The Borgias 2.07
May. 26th, 2012 05:51 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
selenakI returned to Munich last night, and in between washing, ironing and generally trying to catch up with various fandoms, I squeezed in an hour of my favourite current historical show.
Two things struck me immediately: I knew they couldn't resist using what is really the most famous story about Caterina Sforza (see last review); their way of including it is the most blatant example of cheating so far on this show. By which I don't mean historical liberties - that's a given. I mean playing favourites when it comes to heinous deeds. Now while Cesare battled Caterina on other occasions, the siege where her children (plural) were held hostage actually wasn't one of them. Yet of course Neil Jordan wanted to use the story. Like I said: this is the most famous anecdote about Caterina, and a big part of her reputation as a larger than life character both courageous and not quite human, just the way many a Renaissance figure can be. So it was a given her opponent for this siege/hostage/I-have-the-instrument-make-more tale would be a Borgia. But Cesare is the young male lead, and while he gets to be ruthless and creepy on occasion, not to mention callous with non-family members (and Micheletto), Neil Jordan obviously didn't want him to go that far. (Yet, or ever? I guess we'll see.) So Juan, who is being written consistently on a downward circle this season (presumably building up to you-know-what), gets the dubious honour of taking the kid hostage and torturing him.
Similarly, instead of various children, we have only one, and a boy old enough that in Renaissance terms, he's just about a man at that, which I think is also cheating but not for Juan's benefit but Caterina's. She's meant to be a sympathetic character of the awesome antagonist type, and if there is one thing many a viewer won't forgive a woman, fictional or invented, it's Being A Bad Mother. Caterina being willing to call the bluff/accept the death of various children of various ages, including toddlers, would, I can see Jordan & fellow writers reasoning, not be forgiven. So she gets only one (teenage) son, and the actress, making clear once again why they hired her, makes it clear she is suffering on his behalf even while she refuses to surrender, plus she only says her famous sentence after she has seen cousin Ludovico has arrived, relief is imminent, and thus her son still has a chance to live.
Mind you: I'm not sure they're wrong with these choices. But I do think it's cheating.
This being said, Caterina Sforza was terrific in her scenes, and I also appreciated the emotional continuity of Juan losing it when her son asks back "and does your mother lose you?" as Juan's relationships with both his parents seem to include throughout the fear that they don't really like him, or at least not as much as his other siblings, plus he's afraid he's not Rodrigo's son, so he has to continually prove to himself he's the favourite really. Ditto for the whole "I'm married and a devoted husband and I already got my wife pregnant" spiel when he's really suffering from syphilis. (Which, btw, was actually Cesare's problem, but never mind.) Purely in terms of the show's universe, however, I still don't really buy Rodrigo magically believing that trip to Spain finally gifted Juan with the military prowess and intelligence he so far failed to prove, not with the whole French army and Paolo disaster relatively recent in mind. Otoh Cesare in Florence deciding he'll just let Juan use the rope to hang himself and be chewed out by Caterina for good measure is entirely in character.
Speaking of Cesare in Florence, that was another famous Renaissance tale I knew Neil Jordan wouldn't be able to resist including: the bonfire of the vanities, aka the high point of Savonarola's rule in Florence. But since as opposed to last season, Guiliano dellla Rovere is not making his useful trip to various Italian states anymore, we needed another view point character in Florence to experience it, hence Cesare being there despite not doing anything (other than bonding some more with Machiavelli). Which I'm on board with since I really wanted to see that, too. Like last episode, the children's army was suitably chilling, and given Micheletto's behaviour, which despite lack of dialogue says so much with what he does, including the staredown with Savanorala, I'm continuing my speculation there'll be pay off, most likely of the Micheletto-will-kidnap-Savonaralo-so-he-can-be-burned kind, and that the revelation about Micheletto's background gives him personal stakes here.
Incidentally, I much appreciated the dialogue between Della Rovere and the Friar whose name I keep forgetting, the Savonarola fan, because while Cardinal Not Pope Yet never says as much you can tell very clearly he and the good Friar are of two very different minds when it comes to Savonarola. Della Rovere thinks Savonarola is useful against the Borgias, but he's no more thrilled by the whole visionary-talking-directly-with-God-bypassing-all-clerical-hierarchy bit than Rodrigo is, and should Savonarola survive the Borgias (we know he won't, but della Rovere doesn't), the future Julius II. doesn't plan on letting him continue, either.
Meanwhile, I must say it frustrates me Lucrezia hardly has had any scenes with Giulia Farnese this season - this relationship is important to me, damn it! - but on the other hand I'm delighted she continues to have more with her mother, and that the show doesn't pretend its young female lead can only be in love (or not), but acknowledges (and let the characters acknowledge) there's such a thing as being in lust for women as well as men without censoring this as bad. However, neither of the invented brothers has struck me as particularly interesting yet, and thus I continue to mourn for the entertaining bizarreness that would have been a Lucrezia/show!Alfonso of Naples marriage.
Two things struck me immediately: I knew they couldn't resist using what is really the most famous story about Caterina Sforza (see last review); their way of including it is the most blatant example of cheating so far on this show. By which I don't mean historical liberties - that's a given. I mean playing favourites when it comes to heinous deeds. Now while Cesare battled Caterina on other occasions, the siege where her children (plural) were held hostage actually wasn't one of them. Yet of course Neil Jordan wanted to use the story. Like I said: this is the most famous anecdote about Caterina, and a big part of her reputation as a larger than life character both courageous and not quite human, just the way many a Renaissance figure can be. So it was a given her opponent for this siege/hostage/I-have-the-instrument-make-more tale would be a Borgia. But Cesare is the young male lead, and while he gets to be ruthless and creepy on occasion, not to mention callous with non-family members (and Micheletto), Neil Jordan obviously didn't want him to go that far. (Yet, or ever? I guess we'll see.) So Juan, who is being written consistently on a downward circle this season (presumably building up to you-know-what), gets the dubious honour of taking the kid hostage and torturing him.
Similarly, instead of various children, we have only one, and a boy old enough that in Renaissance terms, he's just about a man at that, which I think is also cheating but not for Juan's benefit but Caterina's. She's meant to be a sympathetic character of the awesome antagonist type, and if there is one thing many a viewer won't forgive a woman, fictional or invented, it's Being A Bad Mother. Caterina being willing to call the bluff/accept the death of various children of various ages, including toddlers, would, I can see Jordan & fellow writers reasoning, not be forgiven. So she gets only one (teenage) son, and the actress, making clear once again why they hired her, makes it clear she is suffering on his behalf even while she refuses to surrender, plus she only says her famous sentence after she has seen cousin Ludovico has arrived, relief is imminent, and thus her son still has a chance to live.
Mind you: I'm not sure they're wrong with these choices. But I do think it's cheating.
This being said, Caterina Sforza was terrific in her scenes, and I also appreciated the emotional continuity of Juan losing it when her son asks back "and does your mother lose you?" as Juan's relationships with both his parents seem to include throughout the fear that they don't really like him, or at least not as much as his other siblings, plus he's afraid he's not Rodrigo's son, so he has to continually prove to himself he's the favourite really. Ditto for the whole "I'm married and a devoted husband and I already got my wife pregnant" spiel when he's really suffering from syphilis. (Which, btw, was actually Cesare's problem, but never mind.) Purely in terms of the show's universe, however, I still don't really buy Rodrigo magically believing that trip to Spain finally gifted Juan with the military prowess and intelligence he so far failed to prove, not with the whole French army and Paolo disaster relatively recent in mind. Otoh Cesare in Florence deciding he'll just let Juan use the rope to hang himself and be chewed out by Caterina for good measure is entirely in character.
Speaking of Cesare in Florence, that was another famous Renaissance tale I knew Neil Jordan wouldn't be able to resist including: the bonfire of the vanities, aka the high point of Savonarola's rule in Florence. But since as opposed to last season, Guiliano dellla Rovere is not making his useful trip to various Italian states anymore, we needed another view point character in Florence to experience it, hence Cesare being there despite not doing anything (other than bonding some more with Machiavelli). Which I'm on board with since I really wanted to see that, too. Like last episode, the children's army was suitably chilling, and given Micheletto's behaviour, which despite lack of dialogue says so much with what he does, including the staredown with Savanorala, I'm continuing my speculation there'll be pay off, most likely of the Micheletto-will-kidnap-Savonaralo-so-he-can-be-burned kind, and that the revelation about Micheletto's background gives him personal stakes here.
Incidentally, I much appreciated the dialogue between Della Rovere and the Friar whose name I keep forgetting, the Savonarola fan, because while Cardinal Not Pope Yet never says as much you can tell very clearly he and the good Friar are of two very different minds when it comes to Savonarola. Della Rovere thinks Savonarola is useful against the Borgias, but he's no more thrilled by the whole visionary-talking-directly-with-God-bypassing-all-clerical-hierarchy bit than Rodrigo is, and should Savonarola survive the Borgias (we know he won't, but della Rovere doesn't), the future Julius II. doesn't plan on letting him continue, either.
Meanwhile, I must say it frustrates me Lucrezia hardly has had any scenes with Giulia Farnese this season - this relationship is important to me, damn it! - but on the other hand I'm delighted she continues to have more with her mother, and that the show doesn't pretend its young female lead can only be in love (or not), but acknowledges (and let the characters acknowledge) there's such a thing as being in lust for women as well as men without censoring this as bad. However, neither of the invented brothers has struck me as particularly interesting yet, and thus I continue to mourn for the entertaining bizarreness that would have been a Lucrezia/show!Alfonso of Naples marriage.
no subject
Date: 2016-09-19 02:00 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-09-19 04:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-09-19 04:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-09-19 07:00 pm (UTC)