In the most serious way possible, “Gladiator” changed the trajectory of my life. It was the first movie I remember watching that made me realize my deep love for film. You could say it’s literally my Roman Empire.
The 2000 action-adventure classic was nominated for 12 Academy Awards, winning five, including Best Picture and Best Actor for Russell Crowe. Naturally, I was elated to learn that Ridley Scott would deliver a sequel, aptly titled “Gladiator II.” Unfortunately, my excitement quickly turned to disappointment. By the time it was over, I was shaking my head in disbelief as I logged it with one star on Letterboxd. From cinematography and plot to dialogue and acting, it ranks as one of the worst sequels I’ve ever seen.
Scott is a well-known director, who gave us classics like “Alien” and “Blade Runner” — not to mention the original “Gladiator.” But after the embarrassment that was “Napoleon,” I should have lowered my expectations. In the words of Letterboxd user @35mmShmeckle, “I well and truly believe Ridley Scott was kicked in the head by a mule as the first gladiator wrapped production and that’s why he cannot make anything good anymore.”
Cinematographer John Mathieson returned, but his work failed to recapture the original’s magic. No visuals stood out, and the film even reused clips from the first movie. The final image isn’t even of Paul Mescal as Lucius but a recycled shot of Crowe’s Maximus in the infamous wheat field.
The original “Gladiator” was renowned for its fight scenes, but here, bad CGI and nonsensical choices — like putting sharks in the Colosseum — made them laughable; and the hand-to-hand combat lacked the intensity of sword fights.
Mescal himself was surprisingly mediocre, his Irish accent peaking through during what were supposed to be meaningful monologues. He also was just not convincing! I honestly did not care about his fate during any moment of the movie, as we were not given any insight into who he had become. His “foe” — if you could even call him that — General Acacius (Pedro Pascal) is barely even a part of it. Lucius forms no bonds with anyone to begin with, let alone his enemy. I could not pinpoint a clear goal for the character of Lucius at any point.
Connie Nielsen returned as Lucilla, but the writing was so poor that I didn’t even recognize her at first. Her once-strong character was rendered bland and forgettable. The dialogue throughout was stilted, robbing every character of their potential impact.
The only good performance came from Denzel Washington as Macrinus, who is supposed to be a power hungry and corrupt version of Proximo (Oliver Reed). But even Washington couldn’t save the film.
In the original, Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix) in his role as emperor is a major plot point that pushes the story forward. But in this case, the emperors were barely expanded upon and seemed like more of side characters; and this was such a shame considering how fun they were! Joseph Quinn and Fred Hechinger could have shined as Geta and Caracalla given the opportunity. Of course, no one can do it like Phoenix, but the film probably would have gained a few more stars from me if they were actually a bigger part of the story.
Not only are the characters ambiguous, but there seems to be quite literally nothing at stake here — and the fact that they try to again use the fall of the Roman Empire is so uninteresting and frankly lazy. It does not even make sense given all that happened in the original.
I feel like this movie relied a lot on its predecessor, and unfortunately does not live up to it in any shape or form. “Gladiator” remains a monumental piece in the world of cinema, and sometimes, sequels just shouldn’t be made.
1/5 stars
ajones11@ramapo.edu
Featured photo courtesy of @gladiatormovie, Instagram
