ETA:
Yesterday, I watched three historical TV movies. The one about Jeanne de la Motte and the so-called necklace affair had high-class actors (Hilary Swank, Jonathan Pryce, Joely Richardson, Adrian Brody), but tried a little too hard to make Jeanne a victim instead of just a clever con woman. When the voice-over introduction said that her father was in the RESISTANCE (using that term and meaning, as the film later stated, pushing for reforms in pre-revolutionary France), I groaned and gave up hopes on historical accuracy. Actually, a lot of the later stuff was more accurate, but still.
Attila the Hun and Druids both tried to do the "history as told by the story of two men" thing. Attila did it better. (Though again, when early on the child said "my name is Attila", my admittedly very rusty knowledge of that period of history made me say "no, it's not, it's a name you get later in life".) Mostly because both Flavius Aetius and Attila were presented as layered, ruthless, likeable and ultimately tragic. Druids at best was trashy fun. Mind you, I have a soft spot for both Christopher Lambert and Klaus Maria Brandauer, but they were both way too old for their respective roles (and Brandauer had the wrong figure to boot - Caesar was thin and wiry). And the script... let's just say that Vercingetorix as a male Jeanne d'Arc doesn't really work for me.
Now, on to the fourth Garak and Bashir episode. This one can be read by season 4-stuck
( They discussed JULIUS CAESAR once... )
And now I must be off and ponder Sabine's suggestions which are almost as mean...