Nero

Audience Reviews

View All (33) audience reviews

Audience Member W: 1. Pretty well done for a historical B-rated film. Rated 3/5 Stars •  Rated 3 out of 5 stars 01/20/23 Full Review Audience Member This could very well be a Hollywoodization of history but it is fun to see the dramatized lives of Roman leaders. Julius, Augustus, etc. have been done to satisfactory results. Watch the history Channel if you want the better part of the facts. Enjoy this if you want to enjoy a little drama added in. Rated 2.5/5 Stars •  Rated 2.5 out of 5 stars 02/12/23 Full Review Audience Member Fell asleep half way through it. I love Roman stuff but this movie was just a little too PG for me to have any real historical accuracy. Rated 2/5 Stars •  Rated 2 out of 5 stars 01/19/23 Full Review Audience Member not as bad as i excepted... Rated 3/5 Stars •  Rated 3 out of 5 stars 01/26/23 Full Review Audience Member Some SPOILERS AHEAD, READ AT YOUR OWN RISK! There are some good performances but they are scattered here and there in the movie. The acting is uneven , specially Matheson's performance which is moving and very expressive at times, and stiff and hesitant at other times. But I applaud Hans Matheson for his courage to portray this tough character. However, it was a monumental mistake in casting him as Nero. He doesn't have the same body type that Nero had, nor his facial features. He actually looks a bit out of place in this heavy character. Matheson is slim and agile, tall, and has an elegance about him. Nero was bigger, had a large neck, and had a bigger than life presence. The rest of the cast does a good job too. Habich gives a fine performance as Seneca, perhaps the best. Simm's Caligula is interesting but not as tense and edgy as Matheson's Nero which also has more depth. The casting of Dapporto as Claudius I think is the most faithful to the books. And Morante gives an engaging performance as Agrippina the mother of Nero but is not as evil as she is in the books. But this film is too long, over 3 hours long, and there's not enough action. The scene at the large arena where the gladiators fight is not very spectacular, the fights look choreographed with mostly close-up shots. This is a big production with many extras and an orchestral score that complements the movie. The pace is slow and there's some unnecessary drawn-out scenes. If Nero had been more believable, and if the movie had had some bloody scenes in it, there's no orgies, no lions in the arena, no nudity, we don't see Nero doing any vile acts, they are suggested only, and he doesn't seem very menacing, no decadence, to reflect his life. Nero is too much of a good boy here. In reality Nero was a tyrant who set fire to Rome, but in this film they make him look like a good young Roman, not a fat lazy Tyrant. And the film could have had better action sequences. The costumes though are top-notch, and the sets and locales are acceptable, although some scenes are not lighted enough. It's a film with an interesting Nero, an elegant Nero. But the Nero that is in the history books is far more fascinating. This movie is just too long and slow. Rated 1.5/5 Stars •  Rated 1.5 out of 5 stars 01/24/23 Full Review Audience Member Wow. Does this ever suck. I don't know how they managed to bowdlerize the story of Messalina, but they did. She barely seemed naughty, let alone the biggest whore of her era. And the rest of the movie was similarly evened out into an unpalatable, bland, mass of movie tofu. Yuck! Rated 1/5 Stars •  Rated 1 out of 5 stars 02/13/23 Full Review Read all reviews

Nero

My Rating

Read More Read Less POST RATING WRITE A REVIEW EDIT REVIEW