Frequently Bought Together
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Product details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
11 of 12 people found the following review helpful
By Josephus
Format:DVD
This set contains the complete ist series split into 12 episodes of "Borgia" (not to be confused with the much tamer version with Jeremy Irons called "The Borgia"). It was made for the German and Austrian market but also shown in France and Spain. The quality is almost as good as the HD version shown on Spanish Canal+. Historicaly speaking some gross liberties have been taken with the subject matter, but this seems to be the prevailing trend nowadays (i.e. The Tudors, Rome, Spartacus...). It does however portray in a rather realistic way a gruesome period of Italian history when life was cheap and people did almost anything to get to the top (not much change here from the current corporate or political world then). All in all a rather disturbing and very realistic look at the world of the so-called Rennaissance, which combined terribles crimes on the one hand and a flourishing of art and culture on the other. Highly recommended viewing for people who want to get a feel (in more ways than one) of a turbulent period.
11 of 14 people found the following review helpful
By M. FUSCO
Format:DVD
I suspect that more heads may have rolled at Canal+ Studios after this debacle, which must have cost a small fortune, than in the series itself -- and there were plenty there!
The Borgia story is certainly fascinating and this version pretty much sticks to facts, with certain liberties. The sets are sumptuous. The music is nicely appropriate, too (lovely 'a capella' choral music in the main). But that is where it ends.
The cast is a giant hodge-podge of European and American actors and, as other reviewers have stated, no attempt whatsoever was made towards any uniformity of accent. This, in itself, is not too much of a problem as everything is in English and there is just a general and generic European sound to their jabbering. But the high-flutin', and rather stilted, renaissance dialogue sounds even more so with emphases in the wrong places.
All this could be forgiven, but there is one huge, unforgivable, glaring exception that spoils what might have been a decent production: American John Doman in the leading, pivotal role of Rodgrigo Borgia. He may have been acceptable in his role as a NY cop (The Wire), but he is out of his depth here in every conceivable way. His acting is monochromatic and deplorable. His desey-dosey Bronx accent is shockingly out of place and distracting, and destroys whatever atmosphere the sets create. Unlike other reviewers, I could not get past this giant flaw because he continues throughout to top himself in lingual absurdity.
The cast is certainly attractive, but one can never believe beautiful Cesare's supposed 'conflict' between the physical and the spiritual in his life, nor just about any of his decisions, some of which border on the insane. Lucrezia is completely implausible for similar reasons.... Read more ›
The Borgia story is certainly fascinating and this version pretty much sticks to facts, with certain liberties. The sets are sumptuous. The music is nicely appropriate, too (lovely 'a capella' choral music in the main). But that is where it ends.
The cast is a giant hodge-podge of European and American actors and, as other reviewers have stated, no attempt whatsoever was made towards any uniformity of accent. This, in itself, is not too much of a problem as everything is in English and there is just a general and generic European sound to their jabbering. But the high-flutin', and rather stilted, renaissance dialogue sounds even more so with emphases in the wrong places.
All this could be forgiven, but there is one huge, unforgivable, glaring exception that spoils what might have been a decent production: American John Doman in the leading, pivotal role of Rodgrigo Borgia. He may have been acceptable in his role as a NY cop (The Wire), but he is out of his depth here in every conceivable way. His acting is monochromatic and deplorable. His desey-dosey Bronx accent is shockingly out of place and distracting, and destroys whatever atmosphere the sets create. Unlike other reviewers, I could not get past this giant flaw because he continues throughout to top himself in lingual absurdity.
The cast is certainly attractive, but one can never believe beautiful Cesare's supposed 'conflict' between the physical and the spiritual in his life, nor just about any of his decisions, some of which border on the insane. Lucrezia is completely implausible for similar reasons.... Read more ›
Most Helpful Customer Reviews on Amazon.com (beta)
Amazon.com:
3.7 out of 5 stars
47 reviews
130 of 138 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars
Canal+ "Borgias" vs. Showtime's "The Borgias".
14 Jan 2012
By Miim
- Published on Amazon.com
Format:DVD
As you must already know, there's two shows about the Borgia family currently running. One from Showtime, and this one here done by Canal +, an European TV channel. Ironically, both were filmed in the same country at the same time, but are completely independent productions.
People inevitably compare them both, and many often mistakenly claim the Canal + one is historically more accurate than the Showtime one, something that isn't true.
As a history aficionado focusing on the Renaissance era and the Borgias in particular, I can assure you that when it comes to historical accuracy the Canal + show is just as bad as the Showtime one.
Furthermore, the characterization isn't always credible in the Canal + version (and occasionally seems to change randomly and suddenly), while the Showtime version lacks in background details and in the people who should be surrounding the Borgias. So they each have their flaws.
Both of them have excellent points and are very entertaining as well though, even if every so often they both butcher the historical accuracy to quite amazing levels.
The Showtime version has a tendency to do shortcuts and to focus on character development (thus it succeeds in making you interested in the main characters), while the Canal + version tries to show more of the people surrounding them but fails to establish as good of a connection for the watchers, and also frequently veers off into bizarre tangents that are as bad or worse than the ones done by the Showtime version.
(A little list of some of the odd things in the Canal + version [SPOILER WARNING]: Cesare involved with witchcraft?? The whole sub-arc with Cesare trying to kill his baby?? The whole arc about Cesare getting raped and then having various post-traumatic reactions every time someone humiliates him by bringing that back up?? [end of spoilers.]
All of those are invented for the Canal + show and have no relation whatsoever with history, but the show also passes on rumors contemporary to the Borgias, that are known to be untrue and that the Showtime version did not pass on, thankfully. So claiming one is more historically accurate than the other is a moot point, imho. Both are flawed, and yet still very interesting and enjoyable.)
I personally prefer when historical series try to stay closer to actual history, but I realize that more often than not history is sacrificed for the sake of entertaining TV (it was so even with "Rome"), so I don't really blame either of the two shows for those inevitable peccadilloes.
In my opinion, both deserve a solid 4 stars. (I would give 5 for more historical accuracy, but the entertaining value of both is good enough to make it a 4 or even more despite the historical issues.)
Especially considering how we've gotten so much garbage fiction about the Borgias over the years; those two shows are surprisingly good compared so many of the past productions about them.
In conclusion, both are still extremely entertaining despite the issues with historical accuracy they both have. I strongly recommend watching them both if you're very interested in the period or in the Borgias.
People inevitably compare them both, and many often mistakenly claim the Canal + one is historically more accurate than the Showtime one, something that isn't true.
As a history aficionado focusing on the Renaissance era and the Borgias in particular, I can assure you that when it comes to historical accuracy the Canal + show is just as bad as the Showtime one.
Furthermore, the characterization isn't always credible in the Canal + version (and occasionally seems to change randomly and suddenly), while the Showtime version lacks in background details and in the people who should be surrounding the Borgias. So they each have their flaws.
Both of them have excellent points and are very entertaining as well though, even if every so often they both butcher the historical accuracy to quite amazing levels.
The Showtime version has a tendency to do shortcuts and to focus on character development (thus it succeeds in making you interested in the main characters), while the Canal + version tries to show more of the people surrounding them but fails to establish as good of a connection for the watchers, and also frequently veers off into bizarre tangents that are as bad or worse than the ones done by the Showtime version.
(A little list of some of the odd things in the Canal + version [SPOILER WARNING]: Cesare involved with witchcraft?? The whole sub-arc with Cesare trying to kill his baby?? The whole arc about Cesare getting raped and then having various post-traumatic reactions every time someone humiliates him by bringing that back up?? [end of spoilers.]
All of those are invented for the Canal + show and have no relation whatsoever with history, but the show also passes on rumors contemporary to the Borgias, that are known to be untrue and that the Showtime version did not pass on, thankfully. So claiming one is more historically accurate than the other is a moot point, imho. Both are flawed, and yet still very interesting and enjoyable.)
I personally prefer when historical series try to stay closer to actual history, but I realize that more often than not history is sacrificed for the sake of entertaining TV (it was so even with "Rome"), so I don't really blame either of the two shows for those inevitable peccadilloes.
In my opinion, both deserve a solid 4 stars. (I would give 5 for more historical accuracy, but the entertaining value of both is good enough to make it a 4 or even more despite the historical issues.)
Especially considering how we've gotten so much garbage fiction about the Borgias over the years; those two shows are surprisingly good compared so many of the past productions about them.
In conclusion, both are still extremely entertaining despite the issues with historical accuracy they both have. I strongly recommend watching them both if you're very interested in the period or in the Borgias.
54 of 59 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars
Better than the other version, which I find hard to believe
13 Dec 2011
By Bruce Brocka
- Published on Amazon.com
Format:DVD
I love Jeremy Irons. I would listen to him read the phone book. But this version of the Borgias story is quite compelling. It's written by the creative team behind The Wire" (Barry Levinson and Tom Fontana), and is a pan-European effort. It's available now on Netflix streaming.
This means that the costumes are stunning, the sets accurate, but the dialects a bit jarring, It's in english, but some actors have a German accent (Lucrezia), most are British, some are Italian (Giulia Farnese) and so on. The most jarring accent is from the American, John Dorman, who plays Pope Alexander VI. I took me several episodes to get over the fact that the nasty Police Colonel in "The Wire" was Rodrigo Borgia. But once you get over the accent thing, you realize that Rodrigo was a very virile, late-in-life man, and Dorman is actually a very good choice. Like "The Wire" the evil or criminal acts and personalities are presented "as-is" - there is no moralizing here - these are men of their own times.
I'd like to say this version is also more accurate, but what we know is from sources hostile to the Borgias, and accuracy is a nebulous goal. However, the degeneration of Rome at the time is well depicted, and the dresses are gorgeous! The actor who plays the king of France looks as though he stepped from a late medieval painting.
For lovers of period pieces such as myself, this is well worth the time. A real delight, and I'm grateful I didn't have to buy a region 2 DVD version of this!
This means that the costumes are stunning, the sets accurate, but the dialects a bit jarring, It's in english, but some actors have a German accent (Lucrezia), most are British, some are Italian (Giulia Farnese) and so on. The most jarring accent is from the American, John Dorman, who plays Pope Alexander VI. I took me several episodes to get over the fact that the nasty Police Colonel in "The Wire" was Rodrigo Borgia. But once you get over the accent thing, you realize that Rodrigo was a very virile, late-in-life man, and Dorman is actually a very good choice. Like "The Wire" the evil or criminal acts and personalities are presented "as-is" - there is no moralizing here - these are men of their own times.
I'd like to say this version is also more accurate, but what we know is from sources hostile to the Borgias, and accuracy is a nebulous goal. However, the degeneration of Rome at the time is well depicted, and the dresses are gorgeous! The actor who plays the king of France looks as though he stepped from a late medieval painting.
For lovers of period pieces such as myself, this is well worth the time. A real delight, and I'm grateful I didn't have to buy a region 2 DVD version of this!
44 of 50 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars
Outstanding...I will "pray" for a second season.
2 Feb 2012
By maskirovka
- Published on Amazon.com
Format:DVD
I enjoyed the Showtime series "the Borgias" enough to buy a copy of the season one DVD of that series, and I suppose I will watch season two of that show with interest.
However, I'm very glad to have stumbled across "Borgia: Faith and Fear." The storyline was much better and to say it was jam-packed with compelling and shocking moments (in contrast with the Showtime series) is an understatement:
1. John Doman as Alexander VI surpasses Jeremy Irons who comes across as too languid and "English" and laid back in comparison. Doman's Pope strikes me as a more authentic version of what Alexander VI might have been like...a complex mix of corruption, passion, political genius, moral blindness, and sometimes even piety.
2. The series spends much more time than the Showtime series on the conclave that put Rodrigo Borgia into the Papacy. Watching this political intrigue whirling at a dizzying pace is fascinating and compelling to watch.
3. The production values are great and are not outshone by the Showtime series. Battle scenes look real and the faux-Vatican created for the series looks real.
4. I have the impression that "Borgia: Faith and Fear" takes fewer liberties with the historical record than the Showtime series (although I did not a few such things).
I would recommend against letting young children watch the show. It is at times extremely violent (brutal torture, public executions) and it has explicit sex scenes (more so than the Showtime series) but with that said, it was not "gratuitous" (the story is set in a bloodsoaked time in a place swirling with vendetta, violence, lust, and all the other dark passions that move people).
I agree that sometimes the vast cast of characters does get confusing (telling who belongs to what factions. I'm looking for a good book about the Borgia clan, so I can better appreciate both series.
However, I'm very glad to have stumbled across "Borgia: Faith and Fear." The storyline was much better and to say it was jam-packed with compelling and shocking moments (in contrast with the Showtime series) is an understatement:
1. John Doman as Alexander VI surpasses Jeremy Irons who comes across as too languid and "English" and laid back in comparison. Doman's Pope strikes me as a more authentic version of what Alexander VI might have been like...a complex mix of corruption, passion, political genius, moral blindness, and sometimes even piety.
2. The series spends much more time than the Showtime series on the conclave that put Rodrigo Borgia into the Papacy. Watching this political intrigue whirling at a dizzying pace is fascinating and compelling to watch.
3. The production values are great and are not outshone by the Showtime series. Battle scenes look real and the faux-Vatican created for the series looks real.
4. I have the impression that "Borgia: Faith and Fear" takes fewer liberties with the historical record than the Showtime series (although I did not a few such things).
I would recommend against letting young children watch the show. It is at times extremely violent (brutal torture, public executions) and it has explicit sex scenes (more so than the Showtime series) but with that said, it was not "gratuitous" (the story is set in a bloodsoaked time in a place swirling with vendetta, violence, lust, and all the other dark passions that move people).
I agree that sometimes the vast cast of characters does get confusing (telling who belongs to what factions. I'm looking for a good book about the Borgia clan, so I can better appreciate both series.
›
Go to Amazon.com to see all 47 reviews
3.7 out of 5 stars
Were these reviews helpful?
Let us know
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
Listmania!
|
|
Look for similar items by category
Feedback
- Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
