Post by PearlySweetcake on Sept 13, 2017 21:35:16 GMT -4
I watched an old Steve Reeves sword-and-sandal epic the other night (my boyfriend chose it because it was "historical") about the rivalry of Romulus and Remus, the founders of Rome. It was called Battle of the Titans and was made approximately 1962. One thing that struck me, and that I could not help giggling at, was the extreme...shortness... of the mens' costumes. As in their peasant tunics and armored doublets just barely covered their butts, revealing trim yet meaty manly thighs. That had to be a homoerotic element thrown in by the costume designer right? Surely in ancient Rome tunics were not THAT short? I have a vague memory of the same in other 1960s Italian historicals, where it was played straight -- sorry -- ignoring the gay subtext and no one blinked an eye.
Since I don't watch a lot of recent ancient Greek/Rome/Etruscan/whatever movies, are the mens' costumes similarly short these days? I'm trying to figure out if the exposure was in fact historically authentic, or a decision by the producer.
Reminds me of the line from "Sweet Transvestite" - "Or if you want something visual, that's not too abysmal, we could take in an old Steve Reeves movie." Those "meaty manly thighs" did not go unnoticed by others.
