I’m not sure what you mean about finishing the series. On Friday Starz premiered the eighth episode (Mark of Brotherhood) but IMDB says that there are thirteen episodes in this series. So how far have you gotten?
Oooh, a bit of research shows that you’re correct. I finished watching the last episode on Netflix (episode 7) and had just assumed that was the last episode of the season.
Well, I know what I’m going to be doing this afternoon. Thanks!
I thought thissums it up pretty well.
Given how the seventh episode ended, I can see how you thought that was the series ender. But I wonder how where they’re going to end this first season.
And that raises a question. Given that the series seems to be following the historical record (more or less), would it be a spoiler to mention events that haven’t happened yet, even though those events are documented by Plutarch and others?
People whined in the Deadwood threads about unboxed spoilers despite that info being (in comparison) recent American history, so I’m guessing yes.
What real history? Is this the actual Spartacus? I thought the Romans gave him the name Spartacus as a reference to the actual Spartacus, meaning the guy who led the slave revolt. Is our tiny Thracian supposed to be the actual Spartacus? If so, Spartacus wasn’t that guy’s birth name? I’m so confused…
I was once again impressed by how quickly they move things along. Bringing in additional slaves would normally be the natural starting point for season 2. Made even more impressive by the fact that Starz ordered season 2 before this first season even started airing.
Ahem - cough, cough - yes - just saw the most recent episode.
Re-defines the cut/uncut debate.
I’m confused just trying to read your post, but the title character on the show “Spartacus: Blood and Sand” and played by Andy Whitfield was not called Spartacus at birth. The rest I’ll spoilerbox, in case there’s anyone out there unfamiliar with the history.
He was given that name by the Romans who enslaved him. So yes, we’re supposed to understand that he is the Spartacus of legend, formerly portrayed by Kirk Douglas, and eventually to lead a slave revolt. So what I was wondering was whether the slave revolt would occur in this first season.
No, he was given the name Spartacus AFTER the Spartacus of legend, it is not supposed to be him.
Based on the plot descriptions on Wikipedia, IMDB and the official show website, I think he is supposed to be the Spartacus of legend, named for the Thracian king Spartocids. Unless of course I’m totally confused.
That’s not how I understood it from the show. I thought they *said *in the show when they named him Spartacus that it was after the legend of Spartacus. Why would there already be a legendary Spartacus if that’s supposed to be him? 
Was the legendary Spartacus *not *called that at birth?
I have to agree that he is the Spartacus. To follow on Dewey’s spoiler:
In the show, the dominus of the ludus is Batiatus, same as in the movie and legend. Location is the same (Capua) as is Spartacus’s soon-to-be partner Crixus. Plus, why would the Roman’s choose to name a slave/gladiator after a slave/gladiator who lead a slave uprising?
This is how i understood it also.
Just to add to JeffB’s post above, here is a site containing a translation of Plutarch that describes (and I’ll spoilerbox this)
how “a man called Lentulus Batiatus had an establishment for gladiators at Capua.” Note that Batiatus is the name of John Hannah’s character and of course the show is set in Capua. Note too that the page also mentions Spartacus and Crixus.
I think it’s a bit of both and the writers are using some artistic license. There was a previous great Thracian gladiator named Spartacus that this Spartacus is named after, but his life is closely following the historical legend in other respects.
I think he’s supposed to be the real thing. Besides, I don’t think the Romans would have named a later gladiator after the famous Spartacus. Spartacus wasn’t someone the crowd would have been encouraged to remember fondly.
Maybe, but it’s not like there’s any shortage of arrogance in every Roman depicted.
Nope not a previous gladiator, a legendary king of the Thracians. Add to that that there are other characters named who are part of the Spartacus(slave revolt) story eg. Batiatus and
Crixus and it’s pretty clear that this IS Spartacus.
Also this video of the star talking about the show clearly states the timeline they are talking about and it’s the timeline of the Slave revolt.
Spartacus was not named Spartacus at birth. Batiatus named him after a famous Tracian King. He resists the name at first. Sura never calls him by name. When he is anticipating her arrival, he mentions that he will finally be called by his real name. At the end Episode 7, he embraces his slave name.
I was pleasantly surprised by all the female nudity and sex. Most movies about ancient Roman times had bodybuilders walking around in leather diapers while the women wore baggy dresses. This one is a little bit more appealing to straight males. Lucy Lawless wearing nipple chains … woo-hoo!!!
Also, the slave are sexually used in a casual sort of way. Sexy and historically accurate. In certain respects, this show is more historically accurate than “Rome” but the blood-spray t hing is ridiculous. That video that was linked to was absolutely hilarious, and absolutely right.
Yes, we know. We all watched the show. The question was, was the Spartacus of legend, (the Kirk Douglas one) not named that at birth? That’s where the misunderstanding came in.
Actually looking at the cast info for that 1960 movie, since they also have people playing Crixus & Batiatus, yes it does now appear that the TV show is telling the story of the famous Spartacus.
I had thought it was the “real” Spartacus before I started watching the show, my confusion then came when Batiatus named him that after a famous Thracian, so I thought this was just some random gladiator story. I now see that that meant a famous king, *not *the Spartacus legend himself.
Well this makes the show much more interesting!