Top Tens – History (Rome): Top 10 Best & Worst Roman Emperors (1) Worst: Caligula

Posted on by

Dovahhatty – Unbiased History of Rome X: The Mad Emperors

 

(1) WORST: CALIGULA –

JULIO-CLAUDIAN DYNASTY

(37-41 AD: 3 YEARS 10 MONTHS 6 DAYS)

 

“Would that the Roman people had but one neck”

Ah – Caligula, dreaming of choking out all Rome, the archetype of legendary cruelty and depravity as well as that of the capricious and insane tyrant, so much so that there is a trope of the Caligula named for him (and we all know the type, depressingly frequent in history and culture).

Cue the gag for Caligula learning his capriciousness from Tiberius in Capri.

As I said for Nero, what can I say? You can’t argue with the Gospel of Suetonius, or the Revelations of Bob Guccione in his 1979 Caligula film. Or with the Gospel of Robert Graves which follows Suetonius, or the Revelations of Judge Dredd with Caligula as its Chief Judge Cal in The Day the Law Died.

Also, as I said for Nero, while there may be some issues with the accuracy of sources, particularly the more lurid details recorded by Suetonius, there’s just too much insane smoke for there to have not been an insane fire.

Speaking of Suetonius, if you only read one chapter from Suetonius’ The Twelve Caesars (and it is available free online), then that should be his chapter on Caligula. It’s a hoot! Although I say that from the safe distance of two millennia as well as from Rome itself, because I wouldn’t put it past his ghost or ghoul to get me.

Caligula of course wasn’t his name, but his nickname – uncannily similar to Caracalla subsequently, for an item of clothing worn by each while cosplaying as a soldier, although in Caligula’s case it was his mother cosplaying him as a child in army camps and for his boots rather than a cloak. That’s right – his nickname translates as “Little Boots” or “Bootsy”, which is adorable until he grows up to become emperor.

And you don’t want to make Caligula emperor – you wouldn’t like him when he’s emperor.

Although the sources suggest that people initially did like him as emperor, because among other things, he seems to have ruled well for the first six months until falling sick – “upon recovering, Caligula had permanently lost his hair and apparently his mind”. Or as he perceived it, he had become a divine being. And who’s to say? I can well imagine that’s exactly how a divine being might act when trapped in a mortal form – particularly the divine beings from classical mythology, as it’s how they act a lot of the time. After all, only a god could be that crazy and get away with it.

Anyway, all this sadly suggests that he might have been decent but for sickness making him insane. Or not, I have my doubts – and I note the Gospel of Robert Graves, a.k.a I, Claudius, has him as somewhat psychopathic from the outset.

It’s all there in the sources, particularly Suetonius, which “focus upon his cruelty, sadism, extravagance, and sexual perversion” – “committing incest with his sisters, sending his army against the sea after declaring war on the ocean god Neptune and having them stab the waves and collect shells as booty, marrying a woman who was 9 months pregnant so he wouldn’t have to wait for an heir (whether or not it was his is unclear), using a tax hike upon the birth of his daughter to provide gold for him to roll around in, and wanting to make his favorite horse a consul”.

Also arbitrarily confiscating property in increasingly outrageous for his own spending, punishing citizens for being handsome or having more hair than him, and opening up his palace as a brothel. Actually, I’m with him on that last one.

Indeed, Caligula was so over the top insane that it sometimes seems to be parody or epic trolling – Caligula would rock it on X-Twitter.

I can’t resist quoting The Caligula trope on TV Tropes, given how well it encapsulates, well, THE Caligula:

“The Caligula will be wildly irrational, violently moody, extremely debauched, will never tolerate being told anything they don’t want to hear, and are probably afflicted with a god complex. In short, they will be a Psychopathic Manchild with the power of life or death over everyone whom they can reach. They may be a sexual deviant, or they might take pleasure in the pain and suffering they cause. They may indulge in renaming cities or even the entire country after themself or throwing out increasingly ridiculous decrees with brutal punishments in store for anyone who breaks them. Whatever form the madness takes, one thing is certain: to do anything the Caligula finds displeasing is to inevitably be dragged off to a grisly death or worse. Of course, any number of things might trigger their rage, and they might even decide on a whim to punish those who have not done anything at all”.

 

EMPIRE DEBAUCHER

 

The, ah, debauchiest? Well, either him or Elagabalus.

 

MAXIMUS

 

Well unless you count Neptune. Caligula should have had a triumph with all the shells

 

DAMNED

 

No formal damnatio memoriae but history has damned him

 

DID DOVAHHATTY DO RIGHT?

 

The most tongue-in-cheek – and funniest – of  Dovahhatty’s mock chad emperors, outright portraying Caligula as the divine chad he saw himself to be, including literally sparring with Neptune. Although again Dovahhatty’s Elagabalus gives his Caligula a run for his denarii – really, they’re the twin peaks of ‘divine’ mad Roman emperors.

 

RATING: 1 STAR*

F-TIER (WORST-TIER)

Top Tens – Film: Top 10 Horror Films (Special Mention) (6) Religious Horror

Posted on by

One of the most iconic images of religious horror – Damien – from one of the two most iconic religious horror films – The Omen

 

 

(6) RELIGIOUS HORROR

 

The original horror, preceding horror in film and indeed as old as dirt – horror in religion, with the source of the horror as the antagonistic supernatural beings of that religion.

Of course, in Western popular culture, that religion is Christianity – usually defaulting to Catholicism, as tacit acknowledgement that it is the one branch of Christianity that can go toe for toe with the forces of evil and look good doing it. I’m joking and serious – serious about that last part, due to the visually iconic nature of Catholicism. There’s even a trope named for it – Christianity is Catholic. That is, when Christianity is depicted onscreen, it will tend to be Catholic.

Hence the supernatural beings will usually be the Devil, demons or other forces of Hell – with exorcism and possession often featuring prominently as the opposing sides of the battlefield.

It’s also the original horror for me personally, thanks to being raised in a religion in childhood, although I wouldn’t say it was religious as such – more just the usual background tribal culture in which people grow up. However, by my childhood logic, I figured that everything else bad could be traced to the Big Bad itself, so my biggest childhood fear was the Devil.

I grew out of it but The Exorcist and The Omen – which for me will always be the two leading religious horror films – still invoke something of that childhood fear to scare me sh*tless, even with a few drinks to soften them up.

Yes – there’s other religious horror films, enough for their own top ten, but those two are the biggest, perhaps with Rosemary’s Baby as a distant third for the unholy trinity of religious horror.

And yes – even now there’s enough of that residual childhood fear for me to know better than to talk about the details of those films, just as I also know better than to much around with ouija boards (with one playing a prominent role in The Exorcist).

Okay, okay – here’s my Religious Horror top ten on the spot

 

1 – THE OMEN (1976)

 

Damien!

Antichrist horror.

And yes – it spawned a franchise. The first two sequels were okay enough but none equalled the first film. 2024 saw The First Omen as a decent prequel.

 

2 – THE EXORCIST (1973)

 

Another franchise – the title gives you the basic premise.

 

3 – ROSEMARY’S BABY (1968)

 

More Antichrist horror

 

4 – AMITYVILLE HORROR (1979)

 

Iconic haunted house horror – or rather, possessed house horror. Also spawned a franchise.

 

5 – THE CONJURING (2013)

 

More haunted or possessed house horror. Yet another franchise – I’m also counting the Annabelle and Nun spinoffs, the latter being even more religious horror than the Conjuring

 

6 – ANGEL HEART (1986)

 

Seemingly starts off as film noir, ends up as religious horror. Nice turn by Robert De Niro as (spoiler alert) the Devil – going by the transparent moniker Louis Cypher.

 

7 – THE EXORCISM OF EMILY ROSE (2005)

 

More exorcism horror

 

8 – PARANORMAL ACTIVITY (2007)

 

More haunted house horror – or rather, haunted family horror. Also spawned a franchise.

 

9 – HEREDITARY (2018)

 

More haunted family horror

 

10 – LATE NIGHT WITH THE DEVIL (2023)

 

Sadly not Satan hosting a late night TV show but that’s close enough to the premise for the film

 

 

Top Tens – History (Rome): Top 10 Best & Worst Emperors (1) Best: Augustus

Posted on by

Dovahhatty – Unbiased History of Rome IX: Augustus

 

(1) BEST: AUGUSTUS

JULIO-CLAUDIAN DYNASTY

(27 BC – 14 AD: 40 YEARS 7 MONTHS 3 DAYS)

 

THE Roman emperor – the first and best emperor, the definitive and archetypal emperor.

The most august emperor. Dare I say it, the most Augustus of emperors, or rather, Augustus of Augustuses, since all emperors were titled Augustus for his title (not to mention the eighth month of the year) or Caesar for his adoptive family name.

Augustus is commonly nominated as the best or top emperor and I’m not about to dissent from that. It’s a common nomination for a reason. The Roman Senate themselves routinely invoked him as the first of their two benchmarks or gold standards when inaugurating new emperors. I’ve already referred to the second part of this invocation in reference to Trajan, but of course the full phrase also invoked Augustus – felicior Augusto, melior Traiano, may you be “luckier than Augustus and better than Trajan”. Luckier or more fortunate that is, with the connotation of divine fortune that favored Augustus. And since the Senate deified Augustus, consistent with the imperial cult he cultivated (heh), he made his own divine fortune.

Caesar Augustus – born Gaius Octavius and also known as Octavian – instituted the Roman Empire itself, characterized by the imperial peace, the Pax Romana or Pax Augusta. The grandnephew of Julius Caesar and named in Caesar’s will as his adopted son and heir, he inherited Caesar’s name, estate, and the loyalty of Caesar’s legions.

He formed the Second Triumvirate with Mark Antony and some other guy no one remembers (Lepidus) to defeat the assassins of Caesar. The Triumvirate effectively divided the Republic between them as a duumvirate of Octavian and Antony, with the former in control of its western provinces and the latter its eastern provinces. Octavian then famously fought and defeated Antony in the latter’s alliance (and romance) with Cleopatra, taking Egypt from de facto Roman client state to province.

With Octavian as sole ruler of the Republic, he adopted the title by which he has thereafter been known (and used to honour his imperial successors) – Augustus. And also Princeps or First Citizen (Princeps Civitas), which has come to denominate the Principate, the system of imperial rule instituted by him and which endured for two centuries until Diocletian’s Dominate. That system essentially involved Augustus maintaining the façade or formal appearance of the Republic over the reality of imperial authority and institutions of empire, hence the modesty of the Princeps title.

And having transformed the Republic into an empire, he dramatically enlarged the empire – annexing Egypt of course in his defeat of Anthony and Cleopatra, but also conquering northern Hispania (modern Spain and Portugal), the Alpine regions of Raetia and Noricum (modern Switzerland, Bavaria, Austria, Slovenia), and Illyricum and Pannonia (modern Albania, Croatia, Hungary, Serbia). He also extended the borders of the province of Africa (the former territory of Carthage), peacefully converted the client state of Galatia (part of modern Turkey but with Gauls!) into a Roman province, and added Judea to the province of Syria as a recurring source of unforeseen Roman imperial woes, not to mention Christianity.

In other words, he sealed up the Mediterranean under Roman supremacy (not to mention Italy’s alpine buffer), making the Mediterranean their b*tch – or mare nostrum as they called it. Not so much Germany though, with Augustine famously mourning the defeat and loss of three legions under their commander Varus in the Battle of Teutoberg Forest – “Quintili Vare, legiones redde! “(“Quintilius Varus, give me back my legions!”).

Oh well – even the greatest can’t win them all. However, it is a convenient segue to a comparison between Augustus and Julius Caesar. Caesar may well have been more charismatic than Augustus and definitely was a greater military leader, but I would say that Augustus obviously had greater political acumen than Caesar – given that the latter’s ambitions provoked his own assassination while the former’s created the empire. And fortunately Augustus could rely on the skill of his military commanders to compensate for his lack of skill – foremost among them Marcus Agrippa, who can lay claim to being among the best Roman military leaders.

After that comparison to Julius Caesar, I can’t resist quoting Dovahhatty’s comparison of Augustus to Alexander the Great (upon him visiting the latter’s tomb, where Dovahhatty has Augustus scoff “Pfft – what a loser!”):

“For when Alexander became king, he was twenty. When Octavian was adopted by Caesar, he was nineteen. When Alexander took thirteen years to conquer the sh*thole of the East, Octavian took the same time to subdue the entire Mediterranean. And while Alexander’s empire disintegrated the nanosecond after he died, Octavian would lay the foundations for the greatest empire in human history”.

Beyond the frontiers of his empire, Augustus “secured the empire with a buffer region of client states and made peace with the Parthian Empire through diplomacy”. Within them, “he reformed the Roman system of taxation, developed networks of roads with an official courier system, established a standing army, established the Praetorian Guard as well as official police and fire-fighting services for Rome, and rebuilt much of the city during his reign”. As he famously said, he found Rome a city of brick and left it a city of marble.

Finally, the longevity of Augustus’s reign and its legacy to the Roman world should not be overlooked as a key factor in the success of the Roman Empire, if only because as Tacitus observed, the younger generation at his death in 14 AD (after his reign of over 40 years!) had never known anything else than his Principate.

But it wasn’t just that – “Augustus’s own experience, his patience, his tact, and his political acumen also played their parts. He directed the future of the empire down many lasting paths, from the existence of a standing professional army stationed at or near the frontiers, to the dynastic principle so often employed in the imperial succession, to the embellishment of the capital at the emperor’s expense. Augustus’s ultimate legacy was the peace and prosperity the Empire enjoyed for the next two centuries under the system he initiated. His memory was enshrined in the political ethos of the Imperial age as a paradigm of the good emperor. Every emperor of Rome adopted his name, Caesar Augustus, which gradually lost its character as a name and eventually became a title. The Augustan era poets Virgil and Horace praised Augustus as a defender of Rome, an upholder of moral justice, and an individual who bore the brunt of responsibility in maintaining the empire”

 

EMPIRE-MAKER

 

The greatest of them all – THE empire maker (and emperor maker).

 

MAXIMUS

 

Augustus didn’t claim any formal victory titles that I could find, but did hold three triumphs – for his conquest of Pannonia, for the naval victory against Cleopatra and Antony at Actium, and for the conquest of Egypt

 

DEIFICATION

 

Divine Augustus! One of the few emperors worthy of worship – I’d sign up for the cult of Augustus.

 

DID DOVAHHATTY DO RIGHT?

 

The chaddest of them all – did you not see my Dovahhatty quote comparing Augustus to Alexander the Great, much to the detriment of the latter?

 

RATING: 5 STARS*****

S-TIER (GOD-TIER)

Top Tens – Film: Top 10 Horror Films (Special Mention) (5) King Horror

Posted on by

“Here’s Johnny!” – the iconic scene from The Shining

 

(5) KING HORROR

 

King horror – Stephen King horror, that is, for the cinematic adaptations from one of the most iconic and prolific horror writers of our time. Images, lines and scenes from his work reverberate throughout popular culture, particularly driven by their cinematic or screen adaptations.

There’s something of a trope that goes around that his work makes for bad cinematic adaptations. This trope seems wrong to me – the more correct statement would be that the cinematic adaptations are mixed. A number of films from his work are good or well regarded – hence this special mention – “while many others are not”.

Of course much depends on the director but one rule of thumb I have is that the better movies are based on his shorter or tighter works. Like most screen adaptations of literary works, the longer the book the messier the adaptation gets. Not too short though – short stories can have too little substance to them for a feature length film.

And for the worst Stephen King cinematic adaptation ever – The Lawnmower Man – they didn’t even use what little substance they had from the titular story for a feature film, choosing instead to go off on their own weird jaunt based on a single (misplaced) line. The film became notorious for King suing it to remove his name from it.

Anyway, here’s my King horror cinematic top ten on the spot:

 

1 – THE SHINING (1980)

 

“Here’s Johnny!”

Probably THE King horror film adaptation that everyone loves – ironically as King himself is not a fan given the different direction (heh) in which Stanley Kubrick took the film.

 

2 – CARRIE (1976)

 

It’s not nice to make fun of Carrie…it’s not safe either.

That’s the tagline I recall for the film. With a strong cast including Sissy Spacek in the titular role and taut direction by Brian De Palma, the film is consistently ranked a high place among King adaptations – even more so because it was the adaptation that allowed King to become a full time writer.

 

3 – CUJO (1983)

 

Who’s a good boy? Well, he was until…

 

4 – CHRISTINE (1983)

 

Probably the most famous possessed car in popular culture.

Well hello again, Mr Carpenter – although King himself wasn’t a fan of the film.

 

5 – CHILDREN OF THE CORN (1984)

 

He Who Walks Behind The Rows.

The first film was a cracker, based on the short story by King. The sequels or franchise? Not so much.

 

6 – PET SEMATARY (1989)

 

“No fair”

A monkey’s paw of a movie – in that sometimes getting what you wish for is the worst thing you can get.

They came back wrong. Classic pulp horror but that line and scene gets me each time – because evil Gage is telling the truth. Everything about his death, resurrection and, ah, re-death wasn’t fair.

 

7 – MISERY (1990)

 

“I’m your number one fan!”

Arguably the best and tightest of King’s cinematic adaptations, due to the dynamite duo performance of Kathy Bates and James Caan – Bates got an Oscar for her performance, making the film the only King adaptation to win one.

 

8 – THE MIST (2007)

 

One of the biggest wham endings of any horror film – which Stephen King liked so much he preferred it to his own ending.

 

9 – IT (2017-2019)

 

Ah – Pennywise!

One of the best known of King’s cinematic adaptations, due to the visually iconic depiction of the titular antagonist and all its creepy extensions of itself

 

10 – IN THE TALL GRASS (2019)

 

Where’s a mower when you need one?

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

A-TIER (TOP TIER)

Top Tens – History (Rome): Top 10 Best & Worst Roman Emperors (2) Worst: Nero

Posted on by

Dovahhatty – Unbiased History of Rome XII: The Mad Emperors

 

(2) WORST: NERO –

JULIO-CLAUDIAN DYNASTY

(54-68 AD: 13 YEARS 7 MONTHS 27 DAYS)

 

What can I say? You just can’t argue with the Gospel of Suetonius. Or the Book of Apocalypse, with Nero literally as the Beast of the Apocalypse – or as I like to quip, that sixy beast, given that the Number of the Beast was alphanumeric code for Nero Caesar.

Well, Nero or some weird revenant superpowered uber-Nero, with one of the heads of the beast having healed from a fatal wound, matching the so-called Nero Redivivus Legend, or the widespread belief that Nero was either not dead after his apparent suicide or somehow would return.

I mean, you can’t argue with legendary cruelty and depravity that is so legendary as to give rise to the further legend of coming back from the dead to keep doing it. After his death, at least three leaders of short-lived, failed rebellions presented themselves as “Nero reborn” – Pseudo-Nero, or is that pseudo-uber Nero?

In other words, you just can’t argue with the legend – legend that lends him notoriety as one of Rome’s two archetypes of evil emperor, even if that notoriety exceeds the historical reality and is likely exaggerated, by the Roman elites who hated him and wrote his histories, as well as the Christian writers who saw him as “one of their earliest and most infamous villains”.

I am inclined to accept that his legendary cruelty and depravity was exaggerated, particularly in its most lurid details. However, I just can’t go past that name recognition or iconic status…and I’m also inclined to accept that “he was really off his rocker”, albeit probably later in his reign.

Dare I say it – there’s just a little too much smoke for there not to have been fire (heh). Just perhaps not the Great Fire as it was attributed to him as arsonist – or that he fiddled while Rome burned as the saying goes, or that he sang or played the lyre as the legend went. However, it does seem plausible that he was tone deaf (heh) to placing too much priority on lavish palaces for himself in the reconstruction or used it as an opportunity to scapegoat Christians.

“Most Roman sources offer overwhelmingly negative assessments of his personality and reign. Most contemporary sources describe him as tyrannical, self-indulgent, and debauched”. Or as Suetonius wrote, in his chapter on Nero that is the second most entertaining chapter in The Twelve Caesars – “his acts of wantonness, lust, extravagance, avarice and cruelty”.

Unlike the empire breakers in this top ten, he did have some basic competence as emperor, notably with respect to wars and revolts, even if that was more his generals (and there was little that could realistically challenge an empire then at the top of its game) – the general Corbulo who fought the Roman–Parthian War of 58–63 and the general Suetonius Paulinus who quashed the famous revolt in Britain led by queen Boudica (even if he went so beserk on the Britons afterwards that Nero had to recall him). During his reign, the client Bosporan Kingdom was also annexed to the empire, and the First Jewish–Roman War began (albeit finished by the Flavian dynastic duo, Vespasian and Titus, that fought it for Nero).

But we are talking about someone who killed his own mother, even if that mother was the infamous Agrippina and she was scheming against him (as she had originally schemed for him and against his predecessor Claudius). It took him a few attempts too, which I like to think of as the original source of that legend of Nero being hard to kill permanently. Like mother, like son.

His early reign was decent enough – it seems modern scholars follow Roman historians in seeing his mother’s death as the point he lost the plot. Which is where those lurid details come in – “he started to become more preoccupied with leading a decadent life…drank and ate a lot, and immersed himself in perverted sexual behaviour, both with men and women”.

My favorite is the reference in Suetonius that forever burnt itself into my adolescent mind when I read it – that he “devised a kind of game, in which, covered with the skin of some wild animal, he was let loose from a cage and attacked the private parts of men and women, who were bound to stakes, and when he had sated his mad lust, was dispatched”.

And there was his infamous persecution of the Christians, swallowing up even Saints Peter and Paul – including that he “had many of them tied up on poles next the road, then covered in tar and set on fire, so they could function as street lighting during parties.

He also “fancied himself a wonderful poet, singer and lyricist” – hence the last words attributed to him, “what an artist the world is losing!”.

Those last words came after the Senate had Nero declared a public enemy and condemned to death in absentia – his death at his own hand sparking Rome’s first succession crisis, which might be dubbed the crisis of the first century but for the empire being too stable and secure at that time, as well as a brief civil war between rival claimants known as the Year of the Four Emperors.

 

EMPIRE-DEBAUCHER

 

One of the most debauched

 

MAXIMUS

 

No victory titles as far as I’m aware.

 

DAMNED

 

Not a formal damnatio memoriae but he was declared public enemy by the Senate.

 

DID DOVAHHATTY DO RIGHT?

 

One of the two mad emperors for which he named the episode in which they appear, it’s another tongue-in-cheek depiction by Dovahhatty as divine chad emperor, no doubt as Nero would have seen himself.

 

RATING: 1 STAR*

F-TIER (FAIL TIER – OR IS THAT BEAST TIER?)

Top Tens – Film: Top 10 Horror Films (Special Mention) (4) Slasher Horror

Posted on by

2010 film poster

 

(4) SLASHER HORROR

 

“Here, we can see a slasher movie killer in their natural habitat, stalking the final girl.”

I tend to prefer other sub-genres of horror to slasher horror but the latter is so iconic of the horror film genre in general that I have to rank it in my S-tier or god-tier special mentions, particularly with the iconic visual design of their slashers.

Also, like zombie horror films, they have become so prolific as to define their own film genre, one worthy of their own top ten list many times over just for their themes, tropes and types, as well as by iconic slasher.

Interestingly, on the subject of type, according to Wikipedia “the slasher canon can be divided into three eras: the classical (1974–1993), the self-referential (1994–2000) and the neoslasher cycle (2000–2013)”.

Given my preference for supernatural (or SF) horror, I tend to prefer the more supernatural slashers. More overtly supernatural slashers that is, as all slashers tend towards supernatural – at least in terms of their superhuman ability to, well, slash, stalk, and all other ancillary abilities associated with them.

It’s like the film Taken – slashers tend to have a very particular set of skills. Hmm…now there’s a story idea concept, Taken as slasher film (or vice versa from the slasher’s perspective).

“The killers, mostly driven by revenge, are also typically somewhat made of iron, at a minimum, and frequently implacable to boot. Slashers prefer melee weapons that let them get up close and personal with their victims and almost never use firearms. Many are borderline (or explicitly) supernatural, having the ability to appear and disappear as if by magic. The corpses of their victims tend to be equally elusive; a slasher killer can whisk away a fully-grown adult’s body in seconds, leaving not a single drop of blood behind, or swiftly arrange all their victims into an elaborate tableau, without ever being seen lugging the dead bodies around”.

Anyway, here’s my Top 10 Slasher Films (and their iconic slashers) on the spot.

 

1 – WES CRAVEN – NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET (FREDDY KRUEGER)

 

My favorite slasher film franchise – the combination of slasher horror with supernatural dream-haunting demon is hard to beat. Wes Craven has also proved one of the more capable directors as creators of slasher horror (and horror in general)

While iconic, Freddy is not the most iconic slasher – that title has to go to the duo of my next two entries

 

2 – JOHN CARPENTER – HALLOWEEN (MICHAEL MYERS)

 

That iconic William Shatner mask. And hello again, Mr Carpenter.

 

3 – FRIDAY THE 13TH (JASON VORHEES)

 

That iconic hockey mask

 

4 – TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE (LEATHERFACE)

 

Title says it all really – as does the slasher’s nom de slash.

 

5 – WES CRAVEN – SCREAM (GHOSTFACE)

 

Hello again, Mr Craven. Yeah – we’re very much in the self-referential phase of slasher canon here, with Scream as its definitive franchise

 

6 – CHILD’S PLAY (CHUCKY)

 

If a dream-demon like Freddy Kreuger can be a slasher, why not a possessed doll. Well, apart from the size thing, which makes Chucky a little hard to take seriously – hence why he’s not in the top iconic slashers

 

7 – WES CRAVEN – THE HILLS HAVE EYES

 

Hello again, Mr Craven. I’ll rank this here – namely because of the lack of a similarly iconic slasher among its hillbilly mutant cannibal tribe (and also because said tribe strays somewhat from the archetypal slasher film)

 

8 – I KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER

 

A distant second to the Scream franchise as representative of the self-referential phase of slasher canon – also that hook guy just doesn’t have the same iconic status or visual design as the top slashers

 

9 – SAW

 

Yes – less slasher and more torture p0rn but I’m still ranking it here as close enough, if only for the iconic puppet used by the killer.

 

10 – WOLF CREEK

 

Australian slasher horror!

 

HONORABLE MENTION

 

PSYCHO

 

Precursor and inspiration for slasher horror – it also gives us an iconic horror figure with Norman Bates

 

THE HITCHER

 

As I rank it in my Top 10 Horror Films and it definitely overlaps with slasher horror, I have to give it a shout out here.

 

SILENCE OF THE LAMBS & AMERICAN PSYCHO

Two of the most (in)famous serial killers in cinema – Hannibal Lecter and Patrick Bateman – influenced and an influence on slasher horror films, although they obviously depart from the slasher archetype in a number of ways.

 

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

A-TIER (TOP TIER)

Top Tens – History (Rome): Top 10 Best & Worst Roman Emperors (2) Best: Trajan

Posted on by

Dovahhatty – Unbiased History of Rome XII: The Five Good Emperors

 

(2) BEST: TRAJAN –

NERVA-ANTONINE DYNASTY / FIVE GOOD EMPERORS

(98 -117 AD: 19 YEARS 6 MONTHS 10/14 DAYS)

 

The Optimus Prime of Roman emperors. No, really, as in the Senate gave him the title of Optimus or Optimus Princeps, “the best” or “the best emperor”, one of the two benchmarks or gold standards invoked by the Senate for every new emperor thereafter, wishing them to be better than Trajan…but none were (with the possible exception of Aurelian). A little like Jedi wishing may the Force be with you.

Everybody loved Trajan. The army, with whom he was popular as he had distinguished himself in military campaigns against the Germanic tribes. The Praetorian Guard, whose revolt had forced his predecessor Nerva to adopt him as heir and successor. The people. The Senate, who deified him after his death, and as I said, invoked him thereafter for new emperors.

“As an emperor, Trajan’s reputation has endured – he is one of the few rulers whose reputation has survived 19 centuries.”

“Even Christian historians saw him as a virtuous pagan, among other things for not persecuting them too hard during his reign (Catholic tradition holds that Pope Gregory I briefly raised Trajan from the dead in order to convert him). He is immortalized in Heaven in The Divine Comedy”.

He was a successful soldier-emperor, who took the Roman Empire to its greatest territorial extent by the time of his death – a greater area is argued on occasion for Septimus Severus, although that is not clear and just extended worthlessly further into the Saharan desert at most.

Famously, he extended the empire by the conquest of Dacia in his wars against it, and by his annexation of Mesopotamia, Armenia and Assyria as Roman provinces in his war against the Parthian Empire. Less famously, he seems to have quickly and quietly annexed the Arabian client kingdom of Nabataea, possibly because they were just signed up from his pure awesomeness because little else is recorded of it.

And his general Quietus suppressed a widespread revolt by the Jews in the eastern provinces that henceforth bore an adaptation of the name Quietus – the Kitos War, yet another of those recurring revolts by the Jews against the empire before Hadrian wiped Judaea and Jerusalem from the map.

It wasn’t just all conquest or war – he was also a philanthropic ruler, albeit at some cost in debasing the currency. He oversaw prolific building projects and social welfare policies.

May Trojan’s force be with you, indeed.

 

EMPIRE-MAKER

 

Making the Roman Empire to its greatest extent.

 

MAXIMUS

 

Germanicus, Dacicus, Parthicus – and of course, Optimus or best

 

DEIFIED

 

By the gods and divine Trajan, yes!

 

DID DOVAHHATTY DO RIGHT?

 

The chad-est of the five chad emperors – and as Dovahhatty laments, “it’s all downhill from here”.

 

RATING: 5 STARS*****

S-TIER (GOD TIER)

Top Tens – Film: Top 10 Horror Films (Special Mention) (3) Zombie Horror & Zombie Apocalypse Horror

Posted on by

Public domain image from George Romero’s 1968 Night of the Living Dead

 

(3) ZOMBIE HORROR & ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE HORROR

 

“Braaaiinnnns!”

If vampire horror is the blood of horror films, zombie horror is the flesh.

Zombie horror films, tending as they do to involve the trope (or tropes) of zombie apocalypse have become so prolific as to define their own film genre, one worthy of their own top ten list many times over just for their themes, tropes and types.

One thing that surprised me looking it up was that they originate almost as early as Dracula or vampire films – with the first zombie film often cited as White Zombie in 1932.

That surprised me as one usually associates zombies – at least in their cinematic incarnation as opposed to their origin “in the vodou beliefs of Haiti, referring to a body ‘revived’ and enslaved by a sorcerer” – with George A. Romero’s 1968 film Night of the Living Dead.

That film defined the cinematic incarnation of zombies – “usually portrayed as reanimated corpses or virally infected human beings” and commonly “cannibalistic in nature” (or “ghouls” as Romero preferred to call them in that film). Usually depicted as shambling en masse, invoking metaphors of mobs or proletarian masses.

However, “while Romero is responsible for most of the ‘general’ zombie conventions, the more specific and visible zombie tropes are more often inspired by the later works of John Russo, Night‘s co-writer. Most zombie movies mix-and-match conventions from the Romero and Russo canons. The Russo canon in particular…is the reason most people will respond with “Braaiinnnns” when zombies come up in conversation”.

Zombie horror films have subsequently ramped up the traditional slow zombies with fast ones – “super-fast and super-angry zombies” that make death (or viral infection) look like a positive boon for Olympic-level athletic performance, better than steroids. Not to mention other elite zombies, with other qualities such as intelligence.

 

Similarly to vampire horror, I’ll probably flesh this out but for now this is my zombie horror film top ten on the spot:

 

1 – EVIL DEAD (1981-1992 / 2013-2023)

 

Not really zombie horror as such since the titular evil dead are killed and reanimated by demonic possession…but I can’t not mention my favorite horror film franchise here now, can I? Particularly when there is a large overlap between the two, not least the reanimated corpses

 

2 – DEAD & BURIED (1981)

 

Fourth place in my top ten horror films – like the Evil Dead film franchise, not quite your archetypal cinematic zombies but close enough I have to mention it here

 

3 – SHAUN OF THE DEAD (2004)

 

“Go to the Winchester, have a nice cold pint, and wait for all this to blow over”.

Similar to my third place vampire horror entry Fright Night, Shaun of the Dead is probably my favorite zombie horror film to watch – classic pulp fun, but incredibly layered with easter eggs and shout-outs to zombie apocalypse horror.

Billed as a RomZomCom – or romantic comedy with zombies.

 

4 – 28 DAYS LATER (2002)

 

Arguably the most definitive modern zombie horror film after Romero and Russo – certainly bringing new life (heh) to the fast zombie trope. It helps speed them up that the zombies aren’t actually dead but virally infected. Also like other zombie apocalypse films in general that show the real enemy is not so much the zombies as one’s fellow humans – here it’s animal rights activists (and children in the sequel film 28 Weeks Later). Okay, fine – it’s also mad horny soldiers (and sheer military ineptitude on the same level of having a button marked push for zombies in the sequel).

But seriously, animal rights activists are to blame for the release of the virus in the first place. In fairness, I also blame the scientist for obtusely telling them the laboratory chimpanzees are infected with “rage” rather than a lethally contagious disease that can spread in seconds. It practically begs the skeptical response – “Yeah, I’d be pretty angry too!”

 

5 – LAST TRAIN TO BUSAN (2016)

 

Zombies on a train!

East Asian film and TV – in this case Korean film – have taken to the zombie genre with a vengeance.

 

6 – BRAIN DEAD (1990)

 

Before Peter Jackson did The Lord of the Rings, he did splatterpunk schlock like this – and it’s a hoot.

 

7 – CEMETERY MAN / DELLAMORTE DELLAMORE (1994)

 

Probably the most ”artsy” zombie horror film you’ll see (with Anna Falchi as one of the hottest female characters in a zombie film) – good luck keeping track of the plot.

 

8 – ZOMBIELAND (2009)

 

One of the better known zombie apocalypse films – and one of the most fun to watch.

 

9 – CARGO (2017)

 

Australian zombie horror films are surprisingly prevalent – this is one of the more highbrow (and emotional) ones, starring Martin Freeman

 

10 – ALIVE (2020)

 

Another fun zombie apocalypse horror film from Korea, using its highrise setting to good effect.

 

HONORABLE MENTION

 

(1988) THE SERPENT & THE RAINBOW

 

Stretching the definition of zombie horror film – going back to the origins of the zombie in Haitian vodou belief.

 

(2003-2014) UNDEAD & WYRMWOOD

 

More Australian zombie horror films – if Cargo is the highbrow end of the spectrum, these are more to the lowbrow end (and filmed on shoestring budgets to match). Pulp fun!

 

(2007) PLANET TERROR

 

Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino do for zombies what they did for vampires in From Dusk Till Dawn.

 

RATING: 5 STARS*****

S-TIER (GOD TIER)

 

Top Tens – History (Rome): Top 10 Best & Worst Roman Emperors (3) Worst: Elagabalus

Posted on by

Dovahhatty – Unbiased History of Rome XIII: The Severan Dynasty

 

(3) WORST: ELAGABALUS –

SEVERAN DYNASTY

(218 – 222 AD: 3 YEARS 9 MONTHS 4 DAYS)

 

With great power comes great degeneracy.

Certainly one of the weirdest emperors, Elagabalus is what happens when you let an omnisexual teenager of dubious mental stability loose with absolute imperial power AND his own cult. It’s like Elagabalus read Suetonius’ The Twelve Caesars with its lurid depictions of imperial depravity and said hold my beer.

And so “Elagabalus developed a reputation among his contemporaries for extreme eccentricity, decadence, zealotry and sexual promiscuity” – “his short reign was notorious for sex scandals and religious controversy”.

It does however make for entertaining reading – indeed one of the most entertaining entries in either my top ten worst (or best) emperors. It’s a pity Suetonius wasn’t around to write the tabloid history of Elagabalus.

Elagabalus was his god name – literally. He was born Sextus Varius Avitus Bessianus, a relative (by marriage) of the Severan dynasty – a family connection which his grandmother (and emperor-maker) Julia Maesa boosted further by spreading the rumor that he was the illegitimate son of the emperor Caracalla. His family held hereditary rights to the priesthood of the syncretized Syrian-Greek-Roman sun of the same name (or variants of it) he adopted, having served as high priest from his early youth.

So naturally he brought his god with him to Rome, in the form of his pet rock – again literally, a black conical meteorite from the temple of the god in Emesa, Syria.

The new god of itself was not so weird, since it was readily assimilated to the Roman sun god Sol – the worship of whom had become increasingly prevalent under the Severan dynasty, becoming known as Sol Invictus or the Unconquered Sun (and which would be redeemed by far superior emperors).

What was weird was Elagabalus installing his god as the chief deity of the Roman pantheon and suborning that pantheon to his god – compounded by equivalent of forcing Roman Senators to go to his church and watch him as he danced around the god’s altar, which was hardly conducive to imperial dignity.

Speaking of the Severan dynasty, it’s something of a running theme in my top ten worst Roman emperors, with Elagabalus as the second entry from that dynasty.

Perhaps the most entertaining part of this emperor’s history are the lurid tales of his sexuality. However, “the question of Elagabalus’s sexual orientation and gender identity is confused” due to the salaciousness of the sources, which includes accounts of him asserting and adorning himself as a female, to the point of reputedly seeking out sex changing surgery (and offering half the empire to anyone who could pull it off). Hence some have asserted or claimed him or her as the transsexual Roman emperor.

I am not sure that one should want to claim Elagabalus as one’s poster boy or girl, but moreover, I am not sure that these accounts are accurate to that extent, smacking as they do of Roman hyperbole to characterize someone of, ah, unmanly conduct – un-Romanly conduct that is. However, I do think that the historical sources are clear enough to say that Elagabalus swung every which way, hence my omnisexual quip.

Which has gone down a treat with historical writers. As per Edward Gibbon – Elagabalus “abandoned himself to the grossest pleasures with ungoverned fury” – and Barthold Georg Niebuhr – “the name Elagabalus is branded in history above all others” because of his “unspeakably disgusting life”.

Even Sir James George Frazer, author of The Golden Bough, got in on the act – “The dainty priest of the Sun [was] the most abandoned reprobate who ever sat upon a throne … It was the intention of this eminently religious but crack-brained despot to supersede the worship of all the gods, not only at Rome but throughout the world”.

A more neutrally stated modern assessment is by Adrian Goldsworthy -“Elagabalus was not a tyrant, but he was an incompetent, probably the least able emperor Rome had ever had.”

Interestingly, some have sought to reclaim his reputation. It’s a running theme throughout my top ten worst emperors that almost every entry – or at least almost every entry of major significance – has some advocate for them, as indeed it is for my top ten best emperors to the converse of people querying their legacy or reputation, arising as it does for figures that lack the comprehensive documentation of their contemporary counterparts.

In particular, modern historian Warwick Ball has picked up the Elagabalus ball (heh) and run with it, describing him as “a tragic enigma lost behind centuries of prejudice” – and one whose religious syncretism was ultimately successful in the long term, “in the sense that his deity would be welcomed by Rome in its Sol Invictus form 50 years later” and “came to influence the monotheist Christian beliefs of Constantine, asserting that this influence remains in Christianity to this day”.

 

EMPIRE DEBAUCHER

 

No surprise there, surely?

 

MAXIMUS:

 

No victory titles as such but he did claim the title of Pontifex Maximus as high priest of his god – and did have something of a regular annual triumph for his god, parading his pet rock about the city.

 

DEIFIED AND DAMNED:

 

It was a fine line between the divinity he claimed for his god and that for himself. When marrying a Vestal Virgin – outraging Rome yet again – he claimed the marriage would produce god-like children. And of course after the usual assassination by the Praetorian Guard, the Senate rolled out a damnatio memoriae on him.

 

DID DOVAHHATTY DO RIGHT?

 

Dovahhatty had one of his (funniest) tongue-in-cheek portrayals of Elagabalus as a chad in drag.

“Why is it that divine emperors only rule for a couple of years, I wonder?”

 

RATING: 1 STAR*

F-TIER (FAIL TIER)

Top Tens – Film: Top 10 Horror Films (Special Mention) (2) Vampire Horror

Posted on by

Screenshot of Christopher Lee as Dracula in the 1958 film (public domain image from Internet Archive)

 

 

(2) VAMPIRE HORROR

 

Vampire horror films originate among the first horror films – and indeed in the dawn of the film industry itself.

My pet theory is that this is the product of happy coincidence between the publication (and popularity) of Bram Stoker’s Dracula in 1897 and the origins of the film entertainment industry, particularly in Hollywood.

Dracula was theatrical in its very conception – not surprisingly given Stoker’s background in theatre – and hence readily cinematic for adaptation. Dracula often reads like a play – and indeed Stoker himself adapted it as one in its first year of publication.

After that, you have the 1922 film Nosferatu directed by F.W. Murnau, infamous as essentially a version of Dracula with the serial numbers filed off, before the iconic cinematic incarnation of Dracula with Bela Lugosi in the title role in 1931.

From there, the rest is vampire horror film history – whether featuring Dracula himself (including Christopher Lee being as iconic in the role as Lugosi) or any number of vampires drawn from an almost infinite variety of vampire folklore, including the folklore attached to Dracula in the novel or its adaptations.

As with my SF horror special mention, I’ll probably flesh this out but for now my vampire horror film top ten on the spot:

 

1 – LET ME IN (2010)

 

Presently sixth place in my Top 10 Horror Films – you can read more about it (and vampire horror films in general) there

 

2 – THE HUNGER (1983)

 

One of the more ‘artsy’ vampire horror films out there – with a cast of beautiful people (Catherine Deneuve, David Bowie and Susan Sarandon). Based (loosely) on a novel by Whitley Streiber, it features a love triangle between a doctor specialising in ageing research and a vampire couple.

 

3 – THE KEEP (1983)

 

Vampires and Nazis – what more do you want? How about Gandalf vs Dracula? (Well, before Gandalf facing off with Dracula actor Christopher Lee as Saruman in the Jackson Lord of the Ring films).

Okay – technically it’s not a vampire (or Dracula) but something posing as one, adapted from the novel by F. Scott Wilson. Still, I’m counting it as another of the more ‘artsy’ vampire horror films out there, albeit somewhat lacking in coherence for anything but cult following. Some big names among its actors – including Ian McKellan obviously for my Gandalf vs Dracula joke.

 

4 – FRIGHT NIGHT (1985)

 

Probably my favorite vampire film to watch – classic pulp fun! What do you do when a vampire becomes your next door neighbor? Call on the celebrity film vampire hunter turned late night horror TV host, of course.

 

5 – THE LOST BOYS (1987)

 

Classic 80s vampire film, albeit trying a little too much too be cool for my taste and not as fun as Fright Night, that other classic 1980s vampire film.

 

6 – LAIR OF THE WHITE WORM (1988)

 

Stoker strikes again! A film adapted from his 1911 novel – I suspect very loosely, borrowing from his more famous novel to feature snake-vampires in a pagan cult to a snake-god. Snakes for the snake-god! Slither in!

 

Directed by Ken Russell in his characteristic controversial flamboyant or psychedelic style – not to mention kinky, hence coiling itself deep in my psyche

 

7 – BRAM STOKER’S DRACULA (1992)

 

Apocalypse Now in Transylvania!

(Amusingly, Kim Newman did a short story doing just that inspired by the film).

Yes – that’s a quip based on the same director, Francis Ford Coppola, but captures the same cinematic visual style he brought to both. Also – it wouldn’t take too much to rewrite it as Apocalypse Now, except going upriver in Transylvania to take out Dracula.

That said – it’s still my favorite cinematic adaptation of Dracula, albeit playing somewhat loose with the novel at times, and Gary Oldham assumes a place close to Lugosi and Lee as iconic depictions of Dracula.

 

8 – FROM DUSK TILL DAWN (1996)

 

A vampire horror film by Robert Rodriguez (and Tarantino) so iconic that it has spawned a whole franchise – mostly lacklustre film sequels but I liked the TV series adaptation.

Gangster criminals on the run in Mexico vs stripper vampires? What more could you want? Well, apart from Salma Hayek’s Santanico Pandemonium, whose snake dance will be hot-branded in my psyche forever.

 

9 – 30 DAYS OF NIGHT (2007)

 

Technically this should be in my comic book films as it is based on a comic series of the same name but it’s one of my favorite vampire horror films to watch so I’m ranking it here instead.

The title says the plot and premise – vampire congregate on the Alaskan town of Barrow for an all you can eat buffet opportunity of the titular thirty days of night in the depths of winter.

 

10 – ABIGAL (2024)

 

My present wildcard tenth place entry in my Top 10 Horror Films as best horror film of 2024 – you can read about it there.

 

HONORABLE MENTION

 

(2000) SHADOW OF THE VAMPIRE

 

Speaking of F.W. Murnau’s Nosferatu, the premise of this film is that it got a lot more real than you’d think. Willem Dafoe shines as usual, as does John Malkovich.

 

(2021) BLOOD RED SKY

 

Putting the red into red-eye flight when hijackers take a plane with a surprise among the passengers.