She’s right, though. The title needn’t have anything to do with Christianity. And I wasn’t implying that it would, only that it “might”.
I phrased that badly. My apologies. I meant that the title, “Passover” likely refer to some events which occur during the Jewish holiday and has nothing to do with Jesus (as it seems the poster implied.)
There’s no such thing as Jesus.
Ok. Now that that’s settled, can somebody tell me when the new season of Rome is going to begin, so I can set my DVR for it?
Next Sunday, January 14. Or is it January 15? I don’t have a calendar handy.
I watched the repeats yesterday – I’d forgotten how good this show is, and how funny Vorenus and Titus Pullo are, especially when Pullo is giving Vorenus love-making tips.
But I still don’t understand the Pompey-Caesar machinations.
And in any event, the years that this takes place make it a moot point.
I am really looking forward to this. I loved the first season. I remember reading way back when that this will be the last season and that there never were plans for a third.
This coming Sunday. HBO is showing repeats of the last 2 episodes from season 1 first, then they show the 1st episode of Season 2. If you didn’t see those last two eps, be sure to watch them-- they may have been the best two episodes of that season.
What don’t you understand?
I disagree. It was a flippant comment against secularizing the terminology.
I’ll end my overreaction and hijack at your request. But I’m really left wondering why the ignorance gets to stay, while I’m packed off to the pit.
I apologize then. I did not see the promo. Is it the title of the episode?
The link in the OP appears to be to a screen capture from a promo run by HBO. the screen capture shows a long haired bearded man emerging from water. The OP ponders the possibilty of an appearance by Jesus in the next series of Rome. Certainly it’s news to noone that many believe a dude named Jesus lived in the Roman Empire. Is it spoiling to ask whether, based on a piece in the promo (along with an ep titled “Passover”), JHC might be making an appearance? Timelines would seemed to prevent it, but that aside, is the question a spoiler? I am sincere. I have a hard time drawing the line between what is and is not a spoiler.
I suspect the image we’re seeing in the preview might be a “proselyte baptism” (or “proselyte mikveh”) a symbol of a gentile’s conversion to Judaism. Or it might just be a Jewish man engaging in ritual purification. That the next episode is entitled “Passover” would seem to suggest the possibility.
I heard the same thing, and that the big problem was that ratings weren’t very good, and the show cost a fortune (I think the first season was $100 million). So I’m eagerly awaiting the second season.
I’m only somewhat familiar with Roman history, but I love the historical aspects. Like how we literally saw Caesar crossing the Rubicon. And Octavian is clearly very perceptive, even as a young boy, which makes sense, given what he does as an adult.
Lucius Vorenus is a great character, and in some respects reminds me of Seth Bullock from Deadwood.
Why did Pompey set up a vote to denounce Caesar as a traitor and depend on Marc Antony to veto it? And if he’s going to do that, why didn’t he let Antony in on his plan? Antony was flummoxed there at the end. “Huh? I’m supposed to veto this? Why’d you bring it up in the first place, you great lummox!”
I also don’t get Octavius’s explanation about the stolen eagle, that Caesar didn’t care about the eagle and attempting to retrieve would be seen by Pompey as weakness. What was that about?
Pompey wanted to set up the vote against Caesar simply to demonstrate that Pompey (and not Caesar) had the full support of the Senate. On the other hand, Pompey didn’t want an actual military confrontation with Caesar, so he was counting on Marc Antony to veto the measure. Antony’s inability to veto the measure led to the confrontation that Pompey feared.
In other words, the measure was intended as a bluff, to demonstrate Pompey’s authority and intimidate Caesar. By failing to veto, Antony called the bluff (albeit inadvertently).
Well that’s politics Auntie. Pompey needed the symbolic gesture of denouncing Caesar without actually forcing a war with him. Probably almost as important is recording that vote for history.
Thank you.
I was also puzzled by the vote itself. It looked like only about a third of the senate voted with Pompey. The guys sitting on one side approved it, but it looked like the guys on the other side were grumbling. Did I interpret that scene wrong?
I’m going to miss this Caesar. I thought he was played by a solid actor, and had a real chemistry with the other characters.
Ciaran Hinds.
A member of the Royal Shakespeare Company. I saw him play Achilles in Troilus and Cressida many years ago.
He spent much time skulking in his tent.
Agreed. Rome won’t be the same without him.
Aw shit. You mean he dies?
