OK, perhaps Egyptian Vice is not quite in Ancient Alien's glorious ahistorical realms, but it sure did make me think of it at times. For instance, while the series boasts a roster of Egyptologists and archaeologists (and, erm, a 'military strategy' expert), there are some nuggets of actual history, but also an awful lot of 'you have to wonder' material in its shallow surface skim through one of the greatest civilisations the world has even seen. For instance, we learn that many slaves were put to death to serve their master in the afterlife, but are informed that there is no way to determine the cause of their deaths. Thus, a speculation that they may have been poisoned then leads to a full-blown and dramatic re-enactment of what is merely speculation and not historical fact. Then of course, we have the biographies of the pharaohs using modern psychology. Consequently, we learn that Ramses II was a liar as he exaggerated the success of his battle with the Hittites. Now, if I was the pharaoh, I might just give my people a morale-boosting 'spin' in relation to my first skirmish with an invading force rather than screaming "We're all doomed!" when I get back in my chariot. However, that is just me. I also liked tales of Rambo-meets-Leonidas one-pharaoh-armies, but my favourite was the depiction of Akhenaten. In surveying the sculptures of Akhenaten we find a marvellously striking depiction of a man who is almost otherworldly in terms of looks (cue Ancient Aliens "You have to wonder" moment!), but the makers of Egyptian Vice opt in their dramatizations for a burly bloke who wouldn't look out of place in an old school wrestling ring. Furthermore, the deep analysis of Akhenaten's radical attempt to subvert the pantheon of the gods into the monotheistic worship of the Aten is neatly summed up with the learned view that he "was a bit mad". Well, that sorts that out, then. So, an entertainingly odd series, but if you want the inside scoop on the true ways of ancient Egypt, hit the books!
6 Reviews
No words can describe this
.
Lammasuswatch22 January 2017
Let me start off by saying that if I could give zero stars and still post a rating I would. However, they don't allow you to give zero, so I'm going to have to give this alleged history movie (?) one star.
It is categorised here on IMDb as a movie, although it is masquerading as a documentary (I think), utilising frequent cut-in interviews with a number of experts who are supposed to be providing historical commentary and expansion on the re-enactments, which are obviously the main purpose of this documentary, movie whatever.
Now, I was not previously familiar with the other experts featured in this melange of dreck, but none of them seems to have Egyptology as a specialty. Englishman Dr Chris Naunton does, however, and he is a serious archaeologist, and a significant Egyptologist. I do find it difficult to believe that he knew what he was signing up for when he agreed to participate in this travesty. But he can take solace in the fact that he was the ONLY expert who quietly provided measured and accurate commentary, and actual known facts.
Whether the others had their commentaries pre-scripted by the series writers and given to them to learn off will be one of the great academic mysteries of all time. It is hard to believe they will ever be taken seriously by any of their colleagues in their chosen fields again. Such is the damage that this program could – and should – do to their academic credibility. And as for the narrator, actor Alexander Siddig, he's not stupid. He must have needed the money.
So what is "Egyptian Vice" all about? Well, they got the names of the Pharaohs right, but announcing them in Greek-style script was just one of the bewildering decisions made by whoever was in charge. (Was someone in charge?)
Otherwise it's about nothing. At least nothing factual. There are lots of huge pecs, and six-pack abs, fight and atrocity scenes, blood and guts galore, as well as the requisite seductive bath and sex scenes. (But don't get too excited! They're only on the risqué level of a bath soap commercial - and about as interesting.)
Any historical context in terms of religious beliefs or cultural beliefs of the times depicted (spanning 3,000 years!) is completely ignored. And within that framework, they managed to almost completely ignore any known facts or conjectures, except for the most basic details that suited the storyline they wanted to show. What we also get lots of, besides the sex and violence, is moralistic and pseudo-psychological claptrap. But nothing at all enlightening about any aspect of Ancient Egypt.
All but one of our 'experts' analyse the personalities of various Egyptian Pharaohs using ridiculously emotive and inappropriate language. And then they invariably come to the conclusion that ________ (insert applicable Pharaoh's name) was a sociopathic liar, an evil ruthless killer, a blood-hungry psychopath, and/or someone who mistreats both his enemies and his own people, and shows no value in human life, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. All of which we can't possibly know except in extremely general terms, if at all. And all the females are delightfully - well, I'm sure you already know what. (Yes, of course, sexual deviants. What else?)
From all these moralistic pronouncements one might deduce that the intended audience is the Christian right, for whom the producers have created the ideal viewing opportunity to bask in the moral superiority of looking down on such godless pagan religions and societies. But I rather suspect the true intended audience is those who really like to spy through keyholes. And people who don't care a jot for history, but like films in the manner of "300" where you have lots of sex and stylised extreme violence, filmed as if it's an animated video game, with the same attitude of respect towards any real historical knowledge.
But if you're a fan of documentaries about Ancient Egypt, avoid it like the plague. It'll only upset you.
Come to think of it, I don't think zero does this tripe justice. Feel free to understand my rating as a minus score.
It is categorised here on IMDb as a movie, although it is masquerading as a documentary (I think), utilising frequent cut-in interviews with a number of experts who are supposed to be providing historical commentary and expansion on the re-enactments, which are obviously the main purpose of this documentary, movie whatever.
Now, I was not previously familiar with the other experts featured in this melange of dreck, but none of them seems to have Egyptology as a specialty. Englishman Dr Chris Naunton does, however, and he is a serious archaeologist, and a significant Egyptologist. I do find it difficult to believe that he knew what he was signing up for when he agreed to participate in this travesty. But he can take solace in the fact that he was the ONLY expert who quietly provided measured and accurate commentary, and actual known facts.
Whether the others had their commentaries pre-scripted by the series writers and given to them to learn off will be one of the great academic mysteries of all time. It is hard to believe they will ever be taken seriously by any of their colleagues in their chosen fields again. Such is the damage that this program could – and should – do to their academic credibility. And as for the narrator, actor Alexander Siddig, he's not stupid. He must have needed the money.
So what is "Egyptian Vice" all about? Well, they got the names of the Pharaohs right, but announcing them in Greek-style script was just one of the bewildering decisions made by whoever was in charge. (Was someone in charge?)
Otherwise it's about nothing. At least nothing factual. There are lots of huge pecs, and six-pack abs, fight and atrocity scenes, blood and guts galore, as well as the requisite seductive bath and sex scenes. (But don't get too excited! They're only on the risqué level of a bath soap commercial - and about as interesting.)
Any historical context in terms of religious beliefs or cultural beliefs of the times depicted (spanning 3,000 years!) is completely ignored. And within that framework, they managed to almost completely ignore any known facts or conjectures, except for the most basic details that suited the storyline they wanted to show. What we also get lots of, besides the sex and violence, is moralistic and pseudo-psychological claptrap. But nothing at all enlightening about any aspect of Ancient Egypt.
All but one of our 'experts' analyse the personalities of various Egyptian Pharaohs using ridiculously emotive and inappropriate language. And then they invariably come to the conclusion that ________ (insert applicable Pharaoh's name) was a sociopathic liar, an evil ruthless killer, a blood-hungry psychopath, and/or someone who mistreats both his enemies and his own people, and shows no value in human life, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. All of which we can't possibly know except in extremely general terms, if at all. And all the females are delightfully - well, I'm sure you already know what. (Yes, of course, sexual deviants. What else?)
From all these moralistic pronouncements one might deduce that the intended audience is the Christian right, for whom the producers have created the ideal viewing opportunity to bask in the moral superiority of looking down on such godless pagan religions and societies. But I rather suspect the true intended audience is those who really like to spy through keyholes. And people who don't care a jot for history, but like films in the manner of "300" where you have lots of sex and stylised extreme violence, filmed as if it's an animated video game, with the same attitude of respect towards any real historical knowledge.
But if you're a fan of documentaries about Ancient Egypt, avoid it like the plague. It'll only upset you.
Come to think of it, I don't think zero does this tripe justice. Feel free to understand my rating as a minus score.
Digusting!
eclectic_girl7723 July 2015
What a disgusting, sensationalist, bigoted, biased, anti- intellectual, pro-violence piece of propaganda! All the colleges and universities that provided degrees to the "experts" used in this program should demand those degrees back and that remedial courses be taken by all. Every other word was "killing" or "evil" or "ruthless" or "psychopath" or "delusional" or "god-complex"; "evil" seemed to be the word of choice, though, being used at least a hundred times, if not more. With every pharaoh profiled, there was a single nugget of truth that was then distorted, misrepresented, blown out of proportion, taken out of context, and in every way used to create a fictional portrait. What I thought was most laughable was the profile of Akhenaten: the pharaoh who created and propagated one of the earliest monotheistic religions is described as mad and power-hungry, out to destroy the lifestyle of the priests of Amun and the entire way of life in Egypt, something that Jesus, thirteen hundred or so years later, gets lauded for. Bias? No, not here. The actors are hilarious, especially the woman they got to play Cleopatra VII, who looked like a Middle Eastern supermodel; Cleopatra was known for her intelligence, her wit, her political acumen, but not her looks; the man portraying Julius Caesar was a silver fox with carved abs, not the bald, paunchy old man he should've been. Oh, and of course, much was made of the incest without any cultural or historical context or precedent--it was simply something to be pointed at, exclaimed over, and sneered at.
There is no history here, just fantastical, fictional portraits skewed to provide as much blood, gore, and sex as possible without any regard to reality or historical accuracy.
There is no history here, just fantastical, fictional portraits skewed to provide as much blood, gore, and sex as possible without any regard to reality or historical accuracy.
Example of everything worng with revisionism. Excruciating to watch
VoyagerMN198628 October 2018
I've got no problem generally with popularizing ancient history.
I've also no problem with revisionism. Back when I was in grad school 10 years ago there was a new school of academically lightweight but popular work asserting that slavery was not a major factor in Egypt, which was revision of long held views. Yet today that has reversed again, and a mountain of evidence has once again turned to an understanding of Egypt as a virtual total slave society and slave economy.
That said, this pair of programs is profoundly idiotic. The language used to describe the Egyptian rulers is just childish. There was a recent study on psychopathy and sociopathy rates in US states, and the top jurisdiction was Washington DC, with eleven times times the rate of any other jurisdiction. This corresponds with several other studies that show people in politics especially successful politicians, generally exhibit such higher rates psychopathy. We are learning it is not that "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely," but rather the other way around -- that the corrupt are drawn to and succeed in gaining power -- be it in authoritarian systems OR in democracies.
Was Egypt more violent than Assyria? Did it have more slaves than the Persian empire which was a slave state (made more ironic with completely invented interpretations of the 'Cyrus cylinder" as being some kind of "human rights declaration" when Cyrus was a mass murderer and genocidaire). Were the Ptolemies any different than the Romans? Are we really to go backwards and swallow Octavian's propaganda against Anthony and Cleopatra as dissolute?
Even if you have a high tolerance for junk mixed in with popular history this is beyond the pale and excruciating to watch.
I've also no problem with revisionism. Back when I was in grad school 10 years ago there was a new school of academically lightweight but popular work asserting that slavery was not a major factor in Egypt, which was revision of long held views. Yet today that has reversed again, and a mountain of evidence has once again turned to an understanding of Egypt as a virtual total slave society and slave economy.
That said, this pair of programs is profoundly idiotic. The language used to describe the Egyptian rulers is just childish. There was a recent study on psychopathy and sociopathy rates in US states, and the top jurisdiction was Washington DC, with eleven times times the rate of any other jurisdiction. This corresponds with several other studies that show people in politics especially successful politicians, generally exhibit such higher rates psychopathy. We are learning it is not that "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely," but rather the other way around -- that the corrupt are drawn to and succeed in gaining power -- be it in authoritarian systems OR in democracies.
Was Egypt more violent than Assyria? Did it have more slaves than the Persian empire which was a slave state (made more ironic with completely invented interpretations of the 'Cyrus cylinder" as being some kind of "human rights declaration" when Cyrus was a mass murderer and genocidaire). Were the Ptolemies any different than the Romans? Are we really to go backwards and swallow Octavian's propaganda against Anthony and Cleopatra as dissolute?
Even if you have a high tolerance for junk mixed in with popular history this is beyond the pale and excruciating to watch.
Shameful twaddle!
colbmgs22 January 2017
Warning: Spoilers
This is so bad it deserves no stars. It should not be called a documentary as it makes no attempt to look at Ancient Egypt with any historical perspective but simply to sensationalise and misrepresent. The so-called academic experts should be embarrassed to have their names associated with such a project. History students and lovers of history be warned: this is everything you should not do as an historian. I persevered through episode one in the vain hope it might improve but it only made me angry. My junior students bring more academic rigour to their work than is evident in this garbage. There are many fine explorations of ancient Egypt available as an alternative so I urge you to seek them out.
Utter garbage- Ancient Egypt as Las Vegas
aufo-9128115 August 2021
This programme of fantasy nonsense should never have been on the History channel. Scyfy channel perhaps. If you watch it- take the names of the 'experts' giving their opinions- and be sure to avoid any programme/book/film that they appear in. It's insulting to to a great civilisation-and sickening slur on American academia. It should never be broadcast again. The History Channel should be ashamed.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
