Hadrian and a Bond...boy?

[eumelia]

Who want to see a movie about a Roman Emperor who was known for being a kick-ass and a gentle lover?

I do!

Especially when Daniel Craig (The new and second best James Bond) is going to play Emperor Hadrian - who was well known for a wall, fighting against the Second Jewish revolt and for his lover Antinous - whom he deified after Antinous' death.

Apropo bisexual men; Mr. Craig, in lieu of portraying a bisexual character, suggested that in the next Bond film, 007 have a Bond-Boy, instead of a Bond-Girl.

He is quoted in the Daily Star: "Why not? I think in this day and age fans would have accepted it. No-one blinks an eye"

I have a bit of a crush on Daniel Craig now.

Via.
Sent to me by hemlock_sholes, who gets extra cookies for requesting that I blog about this.

Comments

[schemingreader.livejournal.com]

I was just thinking that I wanted to learn more about Hadrian, who must have been an utterly crap emperor to have had revolts on two fronts like that. This sounds like a fun movie!

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

I'm thinking it was all teh sex that distracted him from Albion and Judea :D

[hemlock-sholes.livejournal.com]

Actually, he was considered one of the 5 good emperors, during which was the Roman Empire's golden age.

These five emperors (Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antonious Pious and Marcus Aurellius) each adopted the next one so that the emperor would be chosen by merit and not by birth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadrian

[schemingreader.livejournal.com]

I think I read the world through Jewish goggles sometimes. It seems kind of dumb to me to open up a rebellion on a new front through massive cultural insensitivity. I mean, he had to move troops to defend against the rebellion in Britain (I had known that before the Wikipedia article, though I did learn some interesting new things) and it sounds like there were rebellions elsewhere as well--why charge into Jerusalem and antagonize the natives?

[hemlock-sholes.livejournal.com]

The problem is that we don't even know the real reasons for the rebellion. Most of our information comes from Jewish/rabbinic sources which are ... slightly biased.

Basically, there are two reasons given for the outbreak of violence:
1. Hadrian forbade circumcision. We don't know whether Hadrian did this as an anti-semitic act or whether he did this because, as a fervent Hellenic, he thought he was helping the Jews from the "cult" they belonged to. We don't know how much dialog took place between the edict being published and violence breaking out.
2. Hadrian built a temple to Jupiter in Jerusalem. We actually are not sure whether this temple was built before or after the Rebellion!

Probably, the rebellion broke out due to a mixture of ineffectual, perhaps corrupt, local Roman rule and fanatical, messianic Jewish behavior on the other side and less due to Hadrian himself.

Robert