As italian, but most of all as moviegoer, I was waiting for a production like this in Italy for a long time.
They strictly made their point, I was totally immersed in the movie's atmosphere made by natural light of photography. Matteo Rovere did a very great job with cinematography to make it as realistic as possible.
34 Reviews
Rome wasn't built in a day...
asandor30 December 2019
Romulus and Remus : The First King (Il primo re) is an Italian film shot in the Latin language, featuring the story of Romulus and Remus, the legendary founding brothers of Rome. This movie, although chronicling a legend, sticks more to reality, without the nursing wolves or other fantastical elements of the legend. Instead, this film presents a real, gritty and interesting account of the tale.
I ended up enjoying this film quite a bit. The Latin language in the film is interesting; it is wonderful to hear the language on the big screen, and is almost a surreal experience, as the language is little used in other aspects of the modern world. The action is gritty, with campy blood spurts that border on comical - something I ended up enjoying and that added charm to the film. One of the big pluses for me was the feeling, atmosphere and cinematography of the film. This feels like a world steeped in myth, with individuals struggling with reality, luck and myth and the intersection between these. The portrayal of the vestal virgin and sacred fire of Rome, for example, is interesting. The vestal does not have magic powers, but instead uses cunning, curses and the intimidation of her position to influence and control events. The mist steeped forests, overflowing Tiber River, and interesting atmosphere add to this world, where myths, beliefs and legends feel concrete and real.
On the mediocre side, we have the acting. Relatively fine, but with no special performances. The way the brothers are written feels rushed, and the motivation for one brothers turn to despotic power is never really elaborated on. He just goes quickly from noble to despotic with little motivation. The actors themselves are fine, although some performances feel subdued - a possible side effect of using Latin over Italian in the filming process.
On the poor side, the story feels quite rushed here. There are many positive aspects of this film, but the story itself does not fit the wonderful atmosphere of the rest of the film, much to its detriment.
Overall, a solid 7/10. In my mind, this means the film is of good quality and I enjoyed my time with it. I could easily recommend this film for fans of Roman history, or those looking for a good ancient action drama with some cool apsects to it. Worthy of a watch for sure.
I ended up enjoying this film quite a bit. The Latin language in the film is interesting; it is wonderful to hear the language on the big screen, and is almost a surreal experience, as the language is little used in other aspects of the modern world. The action is gritty, with campy blood spurts that border on comical - something I ended up enjoying and that added charm to the film. One of the big pluses for me was the feeling, atmosphere and cinematography of the film. This feels like a world steeped in myth, with individuals struggling with reality, luck and myth and the intersection between these. The portrayal of the vestal virgin and sacred fire of Rome, for example, is interesting. The vestal does not have magic powers, but instead uses cunning, curses and the intimidation of her position to influence and control events. The mist steeped forests, overflowing Tiber River, and interesting atmosphere add to this world, where myths, beliefs and legends feel concrete and real.
On the mediocre side, we have the acting. Relatively fine, but with no special performances. The way the brothers are written feels rushed, and the motivation for one brothers turn to despotic power is never really elaborated on. He just goes quickly from noble to despotic with little motivation. The actors themselves are fine, although some performances feel subdued - a possible side effect of using Latin over Italian in the filming process.
On the poor side, the story feels quite rushed here. There are many positive aspects of this film, but the story itself does not fit the wonderful atmosphere of the rest of the film, much to its detriment.
Overall, a solid 7/10. In my mind, this means the film is of good quality and I enjoyed my time with it. I could easily recommend this film for fans of Roman history, or those looking for a good ancient action drama with some cool apsects to it. Worthy of a watch for sure.
Breath of fresh air
samyoung-826483 July 2019
My review is influenced partially because I haven't watched a European movie for several years and it was refreshing to revisit. This movie is certainly not suitable for younger people or anyone who dislikes realistic violence. I usually shy away from violent movies, especially where the violence serves no purpose.
What stands out about this movie is that it feels realistic. Most of Hollywood has drastically shifted into a synthetic reality that is more like a day-time soap opera, but has added plenty of violence. and SFX. By contrast, this movie had characters exhaling misty breath in freezing cold rain, inside a cage made of rough bits of timer. You really felt as if you were watching the real thing at times, or a very detailed documentary. The characters also behaved realistically, something Hollywood has lost the ability to reflect.
The costumes (despite criticism from another reviewer) were probably realistic for 750BC as the characters were mostly slaves that were imprisoned in the quieter parts of what is now known as Italy. Many characters had beards because they didn't have access to Schick shavers. However, the actors probably lacked muscle and leanness that the actual inhabitants would have had. By contrast, the social elite in 750BC would have dressed immaculately.
The fight scenes were very well performed. Far less cut-scenes than you usually see today in Hollywood and far more awareness of exactly what is going on around the violence. However, at times I felt the violence was too much and wasn't adding value to the story.
In case you're wondering, even the ancient Romans were unsure of how accurate the stories of Romulus and Remus were. Today, we talk of what being a "good citizen" (especially promoted by the United Nations). The Romans had the concept of a "good Roman", so, in all probability, the current story of Romulus and Remus was popularised through a "good Roman" filter.
If you're in the mood for a thoughtful, violent, somewhat historically accurate film about the establishment of a world-class Empire, this is absolutely worth watching. It's in Latin, so, you'll have to read subtitles. The violence is very graphic, probably on par with the original Robo Cop movie, although, more realistic. Just think of watching a great BBC documentary with no voice-over and with a lot of graphic violence.
What stands out about this movie is that it feels realistic. Most of Hollywood has drastically shifted into a synthetic reality that is more like a day-time soap opera, but has added plenty of violence. and SFX. By contrast, this movie had characters exhaling misty breath in freezing cold rain, inside a cage made of rough bits of timer. You really felt as if you were watching the real thing at times, or a very detailed documentary. The characters also behaved realistically, something Hollywood has lost the ability to reflect.
The costumes (despite criticism from another reviewer) were probably realistic for 750BC as the characters were mostly slaves that were imprisoned in the quieter parts of what is now known as Italy. Many characters had beards because they didn't have access to Schick shavers. However, the actors probably lacked muscle and leanness that the actual inhabitants would have had. By contrast, the social elite in 750BC would have dressed immaculately.
The fight scenes were very well performed. Far less cut-scenes than you usually see today in Hollywood and far more awareness of exactly what is going on around the violence. However, at times I felt the violence was too much and wasn't adding value to the story.
In case you're wondering, even the ancient Romans were unsure of how accurate the stories of Romulus and Remus were. Today, we talk of what being a "good citizen" (especially promoted by the United Nations). The Romans had the concept of a "good Roman", so, in all probability, the current story of Romulus and Remus was popularised through a "good Roman" filter.
If you're in the mood for a thoughtful, violent, somewhat historically accurate film about the establishment of a world-class Empire, this is absolutely worth watching. It's in Latin, so, you'll have to read subtitles. The violence is very graphic, probably on par with the original Robo Cop movie, although, more realistic. Just think of watching a great BBC documentary with no voice-over and with a lot of graphic violence.
admirable
Kirpianuscus21 July 2019
A splendid film, reminding a Latin text. Not for the use of language but for the admirable precise simplicity. A film about birth of Rome. The story is familiar, at the first sigh, from school years. In fact, a profound inspired history of Rome. Level by level, event by event. Because it is a film about brotherhood and murder, about "the others", about gods and atheism, about power, love, sacrifice, weakness in force , about relations and, sure, about the death as seed for a great project. A film who you feel. And it is enough.
Surprised me.
johnstewardtx1 May 2020
Awesome quailty
christopher-dallas-113-2295415 July 2019
As others have mentioned, the cinematography/photography is impressive.
The dates are debatable but the basic legend is consistent.
Acting was superb.
Now the honesty.
As much as I love foreign films and non-mainstream, this was dull for me. I do not expect hollywood action garbage and do not watch those films.
It may also be a matter of timing. Maybe I watched it at a time when I needed something fast paced instead.
Good movie though.
A political review of a difficult topic to fictionalise
davidepresciuttini6 March 2021
I would say that overall this is an interesting attempt to do something new and creative.
I enjoyed the atmosphere of an ancient prehistorical world, in which superstition is everything and all actions have to be interpreted. Also, the concept of "war of all against all", is well represented. Until there is no unitary power, individuals and tribes will endlessly live in fear and fight each other for supremacy, making use of all available psychological and practical means to oppress each other.
What I want to focus on, is the political side of the movie. Being Italian myself, I know that for an Italian director can be a bit troubling to do a movie on the mythical foundation of Rome, you don't want it to sound too celebratory of Roman power, because then it would stink of fascism (celebrating ancient Rome was an important part of fascist propaganda).
So, how does this "issue" develop in the script?
Let's start by saying that the movie is loosely based on the actual myth.
Remus is a kind of Machiavellian authoritarian ruler, disregards religion and tradition and simply wants to take advantage of it to make others do what he wants.
Whereas, Romulus is a pious, good hearted person that we can foretell will be a righteous and fair king loved by its people.
Alba Longa, the first rival of Rome, is portrayed as a tyrannical power oppressing villages in the area. Therefore, the birth of Rome is a reaction against Alba Longa, oppressor of the humble and lost peoples of Latium and against a ruthless nihilist amoral Remus, then it is a kind of democratic anti-authoritarian birth!
I think that this turn is a very creative way not to make it look like the birth of a mighty oppressive imperial power (that Rome indeed was to be) but a subtle way of pretending it was a mythical foundation of a democratic power.
I enjoyed the atmosphere of an ancient prehistorical world, in which superstition is everything and all actions have to be interpreted. Also, the concept of "war of all against all", is well represented. Until there is no unitary power, individuals and tribes will endlessly live in fear and fight each other for supremacy, making use of all available psychological and practical means to oppress each other.
What I want to focus on, is the political side of the movie. Being Italian myself, I know that for an Italian director can be a bit troubling to do a movie on the mythical foundation of Rome, you don't want it to sound too celebratory of Roman power, because then it would stink of fascism (celebrating ancient Rome was an important part of fascist propaganda).
So, how does this "issue" develop in the script?
Let's start by saying that the movie is loosely based on the actual myth.
Remus is a kind of Machiavellian authoritarian ruler, disregards religion and tradition and simply wants to take advantage of it to make others do what he wants.
Whereas, Romulus is a pious, good hearted person that we can foretell will be a righteous and fair king loved by its people.
Alba Longa, the first rival of Rome, is portrayed as a tyrannical power oppressing villages in the area. Therefore, the birth of Rome is a reaction against Alba Longa, oppressor of the humble and lost peoples of Latium and against a ruthless nihilist amoral Remus, then it is a kind of democratic anti-authoritarian birth!
I think that this turn is a very creative way not to make it look like the birth of a mighty oppressive imperial power (that Rome indeed was to be) but a subtle way of pretending it was a mythical foundation of a democratic power.
Very little related to the myth
guisreis22 October 2023
Very little about Romulus and Remus indeed: the generic story could be about any other characters most of the time. Italians seem to have the very same longstanding tradition of Hollywood of making movies supposedly based in mythology but which actually ignore heavily the myths themselves. Edition is also problematic, with some transitions missing (I noticed this problem at least twice). The film would be very similar to any contemporary sword-and-sandal flick from Hollywood if it were not for the extremely nice idea of making the dialogues in Old Latin, following the audacious steps of good movies such as Passion of Christ and Apokalipto. There is an effort (I do not know how much seriously historically accurate; probably very little...) to explore how were the lives of people in early Iron Age in Italian peninsula: the divination scene and the bear headgear were some visually nice elements. However, the film is just sluggish and forgettable.
Deserves attention
Come-and-Review31 January 2019
This film isn't as striking as Revenant or as thematically deep as Valhalla Rising, but it sure gets close.
I didn't choose to mention those two titles casually. Il Primo Re uses a similar range of storytelling devices: minimal dialogues, stunning visuals, a very realistic environment, metaphysical experiences. This provides the film a very immersive style, that can be perceived probably a bit slow, but that also elevates the release's quality.
The interesting part is that Il Primo Re reinterprets a well-known myth but stays faithful to its roots, and merges is with realistic historical settings. The villages, armaments, religions depicted mostly are very close to those that could've been during the pre-roman period.Obviously Il Primo Re mustn't be considered a historically accurate film, but it certainly gives the feel of that archaic period.
What I particularly appreciated was the choice of using latin as language. It is not the first time this happens, an example is Mel Gibson's The Passion, but in The Passion the pronunciation that was used was the scolastic one, which was developed in the middle ages (and I personally know that from my high-school studies of the language). In Il Primo Re they managed to use the original pronunciation of latin, and I believe probably they adopted an archaic vocabulary and sintax, which is admirable.
Criticisms can be drawn: the final climax is not that huge as the build up suggests (let's not forget italian films have a much more limited budget), it doesn't manage to be as thematically deep as the films I've mentioned earlier and sometimes it drastically shifts to being an action movie. I personally acknowledge these negatives, but still feel that the positive aspects outweight the negative ones. This film is so far unique in italian cinema, it definitely attempts at being something new, and therefore I think it deserves consideration
I didn't choose to mention those two titles casually. Il Primo Re uses a similar range of storytelling devices: minimal dialogues, stunning visuals, a very realistic environment, metaphysical experiences. This provides the film a very immersive style, that can be perceived probably a bit slow, but that also elevates the release's quality.
The interesting part is that Il Primo Re reinterprets a well-known myth but stays faithful to its roots, and merges is with realistic historical settings. The villages, armaments, religions depicted mostly are very close to those that could've been during the pre-roman period.Obviously Il Primo Re mustn't be considered a historically accurate film, but it certainly gives the feel of that archaic period.
What I particularly appreciated was the choice of using latin as language. It is not the first time this happens, an example is Mel Gibson's The Passion, but in The Passion the pronunciation that was used was the scolastic one, which was developed in the middle ages (and I personally know that from my high-school studies of the language). In Il Primo Re they managed to use the original pronunciation of latin, and I believe probably they adopted an archaic vocabulary and sintax, which is admirable.
Criticisms can be drawn: the final climax is not that huge as the build up suggests (let's not forget italian films have a much more limited budget), it doesn't manage to be as thematically deep as the films I've mentioned earlier and sometimes it drastically shifts to being an action movie. I personally acknowledge these negatives, but still feel that the positive aspects outweight the negative ones. This film is so far unique in italian cinema, it definitely attempts at being something new, and therefore I think it deserves consideration
What a Joke. Was expecting a lot more than this mess. Ratings obviously Rigged
maddison-5965729 June 2019
I just watched this movie - Romulus and Remus The First King and I finally gave up three quarters waiting for something great but what I got was a lot of crap. First of all the movie does not give you a date (770BC) that this all happened and where. I had to look it up on wikipedia!!!!! As far as the storyline goes, well nothing really much happens. I was frankly bored. I expected and was excited when I first saw the movie title but then that all fizzled out into boredom when I stared to watch it. I thought that I would stick with it, but I really wished that I had watched something else instead. They portray the italian tribes not far off from prehistoric man living in stick huts and in furs. When you consider that the Greeks were living in stone buildings and houses in 3000BC, and the vikings had wooden log houses, these men were obviously taken from a different era. I didn't expect them to speak Latin.The ratings for this movie are misleading and way too high. Don't waste your time and watch something good.
Masterpiece
mlynch518723 July 2021
This movie is a work of art. One of the best films I've ever seen. Frankly, the fact that this is rated a measly 6.5 is just criminal and speaks volumes about why mediocre movies are made en masse. If you prefer to watch "Honey Boo Boo" or "Dude Where's My Car" don't bother watching this - it'll go over your head. If you have awareness of who Romulus and Remus were, if you have read a book outside of school before, or if you have any appreciation for culture, you may find yourself enamored with this film.
It's bad, but not all bad.
franklyfrank120221 August 2019
Warning: Spoilers
It's a very hit and miss movie but I'm going to keep short, firstly the good.
Production value is great, the depictions of the landscape, what i think is meant to be Alba Longa, really bring you back to what central Italy must have looked like back in the 8th century bc. Photography is great, lightning is great, shots are generally good, the violence is great and seems to be biologically right and I also really liked the editng. On a technical level it's great. That's about it though.
It's my understanding they didn't try to depict the founding myth of Rome which is fine, in fact, if you are looking to watch a movie that follows that story don't watch this movie, it doesn't not have 1/1000 of the depth of the actual myth and, if you don't know any of it please do, it's a lot like game of thrones in a way.
However that's fine, I understand they meant it to be somewhat of a reconstruction of the founding of Rome with Romolus and Remus as central characters but even that fails.
In the movie nothing happens, there are no character archs, there is no plot so speak, no character development, no instrinsic message and has nothing to do with human nature. even in 5000 bc you'd expect meaningful interactions between people, some sort of cultural common understanding that dcitates whatever level of politics there is... but there is nothing.
it's just a bunch of people (some of whom in clichè leather garments ) who stumble around and area the protagonists should know like the back of their hand, Romolus does nothing all the time, Remus is meant to be the antagonist but is factually the hero, the role of religion is boiled down to a woman with PTSD and everyone is fundamentally depicted as a brute, dialogue isn't meaningful also and... yeah it's bad.
Which is a shame because at a time when shows with a strong foot in realism and pragmatism like Game of Thrones, the Last Kingdom, Vikings, Breaking Bad and many others this movie strips all the depth from the myth and tries to represent nothing of the probable complexities of society that caused the funding of Rome.
realistically you could go on for days but in short, not even the damn pomerium...
Production value is great, the depictions of the landscape, what i think is meant to be Alba Longa, really bring you back to what central Italy must have looked like back in the 8th century bc. Photography is great, lightning is great, shots are generally good, the violence is great and seems to be biologically right and I also really liked the editng. On a technical level it's great. That's about it though.
It's my understanding they didn't try to depict the founding myth of Rome which is fine, in fact, if you are looking to watch a movie that follows that story don't watch this movie, it doesn't not have 1/1000 of the depth of the actual myth and, if you don't know any of it please do, it's a lot like game of thrones in a way.
However that's fine, I understand they meant it to be somewhat of a reconstruction of the founding of Rome with Romolus and Remus as central characters but even that fails.
In the movie nothing happens, there are no character archs, there is no plot so speak, no character development, no instrinsic message and has nothing to do with human nature. even in 5000 bc you'd expect meaningful interactions between people, some sort of cultural common understanding that dcitates whatever level of politics there is... but there is nothing.
it's just a bunch of people (some of whom in clichè leather garments ) who stumble around and area the protagonists should know like the back of their hand, Romolus does nothing all the time, Remus is meant to be the antagonist but is factually the hero, the role of religion is boiled down to a woman with PTSD and everyone is fundamentally depicted as a brute, dialogue isn't meaningful also and... yeah it's bad.
Which is a shame because at a time when shows with a strong foot in realism and pragmatism like Game of Thrones, the Last Kingdom, Vikings, Breaking Bad and many others this movie strips all the depth from the myth and tries to represent nothing of the probable complexities of society that caused the funding of Rome.
realistically you could go on for days but in short, not even the damn pomerium...
Epic and realistic movie
beamantovan2 February 2019
A film in which the origin of the foundation of Rome and the myth of Romulus and Remus merge to give shape to an epic pearl of Italian cinema whose dialogues are in Proto-Latin. A crazy, intense, primordial, realistic and exciting work.
Such a powerful movie
ilovefriendss1 February 2019
The Italian director Matteo Rovere, with all the crew, did an awesome job with this movie. They collaborated with some of the most prestigious universities in Italy, with the purpose of trying to make this film as realistic as possible. The cinematography is excellent, even the photography is just perfect.
An old story done many times over.
larryanderson15 June 2019
Warning: Spoilers
ROMULUS & REMUS, 2019
Posted on You Tube. 2 HOURS 7 MINS. In Turkish subs.
It also played in Toronto on Sunday June 16th. In Italian.
Romulus and Remus escape from captivity with a few other prisoners and go on a long march. They are constantly attacked by other groups of people for no apparent reason. Finally they get to the banks of the Tevere (Tiber), where the two brothers fight. We all know that Romulus wins or Rome would be called Rem. Romulus gets sick on the march and Remus carries him until he is better. Remus is the leader all through out the movie and is killed at the very end. The tribe looks more like a group of mud covered savages. marching through dark forests and swamps, than the founders of the world greatest empire. They look more like pre-history cavemen than a group from 750 BCE, Romulus and Remus were not the first to arrive in Latvium (Latvia), in the 7 hills area. Many small city states were know to previously inhabit the area that had large organized armies. The Etruscans finally settled the area until the remnants from the conquered Troy arrived and took over. Larry Anderson
Romulus and Remus escape from captivity with a few other prisoners and go on a long march. They are constantly attacked by other groups of people for no apparent reason. Finally they get to the banks of the Tevere (Tiber), where the two brothers fight. We all know that Romulus wins or Rome would be called Rem. Romulus gets sick on the march and Remus carries him until he is better. Remus is the leader all through out the movie and is killed at the very end. The tribe looks more like a group of mud covered savages. marching through dark forests and swamps, than the founders of the world greatest empire. They look more like pre-history cavemen than a group from 750 BCE, Romulus and Remus were not the first to arrive in Latvium (Latvia), in the 7 hills area. Many small city states were know to previously inhabit the area that had large organized armies. The Etruscans finally settled the area until the remnants from the conquered Troy arrived and took over. Larry Anderson
An eternal myth. revisited in a brutal, authentic epic storytelling
mc16354 February 2019
Matteo Rovere has achieved a difficult task: rewrite the well known legend of the foundation of Rome, in the past seen in peplum productions, with academic consultants, knowledgeable and enthusiastic professionals and limited budget and make a powerful movie quite different from the current Italian scene. We follow the Romulus and Remus brothers from a sudden disruption of their lives as shepherds to the final tragedy leading to the foundation of the eternal city. There is an intense effort to be as authentic as possible: all the locations are near Rome, sounds chosen and edited to be consistent with the historical environment, wood and hay huts, simple basic clothes and weapons. Sometimes one wonders they really were so primitive, but I noticed that knights from the etruscan city of Alba have more elaborate weapons. Even more important, the actors speak original Paleo Latin with subtitles, a choice I had enjoyed in movies like The Passion and Apocalypto. Pervasive violence and correct emphasis on the paramount importance of religion able to have a strong influence on men's decisions. Excellent photography (always in natural light!) evocative music score and at times moving scenes, at least for a lover of Roman history like me. The actors are excellent in their roles. This movie should have worldwide recognition.
Slow, ponderous and dull
julsepsom1 December 2020
Warning: Spoilers
I don't know how other reviewers gave this an average of 7 stars. The film starts with 2 shepherds in a valley with woods either side who are suddenly swept away by a tsunami wave! No establishing shot to show they were near the sea. Already ridiculous. The story continues. Apart from the very graphic fight scenes all the characters actions are so, so slow and laboured. Everyone walks and does things as if they were in a trance. Romulus looks like a neanderthal. They dress like cavemen but have swords, knives, bows and arrows. Lots of moody looks from Remus staring into the distance. He tells his band of fellow escaped slaves and villagers who he "won" by killing their warriors that they would leave and build a city. They'd just left a village of a few crude wooden teepees so how does a shepherd suddenly get such an idea? Oh yes, a witch foresaw it, sort of. Suddenly Remus proclaims himself King, not Chief or leader, but King. His self imposed power goes to his head and he becomes a despot, leaves the witch tied to a tree to be mauled by wild beasts. The film ends on the banks of the River Tiber, surrounded by marsh, woods and the 7 hills with Romulus declaring the city, yet even to have a lean-to shelter built, to be called Rome. The end.
The first king: a big rebirth for Italian cinema
pietro-513966 February 2019
Bad, bad...boring
guidodg30 November 2019
Similar to a band of brothers with a mythical history of a nation.
calsonassociates10 February 2022
There are many bonds among men of nations and those who are aware of virtuous actions based on values of protecting what is most important to you will relate to doing so for their homes and nation.
We never forget loyalty, nor do we forget betrayal.
Thank you kindly for the opportunity to review films that are enjoyed and make me feel what I feel when I feel it, then as mentioned before, I will write about it here and elsewhere.
We never forget loyalty, nor do we forget betrayal.
Thank you kindly for the opportunity to review films that are enjoyed and make me feel what I feel when I feel it, then as mentioned before, I will write about it here and elsewhere.
What?????
nyjazzman24 September 2019
I sat through the entire movie hoping it would get more interesting. Unfortunately, I finished it feeling disappointed and wondering why this movie was made.
The dialog was taken out of a 1960's "B" movie, and there really was no substantial story. No depth, no original thought - only a tired, barely functional film. As others have mentioned, there was some good cinematography, but not enough to carry the movie.
They just trotted out old themes that have been done way better by many movies. The corruption that comes out of power, the old question of - is it better to rule by fear, or by gaining respect from people by acting nobly?
After the movie was done, I was left thinking the Roman empire flourished despite being founded by two crazy brothers - Romulus and Remus.
The dialog was taken out of a 1960's "B" movie, and there really was no substantial story. No depth, no original thought - only a tired, barely functional film. As others have mentioned, there was some good cinematography, but not enough to carry the movie.
They just trotted out old themes that have been done way better by many movies. The corruption that comes out of power, the old question of - is it better to rule by fear, or by gaining respect from people by acting nobly?
After the movie was done, I was left thinking the Roman empire flourished despite being founded by two crazy brothers - Romulus and Remus.
Great movie
gio_vvanni7 February 2019
As an Italian I'm always a little bit prejudice with italian movies. But. This one is pretty great. Certainly worth to be watched, even twice maybe.
IMO a little bit too dramatical in certain detail, actors' expressions or too long on certain detailed shots. But a part from this little and forgettable stuffs, it is a great movie, with a great plot, great and well played characters. Again: worth to be watched.
Hyped (rigged?), no substance, silly, boring.
g-tummarello3 May 2021
As in italian, i read first the italian reviews which were so positive, so i dragged my loved ones into seeing it to everyone disappointment.
The movie is bad, its like a silly "caveman wars" where 10 cavemen with clubs sticks, some occasional knife / axe roam around in the forest along with a witch woman killing enemies and occasionally each other in very violent and unneeded scenes.
Then they declare Rome will be built after some up and downs and the brother kill brother thing which however are are soon to be forgotten.
I dont believe this holds realism, and the imagery is not far from mud, muddy waters, and forest.
The oh so great cinematography is what.. some light that goes trough the trees? Seen that.. is it CGI or some incredible visual magic of real lenses.. ok .. but who cares really, is that worth the movie watching, not even close.
The movie is bad, its like a silly "caveman wars" where 10 cavemen with clubs sticks, some occasional knife / axe roam around in the forest along with a witch woman killing enemies and occasionally each other in very violent and unneeded scenes.
Then they declare Rome will be built after some up and downs and the brother kill brother thing which however are are soon to be forgotten.
I dont believe this holds realism, and the imagery is not far from mud, muddy waters, and forest.
The oh so great cinematography is what.. some light that goes trough the trees? Seen that.. is it CGI or some incredible visual magic of real lenses.. ok .. but who cares really, is that worth the movie watching, not even close.
A Gritty, Realistic Retelling Of An Ancient Myth
artanis_mark2 January 2020
This is a worthy addition to the roster of sword and sandal or peplum movies, made in Italy like its '60's predecessors, only down and dirty with a big emphasis on naturalism and de-emphasizing the supernatural, mythical element. Director Matteo Rovere retells the ancient myth of Rome's founding by the divine twins Romulus and Remus, but the bit about the twins being suckled by a she wolf gets dropped along with a lot of other improbable details. There's absolutely no hint of imperial grandeur or sophisticated culture. Instead, the film depicts early Iron Age civilization in 8th Century BCE Italy with much detailed attention to squalor. Romulus and Remus start out as grubby teenage shepherds. People go about clad in skins or poorly woven woolen homespun, with filth and blood everywhere, and characters often rolling in both. A change in regime is signaled by carrying around the previous chief's severed head impaled on a pole. The film adds to the verisimilitude with the actors speaking entirely in a primitive, pre-Roman Latin (I had to listen for about fifteen minutes before I could even start to pick words out). Like any good peplum, the action is steady and fast paced, with some incredibly gory scenes of close contact, no quarter, vicious ancient warfare. Rovere wisely refrained from resorting to the curse of CGI, preferring to rely instead on expert stunt men and traditional special effects. The decision only adds to the realism.
Alessandro Borghi gets the meatiest role in the flick as the violent, brooding Remus, obsessively devoted to the protection of his brother while simultaneously increasingly more unhinged and savage in his behavior. Alessio Lapice has the tougher task of portraying the saintlike Romulus who bands a disparate group of refugees together into a new tribe through his positive leadership example. The conflict between the two men is simple and stark, but the film does a good job of suggesting that the ultimate outcome turns more on their individual characters than the will of the gods. Shot on location in Italy, the film does an excellent job of invoking a dark, primeval, heavily forested world with humans far and few between and potential threats everywhere.
I recommend this film to fans of the old Roman myths, peplum admirers, and folks who just like gritty action movies in general.
Alessandro Borghi gets the meatiest role in the flick as the violent, brooding Remus, obsessively devoted to the protection of his brother while simultaneously increasingly more unhinged and savage in his behavior. Alessio Lapice has the tougher task of portraying the saintlike Romulus who bands a disparate group of refugees together into a new tribe through his positive leadership example. The conflict between the two men is simple and stark, but the film does a good job of suggesting that the ultimate outcome turns more on their individual characters than the will of the gods. Shot on location in Italy, the film does an excellent job of invoking a dark, primeval, heavily forested world with humans far and few between and potential threats everywhere.
I recommend this film to fans of the old Roman myths, peplum admirers, and folks who just like gritty action movies in general.
Hey guys
Mattiamarcon14 December 2019
1 it's not latin, how could it be more accurate than this? The language they speak is ancient but not latin, even if it has some latin and some latin-sounding words. Etrurian maybe?
2 it's how they dressed at the time in lower social classes. Slaves and poor people didn't dress like ceasars...no need to mention it but I read some funny comments.
3 more action for what? They created an empire which had more than enough violence in the coming centuries, this movie is about the (untold) foundation of rome, it's not The gladiator, and that's why it's good. Romans were not a bunch of barbarians. A lot of violence when it was necessary, and a lot of art, culture and tradition the rest of the time. This is about The R brothers, not an action movie. Just a good story/legend.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
