Overall, I was not overly disappointed with this version of the Spartacus story - that of the Roman Gladiators Revolt. At points it actually was more factually correct than the 1960 Kirk Douglas version and played at a more rudimentary level than the glorified Hollywood original.
What I did find strange and not so surprising (here comes the spoiler part - although I don't think so) is the imagery created by the crucifixion and closing dialogue of the David character. Anyone that knows the original movie or the actual events that inspired them knows that Crassius crucified the captured slaves along the Apian Way. As far as I know there is no factual basis for the character of David a Jew that revolted along with Spartacus from the Gladiator school. I guess the David character was also supposed to replace the Tony Curtis character from the 1960 movie.
Here it is the SPOILER: To then have him, David, be the final crucifixion and for him to respond to Crassius that we will return by the millions (or something like that) and then to have Crassius stab him in exactly the same place that Jesus Christ was stabbed at his crucifixion was only done to add the idea (to the movie) that the Roman Empire will itself fall/convert to Christianity at a later point in history. Granted the point is also that slavery will not prevail. Note for those not aware Christ is supposed to have been descended from another David, King David of Israel. The scene also felt like it was trying to take advantage of those individuals and movie watchers recently enthralled by Gibson's The Passion of the Christ by evoking that image.
Overall the acting was not bad. The story captivating for its content.
What I did find strange and not so surprising (here comes the spoiler part - although I don't think so) is the imagery created by the crucifixion and closing dialogue of the David character. Anyone that knows the original movie or the actual events that inspired them knows that Crassius crucified the captured slaves along the Apian Way. As far as I know there is no factual basis for the character of David a Jew that revolted along with Spartacus from the Gladiator school. I guess the David character was also supposed to replace the Tony Curtis character from the 1960 movie.
Here it is the SPOILER: To then have him, David, be the final crucifixion and for him to respond to Crassius that we will return by the millions (or something like that) and then to have Crassius stab him in exactly the same place that Jesus Christ was stabbed at his crucifixion was only done to add the idea (to the movie) that the Roman Empire will itself fall/convert to Christianity at a later point in history. Granted the point is also that slavery will not prevail. Note for those not aware Christ is supposed to have been descended from another David, King David of Israel. The scene also felt like it was trying to take advantage of those individuals and movie watchers recently enthralled by Gibson's The Passion of the Christ by evoking that image.
Overall the acting was not bad. The story captivating for its content.