Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

This movie is a masterpiece in that it accomplishes what it set out to do: to depict decadent, pagan Rome circa 37 AD. I cringed throughout the FIRST VIEWING, unsure what to expect, fearing revulsion in each scene. The SECOND VIEWING was better, I knew what to expect: a simple plot about unchecked power with gratuitous violence and sex. Guccione may have overstated the sex and violence but that is what you get from pagan cultures. The THIRD VIEWING reveals the movie as art: as pornographic and dangerous as ancient Rome at its worst with interesting props and sets. Maybe Guccione wanted to contrast sexual cultures of ancient Rome with his magazine culture of today: to prove that he himself and/or current exploitation of women isn't so bad after all--only sexually explicit. Generally, sex of any kind still has a bad reputation. This movie only needs be a reasonably accurate historical account (ostensibly derived from museum artifacts commonly found around the world) to maintain historical relevance. Many will hate this sort of reality, but not every movie has to "sublimate" reality according to family movie standards to please puritanical hypocrites. Face it: only a world as lost as Caligula's could crucify Christ. (Notice how persecution against the spiritually pure was greatest then?) Yes (?) Nevertheless, this movie entertains by being so over-the-top that exquisite sound and editing are not necessary. Again, this was the real Rome. Finally, if you are an adult who desires full knowledge of the depth of human depravity, then Vidal, Guccione, et al. should be praised for accomplishing such an important (by virtue of its controversy) historical film. I recommend this film to everyone to either love or hate. I love it!