Rome: Rise and Fall of an Empire (TV Mini Series 2008) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
8 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
A shallow survey of history, but that's to be expected
jadesroom13 July 2015
The series uses less than 13 hours to discuss over 600 years of history, of course none of it is going to be in depth. Still, I enjoyed parts that dealt with figures usually glossed over, Stilicho for example. I also enjoyed the talking heads and the insights that they provide. I found myself researching certain topics so I could get a little more information about the era.

My biggest complaint is that much of the series seemed redundant and boring. As another reviewer has mentioned, the series focuses too much on the military history (and really the battles seemed to be the same ones played over and over) and less on the economic and social history.

The series is decent but not great.
11 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Impressive names, conventional views
hera625 September 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Although one must congratulate the makers for the width of subjects covered and the cooperation of so many resounding names, this series is of decidedly less quality than other history documentary series I know. Especially since the views offered on the various events in the history of the Roman empire never go beyond the conventional views and, moreover, portray the non-Roman peoples almost exclusively from the point of view of Roman writers. Who, as we know, were heavily biased towards Rome and less than honest about those whom they saw as barbarians and thus inferior. For instance, the episode about the conquest of Britain painted a picture of the Britons which I can only call a caricature. If we are to believe the images in this episode, Britons in the first century AD were indeed the primitive savages that the Romans asserted they were. While we know from the research done by various British archaeologists and historians that Brittannia at the time of the Roman conquest actually harboured an advanced civilisation. (By the way - how on earth can an ancient Briton like Caradog/Caratacus carry about such a huge mediaeval sword of a kind that didn't come along until the high Middle Ages?) Furthermore, the episode about Constantine the Great painted him as a full-fledged Christian convert after the battle of the Milvian Bridge, while in reality this was a much longer process. Constantine actually dedicated his Milvian Bridge victory to Sol Invictus, so he was still pretty much a pagan at that moment. And then we see him receiving the Eucharist, while he did not get baptised until he lay on his death bed - and back then it was simply unthinkable for a non-baptised person to receive the Eucharist, be he emperor or no. In brief: kudos for the extensive scope of the series, but the implementation leaves much to be desired.
9 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Short Point
dacjank-45-2943702 August 2014
I feel the other 2 reviews are excellent but I want to make a short point about this documentary,

This documentary focuses on the chronological order of the empires Fall, it has 1 episode on the Roman republic days with the problems of northern Gallic tribes, and than it jumps to Caesar and than jumps again to the empire and than the documentaries main point is what happens during the empires days.

It explains the decay of the empire really well and I cant criticize it for leaving out so many cool facts, the this is already 13 hours long.

8/10, really well made, focuses well on the empire side of Rome and its decay,

I really felt sad when it got to the end.
11 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
My first documentary about Rome
tankace7 April 2016
Rome Rise and Fall of an Empire is a great summary of the whole Roman history in 13 episodes. In more details, this mini-series show us how the empire we all know came to being and why it fell at the end. To see the civilization who is the basics for our own who it worked was a big experience for me. As it is visible from my summary, this was my very first documentary about the Roman Empire and it open my eyes to its greatness and flaws, which ironically mirrored our own. I am Greek and here the idea about religion is that it is flawless, perfect and the people who killed Jesus were horrible and in our history books it is even worse, for real. The Romans are showed as the enemy of Christianity and when they converted they became better.Are you mental me? So you can see why this series had a lasting impression on me. With out this I may have not become a history buff and be in the end ME. But I digress all in all it is a good documentary series and you should definitely watch it.You will after remember it with happiness.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Rome's barbarian wars
midge566 April 2010
Warning: Spoilers
This video set focuses on the Roman history we rarely see any information about. The focus of this set is the Roman interaction with the Germanic wars, Britannia, Dracons and other barbarian tribes and territories. This set is centered on the campaigns & battles with the barbarian tribes and little known Roman emperors... so if you are wanting to focus on the flashy or romanticized figures of Roman history such as Nero or Caligula or Octavian or Cleopatra... this is not the set to buy. Nor does it include any engineering or building of temples. The video does have Julius Caesar and Marcus Aurelius, but only those events of their lives which were associated with the barbarian tribes.

Your family can watch this series. This set is not filled with p0rn like the HBO Rome XXX soap opera.

If you are interested in the rarely covered barbarian wars and campaigns... then this video is for you. These barbarian campaigns and battles are what eventually broke the back of the Roman Empire. It is not the actual battles which are important… rather the cause of the battles which were the issues.

Every time the Romans bartered a deal with the barbarians, promising land or money or other truces… time after time, from one emperor to the next, the Romans consistently failed to follow through on their promises. The integrity of someone's word or promises was the most important issue for the barbarians. This would set off the barbarians into a murderous, unrelenting rage of vengeance against the Romans which eventually destroyed Rome. The Romans never learned. Thus, "those who fail to learn from the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them."

This History channel documentary series is well presented with their usual quality of information and visual recreation of the events, stories, costumes and locations as they provide narration and historical details. This series also covers a lot of information on several plagues and mass starvation's which struck Rome that have rarely been mentioned by any other documentary.

This video covers little known or rarely mentioned Roman emperors and the regions which started to break away from Rome. Decius, Aurelian, Phillip, Constantine and many, many more are included in this series. Rarely seen information on leaders like Queen Zenobia has been brought to life in their historical roles.

It never ceases to amaze me is how these "experts" have not yet figured out that the Roman army did not march hundreds of miles wearing full helmets and armor. They only wore those into battle. When they were just moving troops, they stored their gear on wagons which traveled with their regiments.

However, there was one irritant with this video. Despite the PhD's, Chairs, or books of Thomas R Martin, his speech is so grossly overly exaggerated, he nearly gags himself while speaking. Just the simple word "food" nearly has him strangling on his tongue. It honestly reminds me of the guttural noises Jim Carey makes. It drops Martin's perceived IQ level by 50 points per word. Remember how Jim Carey and Morgan Freeman said, "It's gooood" in an exaggerated way on "Bruce Almighty?" That's the way this guy talks on this video. He nearly gags on the words with "oo" or "ew" sounds. This guy's problem is from sheer habitual laziness not an impediment. People tend to judge by someone's actions or speaking skills and not their resume. His input was quite laughable and annoying whenever he appeared on the video because of his extremely exaggerated speech quirks.

When someone sounds as absurd as this guy does, it is so distracting you don't hear a word he says. Even some of his students claimed he is unorganized... while others commented that he was funny and kept them awake (no doubt, after hearing him sound like a clown on the video, I'm sure he's a laugh a minute but it isn't funny on a documentary.)

Then there is the issue that anytime a documentary selects a consultant from a theological college to be a commentator, it is going to constrain the information they provide. A professor or employee would have to limit their comments within the confines of the policies and beliefs of that institution, no matter what the denomination. This isn't a disparagement. It is a fact. Employees are understandably not going to speak outside of the confines of institutional policies or make negative statements about their particular denomination. They would be unemployed the next day… just the same as if I went on TV and made disparaging remarks about my employer. You can't expect someone to make negative comments concerning the policies of their employer as a commentator on a documentary. It makes no sense to put someone in that position in the first place. It is just common sense. When dealing with historical issues on a documentary, there are going to be negatives in the development of any civilization or religion. A documentary has to be unbiased to provide historic facts about these events which are not driven from any particular theological viewpoint.

It was also a bit much to hear some of these commentators using modern terms like WMD or National security or 911 to make references to ancient Rome. These modern phrases and terms meant absolutely nothing to ancient civilizations. I also got tired of hearing the term "Usurper" repeated throughout the video hundreds of times. It seems that someone needs to buy the narrative scriptwriter a copy of Roget's Thesaurus.

Aside from the minor issues with the production, overall, the basic information and presentation (other than the one commentator) was quite refreshing. All of the historic information was fresh and unique from other videos on Rome and presented with full recreation of events.
15 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A very good series that covers what the others don't
terrsgc2 June 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I liked this series a lot. The series does not try to cover the entire history of the Empire continuously. Rather, each episode covers a specific critical episode or period for the Empire, concentrating on Rome's contentious relations with the various barbarian tribes from Marius' wars with invading Gauls to the fall of Rome. In some episodes, the story deviates to civil conflict or conflict with eastern civilizations, but the emphasis is mostly on the barbarians.

While the series does cover some of the better known periods like Spartacus, the Rise and Fall of Julius Caesar, Marcus Aurelius' barbarian wars, and Attila the Hun, the series also covers a lot of history that is far less covered in media, such as Marius wars against tribes invading Italy and the subsequent strife between Marius and the nobles, Trajan's conquest of Dacia, Stilicho's attempts to save the Empire, Rome's conflicts with the Gauls, the Vandal's conquest of Africa, etc. I would have liked to see them cover even more, like the Punic Wars, early Italian wars, maybe follow up the story of Marius with the story of Cornelius Sulla, and cover the period of barracks Emperors better. But, the Roman Empire lasted a very long time (until 1453 if you count the Eastern 'Byzantine' period). And, budgets for series like this are only so big. I doubt there will ever be a truly comprehensive television documentary.

Of course, the series isn't perfect. The dramatizations seem to use a lot of generic "Roman" and "barbarian" wardrobe and props without too much concern about being correct for the period or tribe. Sometimes what is well-supported conjecture is presented as known fact. But, overall they did a very good job on this series.
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Ugh...
author-854051 January 2018
Simpleminded look at a complicated time in our history. But worse than that, the episodes are full of conjecture...bad conjecture at that. One of the worst documentaries I've seen. Anyone interested in Roman history is far better served by the BBC.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed