PhoenixRising

Awesome summation, Kim! I was getting that general idea even all the way back a the end of the first season of Borgia, during that whole "Lucrezia-killed-Juan" nonsense. I could buy Cesare perhaps being behind that, but not her.

BL.Arinna_1982

So, have anyone finished watching Borgia? How it ends?

Borgia1

Yes and I think it's the worse possible cop out of an ending I've ever seen. Seriously still recovering from the nonsensical ending of Borgia FF. I think The Borgias season 3 ending, as abruptly mid arc and before everything important was finished, left me feeling more satisfied honestly

PhoenixRising

Hi, Trina! It's great to see you!


Yeah, I'm debating whether or not to even watch the final two seasons given everything I've heard.

BL.Arinna_1982

Thanks for the insight, Trina. So that means that I'm not gonna watch it.

*Adora*

I suggest anyone who stumbles on this thread and might be interested, to read this article by historian Ada Palmer, a professor in the history department of the University of Chicago. She makes some excellent points without disrespecting either series.

https://www.exurbe.com/the-borgias-v...aith-and-fear/

Now, I just popped in to share some thoughts on Juan's murder, prompted by the discussion in a different thread. This is the perspective of a mere viewer , as I wasn't familiar with the Borgia family details before watching these two shows. After viewing an episode, I do try to research some of the events that unfold and learn how closely they align with historical accuracy—without letting this take away from my enjoyment of the storylines.

What we undoubtedly know about Juan's murder is that his body was found in the Tiber in June 1497, and yet, neither the culprit was ever identified, nor have the circumstances of his death become fully known. Yes, there have been various scenarios regarding his demise, and yes, there are some known facts surrounding the incident (such as him being last seen leaving his mother's dinner party on June 14th and his horse being found wandering), but none of these shed sufficient light on the identity of the murderer and their motive. Instead, they led to many suspects and rumours.

In other words, Juan's murder presents an excellent opportunity for shows like 'The Borgias' and 'Borgia:F&F' to unleash their writing creativity and fill in the missing parts. They can opt for the most popular scenario or suspect at the time, the most historically plausible one, any of the lesser-known theories, or even devise their own, as long as they can integrate it coherently into the plot. This means that Juan's murder is not the most appropriate event in the history of the Borgia family to cite when debating the historical inaccuracy of these shows.

The Borgias' opted for the most obvious suspect, who had attracted all the slander at the time—Cesare. This approach is my favourite one as well, not only because the show utilised a rumour that continues to taint Cesare's name to this day, but also because they chose the most dramatically effective solution for their narrative: the envious brother who murders his own kin over military leadership, driven by the way he was treating their sister and jeopardising the family's reputation. Lucrezia does mention that Juan could have been murdered by any of the people he harmed—pointing to the various suspects who indeed historically had motives to murder Juan. However, considering the plot of 'The Borgias,' Cesare was the only logical choice in the end, as (almost) any other perpetrator would not have been sufficiently supported by the storyline up to that point.

'Borgia:F&F' went down a different path. Instead of presenting Juan's murder in a linear narrative to focus on the characters' emotional aftermath, the show initiates a whodunnit hunt, portraying the events from the perspective of a third person at the time (primarily Cesare, but not exclusively) as they would have witnessed them unfold. The writers incorporate various historically accurate details. To name a few: Juan indeed attends a dinner at his mother's before his disappearance, Cesare leaves with him but they soon part ways, Juan is warned about his numerous enemies and is told to be cautious, a masked figure is seen riding after him, his body is found with nine stab wounds etc. I was given the impression that the writers sought to combine the actual story with the story they wished to tell. As the investigation progresses and the mystery deepens, we are briefly introduced to virtually all the potential scenarios regarding the murderer and the rumours circulating at the time. These serve less to guide us to the truth and more to lead Cesare to question himself, as the notion of him being the murderer increasingly appears plausible.

In the end, Cesare - and we - learn the truth; his sister Lucrezia is the one to have stabbed Juan, while Pedro, her lover, finished him off. It's important to note here that Lucrezia doesn't plot to kill Juan; it isn't a premeditated murder. Although she does assist Pedro in concealing the crime afterwards, his murder is actually the result of a confrontation between them on the night of Juan's disappearance, influenced by their already rocky relationship. In other words, this act isn't entirely out of character for Lucrezia as depicted in the show up to that point, nor is it disconnected from the events of the preceding episodes.

Still, this development surprised me. Perhaps because Lucrezia as Juan's murderer appears to be entirely a creation of the writers – I am not deeply knowledgeable about Borgia history, as I mentioned, but a quick lookup didn't reveal this theory among the prevalent scenarios. Or perhaps because I, like others, was already influenced by 'The Borgias,' which, in contrast, chose the most obvious suspect as the murderer. It was a bold choice by 'Borgia:F&F,' and personally, I understand the raised eyebrows it caused. But later, I started to wonder if the choices of the two shows were really that different. I think they weren't.

In both shows, we are introduced to a very problematic relationship between the two siblings. In 'The Borgias,' Lucrezia might not kill Juan, but she does: 1. attempt to kill/injure Juan and his lover by dropping a chandelier on them, 2. consider poisoning him in episode 2x09 but is dissuaded by Cesare, 3. justify his murder. It's almost by chance that Lucrezia doesn't kill Juan, and what his sister refrains from doing, Cesare does instead, serving both his own ends and protecting her and their family. The situation is essentially the same in 'Borgia: F&F,' just with reversed roles. Cesare nearly slits Juan's throat, but here it's Lucrezia who assists his murder, with her brother taking the blame. Yet, when he discovers the truth, he too justifies the murder, praising his sister for acting bravely.

I'm glad 'The Borgias' depicted Cesare as the one who killed Juan. This isn't only for the reasons I mentioned earlier, but also because throughout the show, Cesare has many redeeming moments. He isn't involved in Paolo's murder, he releases Sforza's son, Alfonso falls on his sword, among other things . The character didn't need further redemption by being falsely accused of Juan's murder. As for 'Borgia: F&F,' I would have preferred Cesare to be responsible for his brother's demise in this rendition as well, but truth be told, the character doesn't suffer from this take on events, nor does Lucrezia's character get undermined. Perhaps it would have been intriguing if the show had explored the scenario of a vendetta with the Orsini family, where the Pope's favoured son dies in retaliation – a scenario that contemporary historians consider the most plausible – especially since the show generally delved deeper into the family's conflicts with other powerful families.

PhoenixRising

Thanks for the link, Adora! I understand what that article means by "historicity." I do think Faith and Fear is the more historical, even if it does look less pretty than the Showtime version.

Wow, that's a lot to read.

Well, to be honest, both Cesare and Lucrezia had a lot of slander attached to them. Yes, a lot of things were said about Cesare's ruthlessness, but Lucrezia was the one who became notorious for poisoning people (something that most historians have discredited), so maybe that's why the two shows had each of the siblings killing Giovanni/Juan?

*Adora*

Yes, even their facial hair. François's has more of a modern, metrosexual, gruff look, while Mark's beard seems more period-appropriate. However, what I find most intriguing in this article is the distinction between who's the older sibling, Cesare or Juan, and how this changes each show. It's quite fascinating how one detail can make such a difference.

Even if 'Borgia: F&F' had the budget of 'The Borgias,' they'd probably still spend it on making gore scenes more terrifying and disgusting, rather than enhancing the aesthetic appeal of the show

And you honestly don't have to (although I do appreciate it). No one should feel pressured to read and answer unless, of course, they find something interesting enough to reply to It's just that I do have a lot of thoughts about these two shows and how they compare, and nowhere to express them Apart from this thread even if I end up talking to myself.

Yes, that could be the case. Just as 'The Borgias' attempted to expand Juan's role by attributing to him actions that either didn't occur or were done by others, the same applies to Lucrezia in 'Borgia:F&F,' especially regarding Juan's murder. This plot point demonstrates her capacity for scheming and committing crimes early on. Meanwhile, Cesare has numerous defining moments in 'Borgia:F&F,' so skipping his brother's murder—which isn't really skipped, I mean he does go through doubting and blaming himself—doesn't significantly detract from his character. In contrast, Juan's murder in 'The Borgias' considerably advances Cesare's character arc.

PhoenixRising

Sometimes the historical records don't seem to know which one was the older sibling. They both made Juan look like an idiot, regardless.



I did get that feeling, especially after seeing those execution scenes where those men were sawed in half down the middle.



It's okay. It was just very late in the evening, and I was ready for bed at the time. And you should ask Arinna. I'm the one who often ends up talking to myself with my lengthy rants.



Well, Faith and Fear does seem to chronicle Cesare's descent into darkness a lot more. Cesare in The Borgias seems like he's already got that hardened edge right from the beginning, while Faith and Fear's Cesare takes a lot longer to get there.

*Adora*

There's a scene where Stanley's Juan gets a mug thrown at his head


Yeah, François's Cesare evolved from badass to even more badass. It's unfortunate, though, that his character's arc was never fully completed. Mark's Cesare starts off younger, revealing a more unstable side of Cesare during the time he was still wavering with his faith in God. I've read that Cesare did go through such a phase in his teenage years, so this portrayal makes sense to me, especially given the storyline being followed here. Have you watched all 3 seasons?

BL.Arinna_1982

I actually liked Francois' Cesare.

PhoenixRising

So did I, Arinna.






There is?


Yep, that's pretty much the main difference. Mark's Cesare had a more fascinating evolution, but Francois' Cesare was more fun to watch.

Of Faith and Fear? I only saw the first two seasons.

*Adora*

If I could summarise my feelings about these two portrayals of Cesare, it would be that François's Cesare introduced me to and made me appreciate this splendid character—both from fictional and historical standpoints—whilst Mark's Cesare helped me understand why people were, and still are, compelled to write books about him.

BL.Arinna_1982

yeah...

PhoenixRising

Well, I think that Mark's Cesare was more of a tragic character study, while Francois' character was more of a romantic and heroic character, or antiheroic character.