Spartacus: War Of The Damned episode 3 review: Men Of Honour
The number of subplots make this week's Spartacus: War of the Damned a less-than satisfying watch. Here's James' review...
This review contains spoilers.
3.3 Men of Honour
After last week's Crassus-heavy bore-fest, it was good this week that the show decided to re-focus on the slave army and some of the day-to-day mechanics of actually holding their newly-captured city. Because let's face it: the show's called Spartacus, not The Roman Politics Fun-Time Happy Hour.
As it turns out, holding the city isn't half as difficult as keeping order within it. Indeed, it was the unlikely form of Naevia who caused most trouble, flying off the handle at any nearby Romans the first chance she gets. Not an unreasonable course of events, given all she's endured on top of a lifetime of subjugation, but her behaviour - and Crixus' loyalty to her - is potentially something that's going to put a strain on Crixus and Spartacus' relationship in the future. History records that the slave army is eventually divided in two behind each man - could Naevia's actions be the eventual cause of any split? Assuming, of course, they stick roughly to history's version of events.
Although Tiberius and his crew did make an appearance towards the end, we can at least be glad that this episode was quite light on Caesar, who was dispatched early on to prevent him meeting the main gladiators too early in the season. The guest appearance of a Mediterranean pirate captain named Heracleo (and his crew) doesn't exactly dispell the fear that this series is going to a bit more cartoonish than its predecessors, though. Without Caesar around, Tiberius' attack felt perfunctory: destined to happen, destined to failure. Still, it was probably the most interesting battle of since the show's return, being the first that was noticeably any more than people hitting each other with swords, thanks to the intervention of Heracleo's crew and their incendiary bombardments.
The problem, at the moment, is that it's very hard not to agree with everyone suggesting that Spartacus simply kill their Roman prisoners. He repeatedly justifies his violent actions to Laeta and co., saying that they're at war, nor does he seem to care much when he hears his men have been forcing the prisoners to fight for entertainment (and frankly, that's quite poetic as justice goes.) But Spartacus often makes it known that he explicitly draws the line at cold-blooded murder of Romans because... well, it's not really clear. Reasons of dramatic tension?
Obviously, part of it is to keep Spartacus within a more recognisably-heroic frame by modern standards, but it just comes over as oddly stubborn. It's a much more believable a character beat when he refuses to sell Laeta, claiming that they don't "do" slavery. That's far more convincing than his pseudo-philosophical monologues and unwisely compassionate leniency.
This episode's real weakness, however, was the sheer number of subplots we were being asked to follow, given very little movement in the main plot. The episode's story mainly concerned negotiating deals with the pirates, but the only main-arc content was mostly crammed into the last scene, while the rest of the episode simply piled subplot upon subplot. Laeta, Naevia, Gannicus and Sybil, Agron and Nasir, Tiberius, etc. etc. It's impressive that the writers can find space for everyone to have a story going on, but ultimately that leaves viewers with finger-food rather than a feast. Let's hope for something a bit more filling next week.
Read James' review of the previous episode, Wolves at the Gate, here.
Follow our Twitter feed for faster news and bad jokes right here. And be our Facebook chum here.
Disqus - noscript
Amazzing episode!!!!!!!!!!! couldnt get better!
I once drained 6 cups and found myself in heated argument with imaginary cat!
cant wait for the next epi!!!!!
Too many subplots....man, you just wish to keep it simple and easy on the mind and then mix it up with eyecandy, huh?Go watch a Michael Bay movie, then, it can't get more straightforward than that!And please tell me where the heck did you see Laeta!?
I can almost guarantee that all this empathy and sympathy that Spartacus feels for the captive Romans is soon to end, and in a few episodes, he'll return to being the hell-bent, rapid animal that we've seen him as before.. Could be a dream he has about his deceased wife telling him to show no mercy, or he may see that his army is questioning his bravado and Machiavellianc characteristics that you want in a leader. Either of these could change his demeanor. He has manipulated his army with wine and festivities (fights among people not getting along) in order to break the tension... (Caesar did the same thing, hence "Breads and Circuses" He wants to destroy every Roman soldier and all supporters of subjugation so he'll do what needs to be done; Spartacus is an anti-hero, he's not above cold-blooded murder if it needs to be done, but I agree with the modern personification of the anti-hero, they may take a different route. Naivea (sp) will definitely be the split between armies, Gannicus will become Sparacus' right hand man, and Agron and his bf will die at the same time, with one avenging the other during a battle scene.. I think....
Er, Laeta played a major part in the episode. She's Ennius' wife. If you're having trouble keeping character names straight, maybe you're the one who should be sticking to Michael Bay movies?
Besides which, my point isn't just that there were too many subplots - it's that there wasn't much of a main plot to balance it out.
Who is this "we" you speak of that's supposed to be grateful for the lack of Crassus and Caesar?!? They're the two best things the series has ever done! They make Glaber look like a jackass by comparison. It's like the series just finally started making everything else to come before a really long, drawn out prequel.
I don't think that any of the "subplots" you're talking about really qualify as subplots. Laeta's not part of a subplot - she's playing a double agent invested in the survival of at least a handful or Romans. Nasir and Agron are just a gay duo. Annoying and distracting, but not really a subplot. Barca and the pigeon boy were a subplot. These two just took a couple minutes to get their gay on. Naevia killing people isn't a subplot - she's as involved in the main story as Laeta. Gannicus and Sybil had 1 conversation. 1 that's not a subplot, at least not yet. We might never see the chick again. She's totally irrelevant at this point.
Do you count everything not directly involving Spartacus the man himself as a subplot?
You do know that Crassus annihilates the slave rebellion in the end, right? Him and Caesar and Tiberius and Pompei and Anthony and almost any other Roman they chose to make up/re-imagine/introduce - they're going to be crucial to the story. The episode was weak but that was because of its LACK of Crassus, the character they should be making larger than life itself if they want to end the series on a note anywhere positive.
They started with showing him killing his friend/slave gladiator, he's cheating on his wife with a house slave, he loves his son but not really, he's willing to sacrifice people from his own team if it serves him in the long run, he's arrogant, hypocritical, a superb liar and he's willing to share the power magnanimously with people he considers worthy - how can you say the guy is boring? He's the most dynamic character in the show, and that was only in the first 2 episodes!
I couldn't disagree more with your review. The previous episode involving roman politics wasn't a bore-fest at all! If anything, it gave Rome and her protectors more power and credibility. Before, the romans were honestly just there to be killed and became the equivalent red shirts on the battlefield. Politically, their world revolved around setting up gladiator fights, expanding their arenas, and figuring out what wine to drink and which women to bed. This new focus on both Crassus' ability to think like his opponent and Julius Ceasar's tactics for war (which he learned from his abroad adventures) gives us an opportunity to see a fighting combination not seen before: one that can credibly suppress Spartacus' rebellion. Batiatus couldn't do it, and neither could Glaber. Perhaps you should watch the first and second episodes again, because they were anything but boring or useless.
Too many subplots? Really. No, it's nice once in a while to see the characters attempt to live out some sense of normalcy amidst the constant threat of an enemy insurgence. If I wanted constant fighting and blood strewn across the screen, I could watch 300 on mute. Also, I don't know how many fans are telling you that killing the roman hostages is needed, if not encouraged. It makes sense for the writers to have Spartacus have morals against harming women, children, or feeble man just because they're Roman, for then what would separate the rebellion from their former oppressors.
Does anybody else find it difficult to understand the dilogue at times? They seem to mumble/whisper..
I mean dialogue