Nikki K

Welcome to this second thread of an ongoing discussion which started HERE: Everything Ken does, Barbie does better.

Back when we started the thread there were some really interested and well-balanced conversation and hopefully we can continue in this fine tradition.

Before we continue, I'd like to remind everyone of the most fundamental rule:

Be respectful. Not everyone is going to agree with you at all times. It’s perfectly fine to disagree with someone as long as it is done respectfully, but do not attack other posters. Please treat other members with the same respect and courtesy that you would want for yourself.

Furthermore, following the example of guidelines we'd like to extend this:

Be respectful towards the cast (aka no actor bashing), post about things related to the show(s), and only direct critique and appraisal at the fictional characters or couples.

Personally, my feelings towards both shows has changed a lot through several re-watches since I first saw them. However, I made my case. But I hope you find entertainment indiscussing both shows - each on its own or in considerate comparison.

For anyone interested: The first episode's title was printed on a T-Shirt I wore for rollerderby practice way back then; this one is a quote by the fabulous Cate Blanchett. My original title for this thread was:

PhoenixRising

Thank you for the new thread, Nina!

Nikki K

You're very welcome, Alex!

were-dinosaur

Thanks for re-starting this thread, Nikki! The discussion in the other one was so interesting that I was really sad I missed it. I will start working on some more detailed thoughts to post later.

DGSAFDMD

You're more than welcome to keep this thread moving, were-dinosaur. What's your name, sorry?

TFTNT Nina!

PhoenixRising

I hope to see you back here soon, were-dinosaur. It would be great to have someone continue this discussion.

I'm just curious when Borgia's second season will finally be available in the USA.

Nikki K

were-dinosaur - You're welcome and you can call me Nina.

Alex - it is out on Netflix in the U.S. since May 1st. (I also posted that in the News thread at the time btw.) The DVDs will be released in Germany next week but they were out in France in May.

May -

PhoenixRising

Thanks for the info, Nina.

were-dinosaur

Haha, this turned into a bit of a novel, and I haven't even finished watching season one of B:F&F yet! Oops.

Rodrigo: I think both portrayals are good, but I favor Jeremy Irons even though John Doman is physically closer to the real Rodrigo Borgia. I think he conveys better the charm, charisma, and energy that I've read the historical Borgia possessed, and I like that he brings more of a sense of humor to the role. Also, all the begones in B:F&F kind of get on my nerves. So I give Jordan the edge here, but not a huge one.

Vannozza: I really like both portrayals of Vannozza. I like that Fontana portrays her as a shrewd businesswoman, which she historically was, whereas Jordan treats her more like a housewife and never really makes it clear what she's surviving on - past favors, I guess. Despite this, Jordan's Vannozza gets more to do, and I think Joanne Whalley is a more charismatic actress than the woman who plays Vannozza in the Fontana version, so I'd give Jordan a slight edge again.

Cesare - I don't think I can approach Cesare with an unbiased eye, because I love Francois's depiction so much. Fontana's Cesare is certainly an interesting contrast to Jordan's, but whereas the seeds of the historical Cesare were very clear in Jordan's portrayal from the start, I have a hard time picturing how Fontana's Cesare as he's been portrayed so far will ever turn into somebody whose name is essentially synonymous with "Machiavellian." Especially after the whole baby storyline and all the self-flagellation involved there, he seems impulsive to the point of being unhinged, which doesn't fit with my impression of the historical Cesare at all, and he also seems way too religious. So, interesting a character as Fontana's Cesare is, I don't think I would recognize him as Cesare Borgia if I was reading a script with all the names blacked out, whereas Jordan's Cesare, despite being portrayed as a more sympathetic person (for the most part) than the historical Cesare probably actually was, has the cold calculation and political and religious cynicism that I associate with the historical Cesare. Mark does fine with what he's given, but overall, Jordan is the easy winner here.

Juan - I prefer David Oakes as an actor, but I have to say that I really like how Fontana's Juan has been written so far. I had the same issues as some of the rest of you with how Jordan's Juan went from being incompetent and obnoxious but basically easy going in the first season to aggressively awful in the second. I like that Fontana's Juan seems to realize that he's a mediocre person in a totally non-mediocre family and really tries to make his father proud, even though he usually screws up. From some of the comments in the other thread, it sounds like Juan's characterization in B:F&F will deteriorate later, but for now, I'll give Fontana the edge on Juan.

Lucrezia - I love Holliday Grainger, but I wasn't thrilled with Lucrezia's characterization in season three of the Borgias. I thought it was inconsistent at times, and it sounds like it got even messier in the Borgia Apocalypse ebook, so I don't think Jordan necessarily wrote a great Lucrezia, certainly not on par with his Cesare. However, I'm not crazy about Fontana's Lucrezia so far either. I think her bratty teenageness is probably more historically accurate, but as someone who didn't really go through a bratty teenage phase myself, I find bratty teenagers annoying. Also, the casting is giving me real problems. I had some initial troubles with the mix of accents on Fontana's show, but mostly got over it, except for Lucrezia. I feel like the actress's accent is strong to the point that it hampers her ability to act and results in lots of line deliveries that emphasize the wrong words and just generally are not good. So I give the writing itself a tie, as both versions have some strengths and weaknesses, but I personally prefer Jordan's Lucrezia as a character and Holliday as an actress.

Giulia - I like both Giulias about equally, but for totally different reasons. Jordan tended to underuse Giulia and often gave her kind of implausible plots when he did. However, I liked her subtlety and cleverness, and enjoyed the accounting storyline, no matter how implausible it may have been. I also think Lotte is physically prettier and more deserving of the title "La Bella Farnese" than Marta, who's attractive but not legendarily so. I like that Fontana gives Giulia so much more to do than just hang around being the Pope's mistress and that she has significant relationships with far more people. She occasionally slides into annoying bratty teenage territory like Lucrezia, but overall I appreciate that she has goals independent of Rodrigo and that she's willing to manipulate him so blatantly to further them, especially when it comes helping to Alessandro and the Farnese family. So I'll give this one a tie, too.

Alessandro - A billion times more interesting on B: F&F than The Borgias, and much more future pope-like, too. Fontana is the clear winner.

Cardinal Sforza - Ascanio is one of my favorite secondary characters in The Borgias, but it was never totally clear to me why he cast off his family so thoroughly in favor of the Borgias, so even though I find the character significantly less likable in Fontana's version, I appreciate seeing the depiction of him as somebody who is using his position to better his family's position. I'll give this one another tie for the writing, but I personally like Jordan's Cardinal Sassypants much more.

Della Rovere - My understanding is that Fontana's DR is more historically accurate overall and I appreciate his more complex motives, but I don't understand why Fontana keeps implying that DR was gay. Didn't he historically have kids? So I am not thrilled about that. (The "evil gay" trope needs to die in fire.) That said, I also had to laugh at Ex Urbe's characterization of Jordan's DR as being shocked - SHOCKED - that simony is going on in the Vatican, since DR historically was just as bad as Borgia in that regard. So truthfully, I don't think either DR is very well written and award a tie of suckiness. On the other hand, the actor who plays DR in Fontana's show is perfectly competent, but Colm Feore is fantastic, so kudos to him for bringing so much depth, passion, and complexity to a role that might otherwise have been laughably simplistic.

Micheletto, Machiavelli, and Savonarola - I've barely met Micheletto on Borgia: F&F and haven't met Machiavelli or Savonarola at all, so I can't compare these three yet. I must say, I am really looking forward to Savonarola on B: F&F as I'm a fan of Iain Glen and expect that he'll knock it out of the park as thoroughly as he does every other role.

Overall impressions:

You can clearly see Jordan's larger budget in the sets, costumes, and general look of The Borgias. It is gorgeous. That said, from what I've read, it's way more gorgeous than Rome actually was during the time of the Borgias, so it's cool to see the contrast of much darker, poorer, and more crumbling backdrops in Fontana's show as well.

From a budget perspective, I think the bigger issue so far is that Fontana apparently couldn't afford battle scenes or even CGI armies, so the whole French invasion is a bunch of people standing around talking about what's going on offscreen and maybe 20 guys running through the streets with torches. Compared to Jordan's gross but spectacular chained cannonballs, it was pretty boring. Jordan's emphasis on the contrast between the French army, which had most likely grown up on stories of the incredibly brutal Hundred Years' War with the English that ended just a few decades' earlier, versus the Italians, who were coming out of an era of comparative peace and still focused more on "honor," was especially interesting, imho, and that didn't really come across at all on Fontana's show.

Speaking of grossness, despite the chained cannonballs, the nightmarish Last Supper, etc. Fontana is so much grosser than Jordan, egad. I know it's historically accurate, but I already know about stuff like execution by giant saw. I don't need to SEE it, too!

Overall, I give Fontana the win for overall historical accuracy, and Jordan the win for more enjoyable television.

I reserve the right to change any and all opinions once I've seen more of Borgia: Faith and Fear.

Nikki K

I don't care to comment.

But I just watched the extras on the DVDs and Marta's interview was really good and the ending extremely funny when Mark barged in asking her if she enjoyed her interview, then took her index cards from her hands and said something along the lines of: "Oh, you made notes? How cute! [looks at them, tries to pronounce something in Italian] I can't read this." Adorable.

Nikki K

Bloody double posts.

NYPoster

Hi were-dinosaur, welcome to the board. It was nice to read your thoughts or Borgia F&F of which I am a fan. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on Borgia F&F after you see the second season. I think Cesare in the second season evolves very nicely and you see why he was portrayed that way on S1.

Again welcome, and my name is Renae

were-dinosaur

Thanks, Renae! I recognize your name - people around here have been missing you. I'm Sasha.

Glad to meet a Borgia: Faith and Fear fan! So far, I am preferring The Borgias overall but it's so interesting to compare them.

Nikki K

Renae!!! So good to see you! I missed you around.

Welcome, Sasha.

sourburst

I got a few episodes into the old one and couldn't stand it. I very much prefer The Borgias