By Jacob Ying
[WARNING – SPOILERS FOR GLADIATOR II]
Ridley Scott’s Gladiator II opens like a video game. Lucius (called Hanno), son of Maximus, tends to his garden as his wife calls to him, and they begin preparing for war. Set 16 years after the death of Marcus Aurelius and the events of the critically acclaimed, Oscar-winning Gladiator, Scott’s magnum opus (some fitting Latin for the quintessential Roman flick). The original Gladiator film is one of the best movies ever made and is one of my favorites.
To say that Gladiator II had some huge sandals to fill is an egregious understatement. Did it fill them?
Like most movies, Gladiator II has good, mid, and bad.
THE GOOD
1. Marcus Acacius is a portrait of Roman valor.
Pedro Pascal’s Roman General Marcus Acacius is the ultimate Roman. Honorable, brave, just, and strong, he charges into the film’s first battle. Acacius despises the movie’s loathsome emperors, Caracalla and Geta, and acts upon his hatred. Beloved by the citizens of Rome, Acacius’ loyalty is to the people and the Republic of Rome, not to the emperors antithetical to the Eternal City’s ideals. He hatches a plot to overthrow Caracalla and Geta. His death is a powerful moment, one where viewers feel the punch in the gut of Rome’s betrayal against one of its greatest men.
Pascal brings Acacius to life. From the onset, Pascal’s facial expressions show the internal conflict he feels for the carnage he causes. Pascal’s words are powerful, spoken like a true Roman general, evoking the love for Rome that Maximus showed in the first film.
2. Denzel Washington is immaculate.
Denzel Washington once again confirms why he is one of the greats of his craft. Washington embodies a great, though unoriginal, villain. Macrinus craves power. But the power stems not from ambition, but from anger. Enslaved by Marcus Aurelius, Macrinus hates everything Rome is, including Aurelius’ dream. Washington encapsulates this perfectly. He plays Macrinus’ rage masterfully. He makes it clear: Macrinus will do anything to see Rome burn.
No actor could have played this role like Denzel Washington did. Despite his superstardom, he allows the character to take center stage.
“If the people rise up in the streets, I will deliver them Caracalla’s head. And that, my friend, is politics,” utters Macrinus to one of his allies ahead of the execution of Lucilla, mother of Lucius, lover of Maximus, and daughter of Marcus Aurelius. This line tells you exactly who Macrinus is, pure evil. Washington delivers it perfectly.
3. Caracalla and Geta are despicable.
The twin Roman Emperors, Caracalla and Geta, are like Dolores Umbridge. They are not the living personification of evil, but you hate them nonetheless. Played by Fred Hetchinger and Joseph Quinn, respectively, everything about them is hateable. They are crazy and unhinged hedonists. Their erratic movements and relishing in others’ pain make your blood boil. If you watch Gladiator II, prepare to get the ick from them.
4. Consul Dondus is perfect.
It’s a monkey as the second most powerful person in Rome. What’s not to love?
THE MID
1. Lucius fails to live up to Maximus.
It’s hard to live up to the Best Actor-winning performance of Russell Crowe. There could not be larger sandals for Paul Mescal to live up to. You almost expected him to be imperfect. The issue with Mescal’s performance for me is the inconsistency. You see brilliant flashes that conjure memories of Maximus in Mescal’s performance, but he seems less passionate. His speech while rallying the gladiators is good, but while viewing, you have to think that Crowe did it so much better.
Lucius isn’t a bad protagonist. He’s an above-average one, actually. But he’s not an incredible one. When making a sequel to Gladiator, Ridley Scott really needed to nail it, and he was unsuccessful.
2. The movie glorifies violence.
Although I know it’s wrong to love violence, I wanted to see it. I just wanted to point out that this could be an issue for some. This can go either way, good or bad, so I put it in mid.
3. Scott takes some historical liberties.
The movie glosses over the darker aspects of being a gladiator and portrays it as pure glory. Also, it makes Caracalla look like a bumbling idiot. Historically, Caracalla is considered a bad emperor, but he was a cunning politician who took power. He was not some buffoon manipulated by Macrinus (who did exist!).
THE BAD
1. The CGI is awful.
I could tell, even when seeing the trailers, that the CGI was going to be bad. It was exactly what I expected. The boats and most of Rome are clearly animated, ruining the movie magic. When I say bad, it’s painfully obvious that inadequate funds were appropriated for graphics.
2. Everything feels small.
Rome, at its ancient peak, had 1 million people. It does not appear so in the movie. The city seems small, and little life is present. Likewise, the Coliseum disappoints. In the original film, the Coliseum is monstrous, making you feel Rome’s grandeur. In the sequel, it feels small and lifeless. The large establishing shots simply don’t capture the scale of Rome as it should be.
Part of this is the CGI. Had the effects been more realistic, the city would have impressed more, but the Roman marble feels unimposing when it’s obviously computer generated.
3. The film rehashes the same plot.
My largest gripe with Gladiator II is the lack of creativity with the plot. It’s the same story that worked once. The protagonist is captured into slavery. They prove themself as a gladiator on a small scale before moving on to the Coliseum. They overcome a variety of opponents, including the emperor’s favorite, before revealing their true identity and fighting for the glory of Rome. But this time, the hero lives, opening the door for a potentially fantastic or horrible threequel. If you’re looking for originality in the plot, Gladiator II is not the movie for you.
SHOULD YOU WATCH IT?
Absolutely! Gladiator II is a great way to spend 2 and one-half hours over Thanksgiving break. Going into the film, I certainly had high expectations. While it couldn’t meet all of them, I still had a good time in the theater. The characters are great and evoke strong emotions, but the film reuses a plot and fails to capture the full glory of Rome.
7/10. Half points are for losers.
