youaresquishy

The story of the Borgias, especially if certain of the most salacious rumors about them are actually true (questionable assumption though), is one of the very most dramatic and interesting stories in European history. But, at least through four episodes, this show has made it all seem a little boring.

I have no doubt that as the story progresses, there is no way things won't become at least slightly more interesting, just because some much more controversial stuff is about to go down. But after watching the first four episodes, I have concluded that an error was made in choosing the writer or writers. Many of the lines are awkward and not believable. I find myself often asking, "Now, why would this character have said that?" and "How does this line advance the story?" and "What purpose did that line serve other than to waste time?"

It seems like the writing is uninspired. Much of it is what I would call "clunky." It's just kind of awkward, clumsy, tedious, and comes off like the work of people who are not experienced or adept at dramatic writing in the historical fiction genre. It's not unlike daytime soap opera quality writing.

I do not think there is much doubt that the man who became Pope Alexander VI was a morally-challenged but shrewd politician, bent on gaining and then retaining the kind of power that, at the time, only being pope could provide. Yet Jeremy Irons seems more often than not to portray him as a little on the hapless side. I wish he were portrayed more like a smart, wicked, power-hungry man, although perhaps with an arguably good overall purpose driving him, shrewdly manipulating things under the cover of the cloak provided by the office of the pope. When I think of Pope Alexander VI, I think of someone more like, I don't know, maybe somewhat like the godfather in The Godfather, except perhaps even more devious because he has obtained the office of pope and the protection that office provides. In many ways, Jeremy Irons' portrayal is the opposite of this.

And Jeremy Irons' continual saliva-sucking sounds--the sort you sometimes hear from folks that are getting used to their dentures--are really annoying.

I don't think he is a bad actor. I think he has been much better in other things, but mostly I fault the writer(s). I also think a lesser known actor should have been cast in this role. There is no point at which I believe I am watching Pope Alexander VI--I am always very aware that I am watching Jeremy Irons attempting to get through this bad script.

Most of the other actors are hampered by the awkward and amateurish writing as well. Although I have nevertheless enjoyed the performances of Joanne Shalley as Vannozza, the mother of Giovanni, Cesare, and Lucrezia; and Colm Feore as Cardinal Rovere.

It makes me a little sad that this is the series that got made, because there was a lot of potential for a really good drama to be made out of the story of the Borgias. Essentially, this is, for the most part, boring, awkward, and bad, at least through the first four episodes. Yet there is some potential for this to get better--I think that if the writing team gets some help in the future this could easily improve.

The inevitable comparisons to The Tudors are made by people, because that show too was on Showtime, but for that series, I considered the writing, for the most part, masterful, and the part of King Henry VIII played and cast superbly. I wish that were the case here. So far, it definitely is not.

I recently attended a free screening of this film.

This story was really clichéd and very derivative of about a million others. There also wasn't enough to the story--it was pretty bland. It was hard to tell which owl was on which side during the fighting scenes. It was also hard to tell exactly what was being done to whom during the fighting scenes.

It came off kind of like a movie designed for children, honestly. But it's probably a little too violent or otherwise disturbing for very small children.

Except as noted above, the animation was pretty cool and interesting, but I enjoyed the visual aspect of 300 much more. It wasn't awful or boring, but it's not a film to which I can give more than a 4/10.

I thought this movie was an acceptable way to pass some time, but overall was nothing terribly special. The few action scenes were pretty interesting and creative though--it was the parts in between that I didn't really enjoy much. If the entire movie was as good as the action sequences, it definitely would've received a 6 or 7 from me.

I don't think Ben Affleck is an especially good actor, and I thought he wasn't especially good in this. I didn't believe in his character much-- he didn't really seem like a bad guy to me. I didn't think there was much chemistry between him and his character's love interest. I didn't think Jon Hamm was all that good either--he didn't really seem like an FBI guy to me. I thought Jeremy Renner stole the show. Chris Cooper was excellent, as usual, but had only a small role. I thought Rebecca Hall was pretty good.

Certain portions of the plot were a little silly, but I don't want to spoil anything. Overall, I guess if you're really big on crime movies, you should probably see this just for the crime parts, because they are pretty cool. As a whole, however, this isn't particularly good or particularly bad.