Filipe Neto Well, I always maintain, as a historian, some healthy reservations about films and period miniseries because, by rule, what happens in this stuff is to see the story told with the eyes of the 21st century and not according to the mentality and the of those people. Okay, it's made for entertainment, but it would be a lot more interesting if they wanted to give those characters the mentality and the way of being from that specific era. This case, unfortunately, is no different. Characters' way of being and acting still shows the way we think in the present. Historically, however,it's strict enough to be acceptable. It might be better, in some detail, and really show us some important moments in the life of this personality that we don't see, even if they're numbered. For example, everything that had to do with Caesar's military life was brutally softened, and we have never been able to grasp the military's worth of this man whose war strategies are still being studied in military academies. However, despite this, the script respects quite a lot the biography of Caesar, and the costumes and scenarios are in agreement with what the history advocates. Actors do, as a rule, a very competent job. The protagonist is Jeremy Sisto, an actor he had never seen and who seems quite young but talented. Richard Harris is an accomplished actor, a veteran who never leaves us disappointed. Christopher Walken also shone on your character.

decroissance Look, I hate to sound nasty, but this production was not good. The acting was crappy. Really execrable in cases. The dialogue was so awful. Historical accuracy -- not that I expect perfection, but what is the point of doing history if they make half of it up? And look, Jeremy Sisto, I despised him. What is up with him throwing away his lines, like the words or decisions are being forced out of him against his will? I see what he's trying to do, but not only does it seem inapproriate for the character, he does it really badly. He's playing the most dynamic leader of the mightiest empire in history. I saw very little of any charisma or take-charge personality that would inspire devotion in his legions. Sean Pertwee standing beside him makes him look like a muppet.And Christopher Walken. Shuffling around the Senate looking like he's really constipated. And it made no sense that for most of the movie, he looked like an ineffectual, finicky effeminate person, but when he goes to war he grows long hair and a beard and is suddenly virile and studly. Plus I thought his acting was bad. Except when he fell on his sword. I wish some other characters had done the same. All right -- maybe it's just that as an American, I was embarrassed that our actors are so inferior. Apollonius was excellent. Richard Harris was really good even though he was obviously so unwell. Vercingetorix -- liked him a a lot, though I must note that it looked like he got his trousers at a flea-market in Santa Cruz. Was Marc Antony American? Because I did think he was good. Oh, and Chris Noth -- he was not awful. He was pretty okay. Certainly looked the part.I'm sure no one cares, but if anyone liked Sean Pertwee in Cadfael, this is the role most similar to Hugh Beringar. In fact I thought his expressions looked like Hugh Beringar all grown up.

ashley wetherall Julius Caesar is a slightly better than average TV movie. But I would not recommend it for history buffs as it dose take quite a few liberty's with its historical accuracy . For example all the costumes are very inaccurate from the army uniforms to the senators robes. Especially in the case of Cato. Cato was said to have lead a rather Spartan life style and never wore the robes of the senator plus Cato was younger than Caesar so why get Christopher Walken to play him. Also the character of Vercingetorix is seen being killed in his jail cell. This never happened as he was ritually garroted in public. Also I think Sulla died of a flesh eating disease, similar to syphilis. Plus Marcus Licinius Crassus, Caesars Mentor and Sponsor is not even mentioned. I'm a bit of a roman history buff and have read a number of books on the Caesar. But I must say I half expected the mini series to be ten time worse. What saves Julius Caesar is the fact that it is well acted by most of the cast and is the first movie that I have seen that try's and tackle the early life of Caesar. It dose this quite well. Although it tended to jump forward years and miss out some major events in Caesars life. In short it was a bit rushed, but you can't have it all. Special effects and the battles are bloodless but well handled Getting back to the cast. Jeremy Sisto is a very good Caesar, unfortunately he doesn't age well. Richard Harris in his last role adds weight to the small role of Sulla. Chris North is good but under used as Pompey, Samuela Sardo is way to sexy to be a realistic Cleopatra but as eye candy, she's great. Valeria Golino really isn't given enough to do as Calpurnia, but is always a pleasure to watch and Christopher Walken is good but miss cast. The plain fact is that you can't fit Julius Caesars life into 3hours. I think they would have done better to make a 10 hour mini series in the same vain as H B O's ROME. But don't be put off by my small moans. I love epic movies and these type of mini series and I hope that they continue to make them. Julius Caesar was on the whole a reasonable attempted and I do not regret watching it. I just wish they hadn't have rushed it.

Jay Jedi I am reading Conn Iggulden's books at the moment. and although he changed a little bit of the real story in favor of the book, the books are close to the real live of Caesar.The movie is bad cause it does not do justice to the man Caesar was...The acting was not good, only Richard Harris was really good as Sulla, he will be missed...I really hope that a man like for instance Peter Jackson is willing to pick up the story of Conn Iggulden's Caesar. It has CLASSIC written all over it...But this movie...I'm sorry..