Technically speaking, this is a wonderful film. It was one of the first films with a synchronized score created to accompany it (on a separate disk) and the cinematography and sets were amazing for 1926. As a result, it's quite beautiful to watch. Unfortunately, when it comes to the script and acting, the film leaves a lot to be desired. While it is not true that all silents featured overacting, this one featured many awful performances by today's standards--with overly melodramatic scenes again and again. Subtle this film sure ain't!
From a historical standpoint, the film is of dubious value. It's true that the Borgia family was indeed quite awful. The patriarch of the family, Pope Alexander VI, fathered several illegitimate children, gave his sons high positions in the Church and was quite the amoral schemer. However, while these "peccadilloes" are many and widely accepted as true as were the awful schemes of his son, Caesar, the real-life Lucretia may not have been the evil poisoning slut you saw in the film--this is open to much debate among historians. But I suppose that it does make for some entertaining moments--too bad Alexander VI never was seen in the film--he would have provided the film some much needed excitement.
As for Don Juan, he was unfortunately a fictional character. Oddly, while this film is set in one of the Italian states in the late 15th century, the film THE ADVENTURES OF DON JUAN (with Errol Flynn) was set over a hundred years later! However, considering that Flynn and the star of this film, John Barrymore, were best friends, womanizers and serious alcoholics, it seems very fitting that both took on this same role.
From a historical standpoint, the film is of dubious value. It's true that the Borgia family was indeed quite awful. The patriarch of the family, Pope Alexander VI, fathered several illegitimate children, gave his sons high positions in the Church and was quite the amoral schemer. However, while these "peccadilloes" are many and widely accepted as true as were the awful schemes of his son, Caesar, the real-life Lucretia may not have been the evil poisoning slut you saw in the film--this is open to much debate among historians. But I suppose that it does make for some entertaining moments--too bad Alexander VI never was seen in the film--he would have provided the film some much needed excitement.
As for Don Juan, he was unfortunately a fictional character. Oddly, while this film is set in one of the Italian states in the late 15th century, the film THE ADVENTURES OF DON JUAN (with Errol Flynn) was set over a hundred years later! However, considering that Flynn and the star of this film, John Barrymore, were best friends, womanizers and serious alcoholics, it seems very fitting that both took on this same role.