicz studied the Roman Empire extensively before writing the novel, with the aim of getting historical details correct. Consequently, several historical figures appear in the book. It was first published in instalments in the Gazeta Polska between 26 March 1895 and 29 February 1896, as well as in two other journals, Czas and Dziennik Poznański, starting two and three days later. It was published in book form in 1896 and has been translated into more than 50 languages. The novel contributed to Sienkiewicz’s Nobel Prize for literature in 1905.
As is not uncommon, the later film differed from the original book. The biggest deviation was in the final ending of the story in the Colosseum in Rome. In the film, Lygia along with her personal bodyguard Ursus were to be killed by a bull in the Colosseum. For Ursus the plan was for him to die wrestling the bull in an vain attempt to save Lygia from being gored to death by the bull’s horns.
In Sienkiewicz’s novel, Lygia was to be martyred in the way many Roman women were martyred at that time; by being tied to a wild auroch bull. This was a brutal and cruel death which for the moronic Colosseum audience was bloody good entertainment (pun intended).
What is a wild auroch bull? I hear you ask.
Well, allow me Dear Reader to begin by telling you what is not! It is NOT a wild version of this:
The South Devon bull above is the largest of British bulls, it has a large frame and is muscular in conformation. It has a broad head leading to a deep full body, the mature bulls weigh approximately 1200 to 1500 kgs. Source: https://www.thecattlesite.com/breeds/beef/98/south-devon/
Put it this way; compared to a wild auroch bull, the fine fellow above is SMALL! And DOCILE!
Aurochs (Bos primigenius) were an extinct species of cattle, considered to be the wild ancestor of modern domestic cattle. With a shoulder height of up to 180 cm (71 in) in bulls and 155 cm (61 in) in cows, it was one of the largest herbivores in the Holocene; it had massive elongated and broad horns that reached 80 cm (31 in) in length – each! Below, a skull of an auroch bull:
Aurochs were still widespread in Europe during the time of the Roman Empire, when it was widely popular as a battle beast in Roman amphitheatres. The Romans thought it a “bloody good idea” to martyr the early Christian women by stripping them naked and tying them down with ropes along the auroch’s back. As you can see by the horns, the poor woman suffered a fate akin to crucifixion as her wrists were tied near to the ends of the bull’s horns. Being a wild animal the beast would instinctively try and shake the poor women from it’s back. Given the poor woman was stretched over the animal’s neck she would scream in agony as the bull swung it’s head from side to side and up and down! Sometimes the animal rolled onto it’s back. It’s huge weight ensured the poor woman was crushed to death. Other times the animal succeeded in freeing itself from it’s burden and would often trample or gore the poor woman. It was a bloody awful death. This torturing to death summed up the barbarity of Roman civilisation.
In Sienkiewicz’s novel, Lygia was freed from her awful fate when Ursus successfully managed to wrestle the bull to it’s death and then release Lygia to the acclaim of the crowd.
Sensibly, MGM decided that this plot was dangerous and impractical. It was also ridiculous as there is not a man on the planet who would be physically capable of overpowering an adult wild auroch bull unarmed!
As a result, MGM’s writers came up with the ending viewers see now. Given that 6 ft 6.5 in (1.99 m) tall Jacob Henry “Buddy” Baer (who played Ursus) was actually going to wrestle a bull, a juvenile young bullock was selected. A full grown bull was way beyond the capabilities of even Mr Baer!
Notwithstanding this necessary rewriting, the film ended as cinema goers wanted; happily ever after with Marcus & Lygia Vinicius settle in the patrician’s villa in Sicily where they live openly as Christians.
As other reviewers have commented, this sort of film – especially promoting Christianity is NOT the sort of film that the large studios and main stream broadcasters would make today!
Which is a very great pity.
Notwithstanding this, there are some criticisms I have of the film: The portrayal of Saint Paul by the late Abraham Sofaer (1 October 1896 – 21 January 1988), whilst hugely likeable, will have been wide of the mark insofar as the character of Saint Paul himself.
Abraham Sofaer’s portrayal was of a wonderfully warm and loveable soul who could be everybody’s absolute favourite Jewish uncle! So? What’s not to like? I hear you ask. After all, Saint Paul is one of the most significant figures in Christianity.
The fact is however that Saint Paul will have been a man possessed of the most extraordinary drive and determination. A wonderful man was he no doubt, but not the gentle lovable soul portrayed by Abraham Sofaer.
The other criticism I make will to some readers put me in the Wokery tick box, but they will be wrong. The fact is however the presence of black actors was noticeable by their almost complete absence. At that time, Roman Legions had a significant number of African soldiers. There were also a significant number of African slaves in Roman households. You it is not realistic to show massed ranks of Roman soldiers and not have a considerable number of black men in their ranks.
The biggest criticism I have however are those of the fleeting glimpses of the actor playing Christ. He (whoever he was) was clearly a pale skinned European. I remember as a small child seeing representations of Jesus as a tall blonde blue eyed Nordic looking man. This was rubbish. He looked nothing like that!
It seems that those in charge of our arts and entertainment are incapable of achieving a sensible balance! They have no sense of proportion!
The most glaring example of wokery is here: https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2016/9/13/12894934/hamilton-debates-history-race-politics-literature
Personally, I reckon that Quo Vadis is a jolly good film and is ready for a remake.
The Poles had in fact made one in 2001 and it can be watched here on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ezhAiHzbdM
As you can see, the film has a naked Lygia strapped to a bull but the wrestling scene is most unconvincing. The film was made on a small budget as was a Polish language film aimed at the home market.
There is no doubt that the bull scene is the most challenging of all and to do it properly – with of course due regard to the safety of all concerned – as no actual bull is needed – requires a lot of money and access to state of the art CGI. CGI can be very time consuming and as a result, expensive. It could be done however but to look convincing it would be expensive.
The other aspect is keeping the film true to historical facts whilst at the same time maximising box office revenue which is all about “bums on seats”. Here there is an inevitable clash between historical actuality and the attitude of the US media industry, US politicians and the US public.
As can be seen, the Poles kept to history and Lygia was naked. This should be the case. However having this part of the film “a nude scene” would effectively block the film from most US outlets.
I would suggest two versions. One for DVD Region 2 and Blu-Ray Region B and another for DVD Region 1 (USA) and Blu-Ray Region A (USA). Region2/B have the nude scene Region 1/A have the actress in a “Roman” style bikini! The bikini could be “photo-shopped” on!
There is of course the big question: How to get Lygia off the auroch’s back without stretching the bounds of credibility and credulity?
Well, having Ursus wrestle an auroch bull is absolute nonsense! Henryk Sienkiewicz did himself no favours when he wrote this into his novel!
Happily, over seventy years have passed since the 1951 film was made. Things have changed a lot in that time! Although aurochs have been extinct for centuries, modern technology (CGI) can recreate them – and safely!
Unfortunately a truly convincing professionally made scene featuring an actress tied to the back of an auroch bull will take many many hours of filming and computer manipulation by highly skilled and talented professionals – who naturally charge high fees! Doing the job right is seldom cheap and often very expensive!
Well, this IS a film promoting Christianity. I therefore suggest a fictional Divine intervention!
I suggest this:
Lygia is seized from her cell under the Colosseum by two soldiers. She is taken to the preparation area where she is stripped naked and force-ably tied with ropes onto the bull. Lots of problems here as we have aspects akin to sexual violence graphically portrayed. Doing this right would involve Roman women preparing and adorning (in the hair on her head and also in certain other areas) Lygia with flowers. For obvious reasons, these scenes would have to be very carefully filmed for Region 2/B audiences. They would have to be cut out entirely for Region 1/A audiences.
Why have flowers placed in any place other than on her head at all? I hear you ask Dear Reader.
Because this is what happened to the poor women subjected to this horrific form of execution and – consistent with Health & Safety – one should strive for authenticity.
See image of a statute below:
The bull and Lygia enter the Colosseum to the roar of the crowd. Lygia then prays to the Almighty for deliverance and to bless and forgive her torturers and would be murderers. Cue strange atmospheric sound and light effects & C. to indicate a miracle is about to happen/is happening. The bull, far from attempting to rid itself of Lygia, suddenly becomes completely docile walks around the arena giving the crowd a good view with apparent care in terms of a gentle gait. Plenty of male visual interest here of course! It dawns of the crowd that they are witnessing something extraordinary and they begin to cheer. The bull continues to walk around to walk around the Colosseum’s arena near the front rows affording the audience with a good view and continues past the Imperial party to the point where it has completed a full circle. It then turns and walks across the arena straight towards the Imperial party. It stops in full view before the Emperor and then lowers itself onto the ground resting on it’s underside and appears to go to sleep!
Of course, the effect on the huge crowd is dramatic!
Nero of course realises that he is now in great danger! Quickly, he has the presence of mind to seek to rectify the situation and recover from this!
Now, Nero made the very great mistake of claiming to be a God! He was not the only Roman Emperor to do this. Is predecessors did as well. The problem of claiming to be a God is that whilst God Himself has divine power, a mortal man has not! God can and has wrought miracles!
In this fictional case, Nero seeks to recover the situation by standing up and announcing that he had decided to use his divine power to “admonish” Lygia and not to harm her for he Nero is always the merciful ruler!
Unfortunately – for Nero – the Almighty had decided that He was having none of this! Suddenly, what had been a glorious sunny day became a cloudy day. The skies darkened – a lot! Suddenly there was a crash of thunder over the arena! But no lightening!
At this Marcus Vinicius (who as in the 1951 film had been tied to a post on the orders of the Empress Poppaea Sabina) managed to free himself and took the initiative and jumped down to the arena to free his wife from the back of the sleeping bull. His fellow legionaries (as in the 1951 film) also revolted and joined their CO on the arena. Using a sword given by one of the soldiers, Marcus Vinicius works quickly to free his wife and them addresses the crowd making the speech he does in the 1951 film.
The film then ends in pretty much the same way as the 1951 film. One of the officers of the Praetorian Guard who have ceased to offer resistance removes his cloak and tosses it to Marcus Vinicius who places it around his naked wife to restore her modesty. What would not be broadcast and would have to be cut of course is the removal of a bunch of cut flowers from a certain part of the actress’s body!
In these scenes there is no need for Ursus. Following “regime change”, Lygia and Marcus live happily ever after as Christians in Scilly.
As written above, creating this scene would be demanding, time consuming and expensive. It would require a huge amount of CGI! It would also require the construction (in studio) of a model of a full sized auroch bull. The actress would have to he secured with ropes to the back of this model and the model would have to be have it’s legs and head and neck moved. The actress could either be unsecured and re-secured after every movement of the limbs or not – Health & Safety being observed at all times! As to the application of flowers, obviously female staff only would be involved and a nurse would place some flowers in a certain place, the stalks being placed inside a certain product – for obvious reasons.
It would require a lot of work to seamlessly integrate the photographic footage of the actress secured to the model with the CGI content of the auroch walking around the arena!
Now then: A further word about our PC woke world!
Doubtless you will have heard the reports about a film made by Shi’a Muslims that has outraged Sunni Muslims.
Well, happily Christians in the UK and Europe are a lot more tolerant!
You see, were they not so, my fellow churchgoers would be most vociferous about this blog-post!
Why?
Because I suggested that a divine miracle be invented!
This to some would be tantamount to blasphemy and condemn me to a very sticky end!
Not only that, but my suggestion of mixing a moving image of a Christian women praying for her enemies with what they would suggest is a lewd and pornographic moving image of a naked woman forcibly restrained in a setting with strong BDSM overtones is blasphemous in-and-of itself and must surely condemn me to an eternity in one of Lucifer’s hotter crucibles!
I would reject this!
What is lewd and pornographic are simulated and not-so-simulated sex scenes that demean the humanity of the actor and actress taking part and also, those viewing it. IMHO, seeing an image of a naked young woman in a dire situation engaged in prayerful activity and NOT sexual activity, is not lewd, is not pornographic and is not blasphemous.
But then, what right has this “Far Right”, “Neo-Nazi”, “Neo-Fascist”, racist xenophobe got to an opinion anyway?