Asterix, Obelix and Dogmatix

goes burrrrr

Ridley Scott tends to play very loose with history, and generally uses history more as a backdrop for the story he wants to tell. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

In either case, the adoration for the Classical period in Asterix and Obelix is far superior!

And as I recall, he’s oddly defensive about it, throwing out “Were you there?” like it’s some sort of mic drop, but decades of archaeology, educated inference, textual analysis of multiple sources, and other peer-reviewed research mean nothing.

Sure, Ridley, Marcus Aurelius really wanted to return to the Republic and control by the Senate, and that was because he was a secret populare.

The names in these comics were funniest things ever.

I think i need to search my parents house for Asterix and Obelix, Lucky Luke and Iznogoud comics.

I love Gibbons thinly disguised critique of the British Empire!

Do you think post-2020 movies are more accurate or why do you make this distinction?

am I in !eurographicnovels@piefed.social ? Are you @JohnnyEnzyme@piefed.social ?

You have summoned me, and here I am!

But no, this isn't EGN. I didn't even know about this community.

I'm Skullgrid and I endorse all of PugJesus' content

Mucho gusto, and I've certainly seen you around the Fediverse. I guess I'd forgotten you were subscribed to EGN, if I understand correctly?

I'm subscribed to a bunch of PJ's communities, and try to contribute (usually comments, some posts) when I can.

I didn't mind Gladiator, as it was mostly about fictional characters set in Roman times. Gladiator felt like a fairytale and was a good story about one wronged man who manages to defeat the emperor of Rome because he has virtue, skill, integrity and charisma. All the things, that the emperor hasn't. Could've been set in any time and any world and the story would still resonate with people.

And then there is Napoleon which is a spiteful, hateful and incorrect biopic of a real historical figure, done by an old man who probably should have retired years ago and left movie making and historical fiction to people who actually respect the source material they work with.

I genuinely hate that I paid money to watch that piece of shit movie. I'm not a Napoleon fan girl in any way, but if you decide to make a biopic, I expect you to take it seriously and not waste my fucking time and money making a petty little hate-film about a European warlord who's been dead for at least a couple of centuries.

Generally, I just think Americans should stop making movies about other countries' histories. There was a time where they managed to make their incorrect historical fictions in a respectful manner, but in current day, they all seem so smug, hateful and deliberately provocative towards the people whose cultures they are appropriating.

I remember refusing to see Napoleon because of how disappointed I was with Ridley Scott's recent output.

It's sad, because the Director's Cut of Kingdom of Heaven is one of my favorite, if only loosely historical, films. But he has really dropped off the past 20 years.

Inaccurate? You're telling me a small village of Gauls didn't kick that sociopath salad fella's arse?

As somebody who grew up reading Asterix, they're canon and none of your dirty lies will convince me otherwise.

We are talking about a guy that used Von Daniken's farts as the basis for Prometheus.

I think a few of the elderly directors in Hollywood have shown recently that they have become too old to make anything worthwhile. I have a similar problem with Martin Scorsese. Dude has not made a worthwhile movie since Silence. I disliked The Irishman and hated Killers of the Flower Moon, but because it is Martin Scorsese, everybody praises everything he makes. Even when it is shit.

Clint Eastwood is one of the few old directors who still manages to make good movies. Probably because he has accepted where he is in life and isn't trying to cling to relevancy.

I still cannot get over how Scorsese threw a toddler fit because cinemas around the world put an intermission into Killers of the Flower Moon. Bitch, if you wanted people to sit through your shitty movie without breaks, you probably shouldn't have made it 4 hours long for no reason!

And I also found it fucking wild when I heard that he had had to rewrite the script at one point because he realized he had made a movie entirely about white men and forgotten to tell the story of the native American. After having seen the movie, I'm genuinely wondering what the original script looked like because it's literally still just a movie about white men and the native Americans are side characters in their own story. I also really didn't understand how he decided to cast a particular character in the movie as a white man when he was a native irl. That particular choice is very fucking weird if you watch the movie and read the book. The book is great, btw. It is told from the perspective of the natives and is a murder mystery.

I'm genuinely so baffled at how Scorsese decided to tell this amazing story and not only fuck up the mystery part on purpose, but also telling it entirely from the perspective of the villains. Like it could've worked, but it didn't. And he still got so much praise for it. I disliked the movie when I saw the film and hated it even more after reading the book. He should just stop making movies. Wtf was that. And people keep being like "but it's good he brought awareness to it". By entirely fucking up the whole story and making the victims side characters in their own stories? Treating them like they are fucking stupid naive children the entire film? Oh, I'm salty about Scorsese.

Mucho gusto, and I’ve certainly seen you around the Fediverse.

I was just doing a parody of the "I'm Political Person X and I endorse this message". Thanks for noticing me senpai!

I guess I’d forgotten you were subscribed to EGN, if I understand correctly?

Yeah, I wish I contributed/participated more there, but I suck/am busy.

Had to be those damn Gauls.