Fun fact: I live right next to a forest where parts of the first gladiator film where shot and whilst they were shooting some guy walked into the local pub there and said we need extras who are tall men and we need loads of them. He ended up taking the whole ass pub to the woods to be extras lol
There was one scene in the movie, after main guy found his dead wife's corpse, he just leaves her floating, and goes with roman soldiers without any resistance, and they pat him on the back like "come on, buddy, we enslaving you, there-there".
It was bad enough we got the obnoxiously obvious "pull the heart string" moment AFTER we already got the campy River Styx dream sequence, but then they botch it even more by that terribly tame interaction between him and the roman guards. Like no desperation or anything. Not fight. This is the guy who was supposed to be DEFINED by rage.
Im halfway in and literally every word coming out of Jake's mouth is what I was feeling. I was physically squirming in my chair unable to look at the screen sometimes because I knew I would hate it less if I didn't look directly at the screen. I swear I physically groaned multiple times. It's such a shame this showing was almost completely packed and the last couple incredible movies I watched in the theatres were barren landscapes. Furiosa :(
Ridley Scott and David Scarpa managed to make Napoleon and Gladiators boring. FUCKING HOW?!!! As a history student it bums me that this awful pairing got to tackle such an interesting subject and it’ll mean there won’t be another Napoleon film for decades. Bring back the screenwriter from The Last Duel, Kingdom of Heaven or the first Gladiator please.
Couldn't agree more with the CGI monkeys. I literally went 'wtf is happening' while watching it in the cinema. I don't understand why they need to do this, hundreds of millions of dollars and the CGI looked worse than movies that came out decades ago. It belonged to an entirely different movie.
As a fan of the first I have serious issues with the retcon the sequel creates. In the midst of everything that happened in the first film Lucilla doesn’t tell Maximus that Lucius is actually his kid!? They have a personal heart to heart scene before Maximus goes off to his death and she doesn’t say “hey, by the way, I know you are sad about your other dead kid and wife but guess what?” I just don’t like the angle that he needs to be related to Maximus in any way. Also I agree, this sequel does a terrible job of explaining what he knows about his “childhood” considering Lucius was damn near a preteen.
THANK YOU this was exactly my problem with it. They also retconned not only Lucius’s father, but his age. In the original, Maximus and Lucilla have a conversation where they specifically talk about how both their sons are almost 8 years old. We know Maximus wouldn’t cheat on his wife with Lucilla because he was totally in love with his wife and he was morally rigid, so there’s no way with that timeline Lucius could’ve been his son. But in the sequel when Denzel Washington is doing his investigations trying to figure out if Paul Mescal is Lucius, he is told that Lucius was 12 when he disappeared, and in the flashback scene, we can see Lucilla sent him away immediately after Maximus died. So with this recon timeline, it means that Lucius was 4-5 years older than Maximus’ son with his Spanish wife which allows for a timeline where Maximus got Lucilla pregnant, then they broke up and then he married the Spanish woman, and this directly contradicts the timeline established in the first movie where both boys are the same age.
@@bebop2523 EXACTLY! It’s all way too messy and convoluted just to try pull some link to Maximus and the first film. Frankly I think it works better if he’s not Maximus’ son but is inspired by his legacy.
@@langleymneely Frfr they should’ve done like an anthology series about a different gladiator and could’ve referenced/been inspired by Maximus but being his son was such a stretch. Or tbh I would’ve loved 2 hrs of Denzel Washington being evil in Ancient Rome they should’ve just made a move about Macrinus, who btw in real life actually did succeed and become emperor manipulating and killing the twins.
The worst part is WE ALREADY HAVE A REASON for Lucius to be inspired by Maximus. To want to follow after him. He gets caught saying "Im Maximus the Savior of Rome!" So it's not like him being his son in any way is necessary to even pull this 2nd movie off. If anything it just kind of complicates things. If anything I feel like it works LESS because we already have that bond with Lucius and Lucilla regarding Maximus, and what he was to rome, and the positive influence he had on Lucius already. Saying he's your father just makes him conflicted, and have all these potentially negative emotions which muddy everything. It's SO poorly handled.
TIL the word legacy-quel, and i love it. it’s also always entertaining to see your guys’ expressions while listening to your partner say stuff you disagree with while containing your own opinions 😂
Denzel Washington was great playing Denzel Washington. Idk why they decided to put the character Denzel Washington with his New York accent and modern dialect into a movie set in ancient Rome. But his performance was good.
@@kk_33i liked his character's direction and energy, but the slight american accent did subtract from the overall believability for me. its probably not a big deal because they're speaking english in rome so it was never accurate, even in the original - but it was a bit distracting in comparison with accents the other cast members were doing. it was the sharks that i found most offensive, though.
He should’ve been the main character. The movie does him dirty too. He is suppose to be smart and calculated until the movie needs him to be a complete idiot at the end.
All respect to Nadia, but this was honestly one of the worst things I've watched in the theatres in a LONG time. And this is coming from someone who thinks Gladiator 1 was my favorite theatrical experience ever 24 years ago. I could go on for hours about all of the ways in which this movie failed not only being a sequel, but just being an entertaining blockbuster, but this movies just not worth my time.
I 100% agree that Gladiator 2 feels like a legacy sequel and there are so many contrivances and just silliness. That being said I enjoyed the experience so much, so I can’t fault it too hard. The acting was great but the characters were cardboard copies of the original film. Denzel is the standout, but like you said this doesn’t come to the forefront until the end. Overall I liked it a lot, it made me laugh and smile and I tought it actually looked pretty good for the amount of CGI that was used. First Gladiator is a 10/10, this one gets an 8/10 for me for dumb fun alone.
Maximus had two boys with 2 different women within months of each other, accoridng to Gladiator 2 (they were both 8 years old when Maximus was talking abiut them in the first movie)...
Before watching this video, here are my thoughts: *minor spoilers* The good: the twin emperors, gladiatorial naval combat, a really great quote that was attributed to Cicero (though I can't find evidence of it), the pet monkey who got to be co-caesar for a day 🐒 The bad: garbage rehashed script that failed to justify the existence of the movie, dumb callbacks, bad acting even from the returning cast, bad casting (except Pedro and the emperors), unmemorable musical score I rewatched the original last week and I still fucking love that movie. Seeing the new one really made me wish Ridley Scott would have just made another sword & sandal movie without any connection to Gladiator 😕
"bad acting even from the returning cast" What happened to Connie Nielsen in this movie? I'm still moved to tears with some of her performance in the first Gladiator and Ive seen that movie 20 times. I couldn't even look at the screen directly her emotional moments in this were SO BAD.
@@lockekappa500Absolutely! Granted the script was not great and the characters didn't have the level of depth they did in the first movie, but the actors did absolutely nothing to elevate it either
@@Malkav65 Yeah I also think they were set up for failure, because some of the lines would have fallen flat no matter what, because of the lack of meaningful setup before that.
It's really exciting that there will be a baby. 50% of both your DNA, they can give their opinion on the film if ever you disagree, which will serve as a neutral combination of your consciences.
Can you two review wild robot? It’s another movie with excellent reviews (even better than this one) that I was confused because I did not find it to be very good. I left thinking “meh, nothing offensively bad here, but that’s like a 60% on rotten tomatoes for sure” and then I left the theatre and looked it up and it had a 98%??!! I was so so confused. Am I missing something genius in this movie? Is everyone just overrating it? Would love to hear your guys’ take!
Agree with nadia, Iactually liked it more than the first but I think i'm in a minority. I only watched the first in preparation for this and didn't really get the hype, good but like 8/10 and i'd give the second one 8.5
I cannot disagree with Jake more on this one, and I usually am on his side. I intentionally did not rewatch the first one so my brain wouldn't go into pessimistic comparison mode. It was a long time ago that I watched the first one, but I remember really liking it. I walked out of Gladiator 2 ready to watch it again immediately. This sequel very intentionally, in my opinion, tries to do a lot different from the first one. The story is more complex, the supporting cast gets much more focus, the revenge plot has more nuance, the tone is intentionally more campy (which is one thing I like about it better than the first), and rather than go for an ending that is bittersweet/melancholy like the first one, it ends on a much more optimistic note. Denzel Washington acted his ass off in this movie, and I always love it when he plays a villain. He clearly is having a lot of fun in the role. Also, some Roman emperors really were as insane as the ones in this movie. The first movie is very much Russel Crowe's movie. I've been listening to the music a lot these past few days that was uploaded by fans of the first, and every image they use is a hero shot of Russel Crowe and for good reason. Gladiator 1 is his movie. This new one doesn't even attempt to make the main character as iconic, because the legacy of Maximus is just too large. Instead, they shifted focus to a more complex plot and to fleshing out the supporting cast. I thought the main character was fine for the most part, but the end speech is what really sold me on him and allowed me to understand what they were doing with his character. The arc of the main character works on almost a meta level. The whole movie, many of the side characters are lavishing praise on Maximus, and you see Lucius struggle with the feeling that he won't live up to his father's legacy. Similarly, I think a lot of people went into this movie with this strong sense of nostalgia for Maximus and an attitude of, "Ok new guy! Let's see what you got!" Finally near the end, he learns to accept himself, dons his father's armor and fights for what he believes in. And after Macrinus is defeated, Lucius gives a speech about how to build a better Rome, it is about all of us working together. That is the big message I think the movie was trying to convey. Looking up to inspiring figures is fine and they can help us envision a brighter future, but that bright future does not happen without the masses banding together to fight the powerful. Otherwise, if we overinvest in a leader, we are vulnerable to even further decay if something bad were to happen to said leader. The opening text specifically describes the Rome of this movie to be more insane, cruel and in a state of collapse, thanks to the greedy and powerful. (Sounds a lot like a certain modern empire...) Also, one last thing. I am really annoyed with the whole "This is an affront to cinema!" comments not just about this movie, but a lot of movies coming out. And I agree with most of those people on the statement that most modern blockbusters are dropping the ball hard. Verisimilitude is important in certain movies, but I don't think it is an iron clad law of nature. Movies can look stylized too. I do think that is what they were going for this time. If you didn't like the movie, that's totally fine. But when people say things like how a movie is an "affront" or has "betrayed" the art form because it doesn't look realistic, they just come across as a pretentious douche. (to me, at least) tl;dr I really liked (possibly loved based on how I feel after a second viewing) Gladiator 2, and I am tired of people who take film as serious as me using their dislike of the movie as some kind of badge of honor as the "real" appreciators of film. P.S. The action scene you probably think is the most unrealistic (the naval battle reenactment) was a real thing that happened in Ancient Rome. Don't take my word for it, look it up yourself. Obviously, they probably didn't put live sharks in the water, but come on. That's just more fun!
I watched kingdom of heaven last night. I think you've described the cinematography and direction for basically every Scott film since Gladiator. He just seems so lazy and uncaring about the scripts and blocking, direction and pacing. It's almost like he's taking you through the motions to get to plot points and rushed spectacles for almost 3 hours every movie now.
Ah Ridders, I love you, Alien and Blade Runner top my list, you're the king of light and shadow, but you need to blink twice or something if you're under duress.
It's interesting because Jake's more of a cinephile so I tend to agree with his points however at the same time I tend to appeal also towards the artist intent in a movie. If I felt this was a cash grab I'd see it from that point of view but I genuinely felt that Ridley Scott REALLY wanted to make this. And I feel Nadia tends to sympathize with the script and motivations more that both of you guys together evens out into how I feel most of the time. I find that valuable because often reviews tend to have one pov and it never quite reaches how I actually feel. Another point I want to make is I actually didn't KNOW Paul Pascal's character was supposed to be the son of Maximus. I went in expecting them to just revamping the story set in a totally different space with no connection. Jake seems to talk about the way they told Paul's story as the son but not KNOWING, I could feel in his performance that there is a deeper thing with him. But it's not in the script which I think Jake is more focused on. So I was intrigued still with his characters (but I do see a lot criticisms about his performance but again none of them touch on how I personally feel about it.)
Great discussion, I was entertained even though I have no plans on watching this. Might check out the first movie based on your recommendations, though!
Gladiator is one of the most epic films of all time. The second was undeveloped in character, musical score, script and dialogue, no foundations laid out. Such a flat liner and sometimes ridiculous in a bad way.
I dunno how you go in with the fear of it ending up a cash grab and a rehash of the original, and then walk away from Gladiator II thinking it ISN'T any of those things. But alright.
Ridley Scott still has the creative potency to make good movies, but because of how Hollywood is adapting to the crazy economy today they don't give him time anymore, and condensing so much in such a few days at his age must take a toll on him. I think this is what's been happening.
I think the problem is that he has TOO MUCH control! Similarly to George Lucas, most of his best works were done early in his career, when they both were "reined in", and had to listen to others, and team-work. Now they have too much power and control.
Not it. He has a LOT of control, huge budgets, his own ideas and clearly not doing IP most of the time. He seems to do his own thing a lot, its the fact that he chooses shitty writers thats the problem, i mean who makes historical epics anymore, studios dont like that, but they put up with it cuz its Scott
100% disagree, Ridley Scott has always been a hit and miss director. The original Gladiator really should've been a mess with the script undergoing constant rewrites even during filming. It just so happened that the competing visions for the movie balanced out with Crowe and Pheonix improvising some of the most iconic lines. Ridley is much more in control of movies these days, and they are not better for it.
@@MrJethroha 100%. I think Scott just gets in his own way tbh, and seems to rush through production like there’s no tomorrow. I sort of get it, he’s trying to fit in as many projects while he can, but that just ends up leaving his recent movies feeling undercooked imo.
Hey carrying family (??). Love the videos. I know the Gladiator is considered a classic and here in Italy it's no different. There are certain movies that while they are very loosely based on real history of a country they enjoy a lot of appreciation from the population, like The Last Samurai. For some reason I never got to watch it from start to finish but I did watch some parts of it, so I was never the biggest fan of the first one. I didn't dislike it, I just didn't really see it. Me and my partner thought that this second one was good. I don't think it was great, overall it was predictable in some places, but the cinematography and the directing was really enjoyable. I think the audience at the movie theater also enjoyed it since they gave it a short applause at the end (first time I saw something like that happen). I think it was good enough, maybe not as good as the original but I think it was a success.
since historical accuracy isn't a thing anyway, somewhere out there there was a story of lucius who now stripped of his privilege and needing to survive becomes like denzel's character to claw back his way to power. the contrast to ideals he was raised with and needing to return to the 'good' side. if that kind of character returned back to ideals it would have so much more weight and conflict.
Mescal's speech at the end didn't even really seem like the corny anachronistic liberalism you get in Gladiator I - like, he spends his whole climax talking about 'strength and honour', predicates his authority on being the grandson of a prior emperor, and makes his appeal directly to a pair of militant armies with whom he presumably intends to take over the city. So, like, basically old school Mussolini fascism? Something something John Carter of Mars
Minor correction, more like speech to a military and secret service. The Praetorian are basically body guards. Hate that both films don't have their edgy scorpion banner cause the Praetorian were historically cartoonishly evil.
i think it wouldve been cooler if this movie had followed paul mescal playing a random dude that denzel plots to present as the son of maximus as a way of seizing power. paul mescal and the audience could have been told by denzel that he was the son of maximus, without it being true. it might be too silly but he could have had to fight the real son in the coliseum later.
Yea, I'm big with Jake on this one. Watched Gladiator before II like you guys, so similiar experience. This movie's plot is so damn lazy! Felt no emotion at all while watching it. Some of my biggest gripes (I could write a 20pg essay but I will try to keep it short): 1- It's like they split Maximus' character into Mescal and Pedro. Pascal is the general that falls out with the Emperor, and Mescal is the "husband to a murdered wife". None of the two gets enough motivation and characterization to really get behind them. 2 - The murdered wife at the beggining was so obvious and lazy. The first second I saw her i went "oh so they are going for the murdered family thing again". 3 - Mescal's character is extremely bland and has very little charisma. You understand why the Gladiators get behind Maximus on the first movie; in this one, it feels like it happens just because it has to. 4 - Denzel's plan was so off the charts insane. This dude murders two Emperors easily, with no consequences, has basically no political or military support but one single senator, and expects to rise to power just because the Emperors are disliked by the people? And because he is made consul by one of them, which he publicly murders. Why would anyone side with him after the Emperors are dead? 5- Lucilla sending Lucius away is so contrived. Why would he be in danger? She is basically one of the most powerful people in Rome by the end of the 1st movie. Why would she send the sole heir to a freaking village in Africa? Couldn't you just protect him in Rome? So dumb. 6- The way everyone just believes he is Lucius is fucking insane. Honestly, just felt like they made a much worse version of the first movie. Would have been better to make something more original.
Thank you Jake. This movie was lazy and I kept thinking about how much I wanted to rewatch Gladiator as well as Top Gun: Maverick cuz that was an excellent lega-sequel.
I have to be honest. I saw the first Gladiator movie last year after finding out about the 2nd movie being in production. I had always seen several scenes from it on cable TV when i was younger but never got around to it. I gotta say, the first movie is overrated af. I was expecting some kind of masterpiece but all i got was a pretty good movie. That's it. I felt sympathy but not empathy for Maximus' loss. The same goes for this movie except this movie missed the mark on some of the motivations for several characters and has a rushed ending. Overall: Gladiator I: 7.5 to 8/10 Gladiator II: 6.5 to 7/10 II is worse than I but not by much. And i found Gladiator 1 a bit underwhelming given the hype and accolades surrounding it.
I agree, I just watched the first one before the second came out. First Gladiator was fine, I think it was a solid revenge movie but it didn’t impress me. I think it’s fun to look at these movies at plays put on screen, but I feel really have to suspend your disbelief, moreso than other movies.
If you wanna see the bottom of the trough in terms of ridley scott then you should watch Exodus. Not having seen glad2 yet I am confident it is high art compared to Exodus 😂
I definitely don't hate it as much as Jake did...but I'm more on his side than Nadia's. I found it fine to decent for the most part-with a few performances and moments that made their way into "great" But overall it didn't work out to anything exceptional; and as the first Gladiator is *so* good, just being "okay" hurts it all the more.
I think they both make good points, but I have to say it is indeed hilarious how this movie just straight up tells us Maximus’s sacrifice was pointless since his son’s life was still in danger anyway, so much so that he was sent away to basically a life of suffering. And OMG those fucking terrible ugly CGI monkeys. Yes, the rest of the movie was compelling, but that scene almost killed any type of interest I had for the movie (which was at that point pretty low because I think the beginning pretty much sucks).
I never intended to watch the sequel but was forced to because my family was weirdly excited about it, the trailer looked like a mindless rehash of the first film, but i guess that's what some folks want, just the thing they liked but done again So i watched it expecting just a fun movie with no substance, and that's what i got 🤷♂️ it was fun, dumb and i liked the scene with the river styx It wasn't great like the first film
Ridley Scott is just cooked. He made 2 iconic movies in the span of 3 years early in his career, then made Thelma and Louise and Gladiator later, but other than that he is a director who has churned out a bunch of forgettable movies that have only gotten worse as he has aged
I hadn't seen the first movie until last weekend, thought it was great. Saw the second one yesterday, it was just okay. I think the best way to describe it was Braveheart wearing a Gladiator skin suit.
Frankly i kind of resented that lucius was related to maximus. I understand that its incredibly plausible. But maximus' story has such strong finality to it that it feels really foolish to add even a single word more to it, instead of just fleshing out lucius and lucilla as people seperate from maximus. This sort of decision feels like if the sequel trilogy of star wars had rey be related to luke skywalker. Just leave him out! Or at the very least do not make them related.
I'm somewhere between you guys, it was fine and entertaining but nowhere near as good as the first. I don't remember the first movie being as vibrant as Jake says though, I always thought that movie was quite muddy and washed out, intentionally so. Maybe thats just the dvd and Blu-ray copies I've been watching all these years
I really found this movie frustrating, not cuz its unnecessary, but because the writing sucked so much. And sure its an ‘action’ movie but you actually gave a shit in the first film, the story was engaging, the characters, the ideas. None of that here. The same screenwriter from Napoleon and All The Money in the World wrote this film and it shows from minute one when the movie can’t conjure up a fucking inkling of engaging interesting dialogue, his wife is a token default dead wife character, the speech Lucius makes is so dull and confusing it makes no impact, we see none of his prior life or what he cares about or his leader Jugurtha. And thats just the start. The dialogue is so childishly dull and dumbed down that none of the stakes are interesting at all except as visual noise
I'm really not into that first film having watched it for the first time yesterday. Maybe I had to be there for it back then, but it was very played out, cheesy, and the action choppy. Not sure how I'll like the second one.
I agree with the guy. The story was terrible. Spoiler: How do we even know Macrinus was bad or good? He wanted go get rid of current authorities and rule Rome, but to do what with it??? And Lucius is going to do what? He is not competent in ruling. The death od the wife was at battle, it was not personal, taking it personally made Lucius look like a moron.
I don't think 'It's worse than the original' is particularly helpful criticism when the original is one of the best films ever made. I came out of Alien Romulus and my friend's only feedback was that it was worse than Alien. I was like.... you were expecting it to be better than than Alien? Are you stupid? Compare it to other action films you've seen this year. Wow Ridley's made some bangers hasn't he
As a history nerd and cinemaphile, this movie made me sick, and had me almost walk out 5 times. Also the only genuinely good or great Ridley Scott movie in the last 10 years is The Martian. The rest have been like Jake said, he just is sleepwalking his way through the twilight of his career.
I'd genuinely give this a 3/10. I was that disgusted by just about every aspect of this film. It failed in EVERY capacity. And I say that because the only good things were ripped straight from the first one, so I don't even give it credit. Oh yeah Denzel was servicable, but miscast. (or told to perform in a miscast manner)
Nadia's review scores are always so entertaining, she's always so different to how I see things haha! I think Jake's summary of the films points, how it was shot and cgi'd out the wazoo with cheesy liberal values chucked in at the end, retconning Gladiator 1's ending... That's kind of what I was expecting from it really, never planned on watching it
Ever since Prometheus, Ridley Scott should have just bounced or otherwise pulled a Francis ford Coppola. Just start doing weird, maybe bad, at least memorable shit. He keeps trying to chase James Cameron with these big movies that are boring.
The ending of both movies (restoring the republic) is such nonsense, if Napoleon ended with Bonaparte uniting Europe and founding the EU it would be as inaccurate as Paul Mescal restoring the Republic in the 3rd Century AD.
Nadia: "I think it's pretty neat"
Jake: "This is an affront to the very idea of cinema"
Clicking on this video, I knew she would love it and he would hate it
It's a trope at this point
@ yeah but it’s a trope I like. Therefor tropes good?
She can tell if he likes it or not and alters her opinion to differ from his. Its a good move for their channel.
@@garretharlow575 nah, she just enjoys movies differently
It’s a pattern with the (we argue) videos
Best part of these videos is whenever Nadia talks about how she likes a movie you can see a light in Jake’s eyes quietly die.
Fun fact: I live right next to a forest where parts of the first gladiator film where shot and whilst they were shooting some guy walked into the local pub there and said we need extras who are tall men and we need loads of them. He ended up taking the whole ass pub to the woods to be extras lol
"You don't care about the dead wife?"
"Well, not this one. ANYWAYS."
😂😂😂
She took it personally hahahaha
MAKE me feel for the wife, don't tell me I should feel for her.
Gladiator, I hardly know her
Gladiator? At least take her to dinner first.
Why would I be glad 'e ate 'er? I don't like cannibalism.
You know it's gonna be a spicy one when "we argue" is in the title
Do you guys go to the movies together, same car? I’m trying to imagine the car rides home, trying to resist the urge to talk about the movie 😂
Nadia's look 👀 at Jake this entire review: "ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED!?" 😂
"....yo...you don't care about the wife?"😢
I like jake's dramatic hand movements whenever he speaks whereas nadia just calmly sits there
After seeing all the positive buzz on twitter, I thought I had gone insane and had seen a different movie. Jake's opinion was such a relief to hear.
It was all fake, throw half of the positive google reviews into an chatGPT detector. They're all fake.
Totally agree!
There was one scene in the movie, after main guy found his dead wife's corpse, he just leaves her floating, and goes with roman soldiers without any resistance, and they pat him on the back like "come on, buddy, we enslaving you, there-there".
It was bad enough we got the obnoxiously obvious "pull the heart string" moment AFTER we already got the campy River Styx dream sequence, but then they botch it even more by that terribly tame interaction between him and the roman guards. Like no desperation or anything. Not fight. This is the guy who was supposed to be DEFINED by rage.
I'm excited to watch this on streaming in 6 months
Me in a few months browsing for movies despite watching this review:
"Oh shit, this came out?"
The lady next to me in the theater was filming it, so you might be in luck friend
*4 months
Im halfway in and literally every word coming out of Jake's mouth is what I was feeling. I was physically squirming in my chair unable to look at the screen sometimes because I knew I would hate it less if I didn't look directly at the screen. I swear I physically groaned multiple times. It's such a shame this showing was almost completely packed and the last couple incredible movies I watched in the theatres were barren landscapes. Furiosa :(
What were the two good movies?
@@DaLiJeIOvoImeZauzeto Dune 2 and Furiosa.
Although I almost always agree with Man, I think it’s fun to have these discussions to challenge one’s viewpoint
RLM and yall are my favorite movie reviewers. =D
Ridley Scott and David Scarpa managed to make Napoleon and Gladiators boring. FUCKING HOW?!!! As a history student it bums me that this awful pairing got to tackle such an interesting subject and it’ll mean there won’t be another Napoleon film for decades. Bring back the screenwriter from The Last Duel, Kingdom of Heaven or the first Gladiator please.
The Last Duel was so engaging, with actual stakes. It wasn't perfect, but it's light years beyond w/e he's doing with Napolean and this movie.
@@lockekappa500 Napoleon was so dogshit that it made me angry
comment for exposure (love you guys)
Couldn't agree more with the CGI monkeys. I literally went 'wtf is happening' while watching it in the cinema. I don't understand why they need to do this, hundreds of millions of dollars and the CGI looked worse than movies that came out decades ago. It belonged to an entirely different movie.
I see it's been a while since i watched this channel, my congratulation!
“You don’t care about the dead wife?”
…
“Oh”
Jump cut.
I’m dead lmao
As a fan of the first I have serious issues with the retcon the sequel creates. In the midst of everything that happened in the first film Lucilla doesn’t tell Maximus that Lucius is actually his kid!? They have a personal heart to heart scene before Maximus goes off to his death and she doesn’t say “hey, by the way, I know you are sad about your other dead kid and wife but guess what?” I just don’t like the angle that he needs to be related to Maximus in any way. Also I agree, this sequel does a terrible job of explaining what he knows about his “childhood” considering Lucius was damn near a preteen.
THANK YOU this was exactly my problem with it. They also retconned not only Lucius’s father, but his age. In the original, Maximus and Lucilla have a conversation where they specifically talk about how both their sons are almost 8 years old. We know Maximus wouldn’t cheat on his wife with Lucilla because he was totally in love with his wife and he was morally rigid, so there’s no way with that timeline Lucius could’ve been his son. But in the sequel when Denzel Washington is doing his investigations trying to figure out if Paul Mescal is Lucius, he is told that Lucius was 12 when he disappeared, and in the flashback scene, we can see Lucilla sent him away immediately after Maximus died. So with this recon timeline, it means that Lucius was 4-5 years older than Maximus’ son with his Spanish wife which allows for a timeline where Maximus got Lucilla pregnant, then they broke up and then he married the Spanish woman, and this directly contradicts the timeline established in the first movie where both boys are the same age.
@@bebop2523 EXACTLY! It’s all way too messy and convoluted just to try pull some link to Maximus and the first film. Frankly I think it works better if he’s not Maximus’ son but is inspired by his legacy.
@@langleymneely Frfr they should’ve done like an anthology series about a different gladiator and could’ve referenced/been inspired by Maximus but being his son was such a stretch. Or tbh I would’ve loved 2 hrs of Denzel Washington being evil in Ancient Rome they should’ve just made a move about Macrinus, who btw in real life actually did succeed and become emperor manipulating and killing the twins.
The worst part is WE ALREADY HAVE A REASON for Lucius to be inspired by Maximus. To want to follow after him. He gets caught saying "Im Maximus the Savior of Rome!" So it's not like him being his son in any way is necessary to even pull this 2nd movie off. If anything it just kind of complicates things. If anything I feel like it works LESS because we already have that bond with Lucius and Lucilla regarding Maximus, and what he was to rome, and the positive influence he had on Lucius already. Saying he's your father just makes him conflicted, and have all these potentially negative emotions which muddy everything. It's SO poorly handled.
@ My sentiments exactly!
TIL the word legacy-quel, and i love it. it’s also always entertaining to see your guys’ expressions while listening to your partner say stuff you disagree with while containing your own opinions 😂
Gladiator 1 is so good, the ending with Maximus dying and finding peace and his family at the gates of heaven made me sob
Denzel Washington’s back must be hurting for carrying this entire film.
The ONLY good thing in the entire movie. And I actually mean that.
Denzel Washington was great playing Denzel Washington. Idk why they decided to put the character Denzel Washington with his New York accent and modern dialect into a movie set in ancient Rome. But his performance was good.
@@kk_33i liked his character's direction and energy, but the slight american accent did subtract from the overall believability for me. its probably not a big deal because they're speaking english in rome so it was never accurate, even in the original - but it was a bit distracting in comparison with accents the other cast members were doing.
it was the sharks that i found most offensive, though.
He should’ve been the main character. The movie does him dirty too. He is suppose to be smart and calculated until the movie needs him to be a complete idiot at the end.
All respect to Nadia, but this was honestly one of the worst things I've watched in the theatres in a LONG time. And this is coming from someone who thinks Gladiator 1 was my favorite theatrical experience ever 24 years ago. I could go on for hours about all of the ways in which this movie failed not only being a sequel, but just being an entertaining blockbuster, but this movies just not worth my time.
They shoulda done their original plan and made a movie about an eternally reincarnating Russell Crowe
Nadia looks so depressed at his take 😢 give her a hug
wait this is the cutest channel
I agree with every single sentiment the right honourable gentlemen shared. And, on that note, I've had my fill of films.
It's TV for me now.
I 100% agree that Gladiator 2 feels like a legacy sequel and there are so many contrivances and just silliness. That being said I enjoyed the experience so much, so I can’t fault it too hard. The acting was great but the characters were cardboard copies of the original film. Denzel is the standout, but like you said this doesn’t come to the forefront until the end. Overall I liked it a lot, it made me laugh and smile and I tought it actually looked pretty good for the amount of CGI that was used. First Gladiator is a 10/10, this one gets an 8/10 for me for dumb fun alone.
Maximus had two boys with 2 different women within months of each other, accoridng to Gladiator 2 (they were both 8 years old when Maximus was talking abiut them in the first movie)...
The haters are just mad cuz they are probably ink wells
@@niket527 is this Ridley’s alt? Lol
His poker face says it all. I loved the first one, too.
Before watching this video, here are my thoughts:
*minor spoilers*
The good:
the twin emperors, gladiatorial naval combat, a really great quote that was attributed to Cicero (though I can't find evidence of it), the pet monkey who got to be co-caesar for a day 🐒
The bad:
garbage rehashed script that failed to justify the existence of the movie, dumb callbacks, bad acting even from the returning cast, bad casting (except Pedro and the emperors), unmemorable musical score
I rewatched the original last week and I still fucking love that movie. Seeing the new one really made me wish Ridley Scott would have just made another sword & sandal movie without any connection to Gladiator 😕
"bad acting even from the returning cast"
What happened to Connie Nielsen in this movie? I'm still moved to tears with some of her performance in the first Gladiator and Ive seen that movie 20 times. I couldn't even look at the screen directly her emotional moments in this were SO BAD.
@@lockekappa500Absolutely! Granted the script was not great and the characters didn't have the level of depth they did in the first movie, but the actors did absolutely nothing to elevate it either
@@Malkav65 Yeah I also think they were set up for failure, because some of the lines would have fallen flat no matter what, because of the lack of meaningful setup before that.
The downfall of the roman empire must be studied
I think about that every day
It's really exciting that there will be a baby. 50% of both your DNA, they can give their opinion on the film if ever you disagree, which will serve as a neutral combination of your consciences.
Can you two review wild robot? It’s another movie with excellent reviews (even better than this one) that I was confused because I did not find it to be very good. I left thinking “meh, nothing offensively bad here, but that’s like a 60% on rotten tomatoes for sure” and then I left the theatre and looked it up and it had a 98%??!! I was so so confused. Am I missing something genius in this movie? Is everyone just overrating it? Would love to hear your guys’ take!
Agree with nadia, Iactually liked it more than the first but I think i'm in a minority. I only watched the first in preparation for this and didn't really get the hype, good but like 8/10 and i'd give the second one 8.5
I love this discussion
I cannot disagree with Jake more on this one, and I usually am on his side. I intentionally did not rewatch the first one so my brain wouldn't go into pessimistic comparison mode. It was a long time ago that I watched the first one, but I remember really liking it. I walked out of Gladiator 2 ready to watch it again immediately. This sequel very intentionally, in my opinion, tries to do a lot different from the first one. The story is more complex, the supporting cast gets much more focus, the revenge plot has more nuance, the tone is intentionally more campy (which is one thing I like about it better than the first), and rather than go for an ending that is bittersweet/melancholy like the first one, it ends on a much more optimistic note. Denzel Washington acted his ass off in this movie, and I always love it when he plays a villain. He clearly is having a lot of fun in the role. Also, some Roman emperors really were as insane as the ones in this movie.
The first movie is very much Russel Crowe's movie. I've been listening to the music a lot these past few days that was uploaded by fans of the first, and every image they use is a hero shot of Russel Crowe and for good reason. Gladiator 1 is his movie. This new one doesn't even attempt to make the main character as iconic, because the legacy of Maximus is just too large. Instead, they shifted focus to a more complex plot and to fleshing out the supporting cast. I thought the main character was fine for the most part, but the end speech is what really sold me on him and allowed me to understand what they were doing with his character. The arc of the main character works on almost a meta level. The whole movie, many of the side characters are lavishing praise on Maximus, and you see Lucius struggle with the feeling that he won't live up to his father's legacy. Similarly, I think a lot of people went into this movie with this strong sense of nostalgia for Maximus and an attitude of, "Ok new guy! Let's see what you got!" Finally near the end, he learns to accept himself, dons his father's armor and fights for what he believes in. And after Macrinus is defeated, Lucius gives a speech about how to build a better Rome, it is about all of us working together. That is the big message I think the movie was trying to convey. Looking up to inspiring figures is fine and they can help us envision a brighter future, but that bright future does not happen without the masses banding together to fight the powerful. Otherwise, if we overinvest in a leader, we are vulnerable to even further decay if something bad were to happen to said leader. The opening text specifically describes the Rome of this movie to be more insane, cruel and in a state of collapse, thanks to the greedy and powerful. (Sounds a lot like a certain modern empire...)
Also, one last thing. I am really annoyed with the whole "This is an affront to cinema!" comments not just about this movie, but a lot of movies coming out. And I agree with most of those people on the statement that most modern blockbusters are dropping the ball hard. Verisimilitude is important in certain movies, but I don't think it is an iron clad law of nature. Movies can look stylized too. I do think that is what they were going for this time. If you didn't like the movie, that's totally fine. But when people say things like how a movie is an "affront" or has "betrayed" the art form because it doesn't look realistic, they just come across as a pretentious douche. (to me, at least)
tl;dr I really liked (possibly loved based on how I feel after a second viewing) Gladiator 2, and I am tired of people who take film as serious as me using their dislike of the movie as some kind of badge of honor as the "real" appreciators of film.
P.S. The action scene you probably think is the most unrealistic (the naval battle reenactment) was a real thing that happened in Ancient Rome. Don't take my word for it, look it up yourself. Obviously, they probably didn't put live sharks in the water, but come on. That's just more fun!
Saw it with my friend and he said exactly what Jake said pretty much.
I thought the costumes were pretty neat though.
I watched kingdom of heaven last night. I think you've described the cinematography and direction for basically every Scott film since Gladiator. He just seems so lazy and uncaring about the scripts and blocking, direction and pacing. It's almost like he's taking you through the motions to get to plot points and rushed spectacles for almost 3 hours every movie now.
Yup, I never felt like we had purpose when we were being led from scene to scene. Just this meandering pacing.
Ah Ridders, I love you, Alien and Blade Runner top my list, you're the king of light and shadow, but you need to blink twice or something if you're under duress.
It's interesting because Jake's more of a cinephile so I tend to agree with his points however at the same time I tend to appeal also towards the artist intent in a movie. If I felt this was a cash grab I'd see it from that point of view but I genuinely felt that Ridley Scott REALLY wanted to make this. And I feel Nadia tends to sympathize with the script and motivations more that both of you guys together evens out into how I feel most of the time. I find that valuable because often reviews tend to have one pov and it never quite reaches how I actually feel.
Another point I want to make is I actually didn't KNOW Paul Pascal's character was supposed to be the son of Maximus. I went in expecting them to just revamping the story set in a totally different space with no connection. Jake seems to talk about the way they told Paul's story as the son but not KNOWING, I could feel in his performance that there is a deeper thing with him. But it's not in the script which I think Jake is more focused on. So I was intrigued still with his characters (but I do see a lot criticisms about his performance but again none of them touch on how I personally feel about it.)
His response is pretty much 100% exactly how I felt.
Great discussion, I was entertained even though I have no plans on watching this. Might check out the first movie based on your recommendations, though!
Gladiator is one of the most epic films of all time. The second was undeveloped in character, musical score, script and dialogue, no foundations laid out. Such a flat liner and sometimes ridiculous in a bad way.
@Danigirl77777 well that completely sells the first film for me. I'll have to check it out asap!
Don't even really need to see it to know how this vid plays out, but I will watch so Man isn't Carrying that Thing alone.
Do you think the opening credits sequence was AI?
I agree with Nadia.
Lemme guess: Nadia liked it; Jake, not so much.
I thought it was alegator 2
I dunno how you go in with the fear of it ending up a cash grab and a rehash of the original, and then walk away from Gladiator II thinking it ISN'T any of those things. But alright.
The biggest issue with this film is our main character is an empty vessel.
Ridley Scott still has the creative potency to make good movies, but because of how Hollywood is adapting to the crazy economy today they don't give him time anymore, and condensing so much in such a few days at his age must take a toll on him. I think this is what's been happening.
I think the problem is that he has TOO MUCH control!
Similarly to George Lucas, most of his best works were done early in his career, when they both were "reined in", and had to listen to others, and team-work. Now they have too much power and control.
Not it. He has a LOT of control, huge budgets, his own ideas and clearly not doing IP most of the time. He seems to do his own thing a lot, its the fact that he chooses shitty writers thats the problem, i mean who makes historical epics anymore, studios dont like that, but they put up with it cuz its Scott
100% disagree, Ridley Scott has always been a hit and miss director. The original Gladiator really should've been a mess with the script undergoing constant rewrites even during filming. It just so happened that the competing visions for the movie balanced out with Crowe and Pheonix improvising some of the most iconic lines. Ridley is much more in control of movies these days, and they are not better for it.
Why did he do a movie without a script tho?
@@MrJethroha 100%. I think Scott just gets in his own way tbh, and seems to rush through production like there’s no tomorrow.
I sort of get it, he’s trying to fit in as many projects while he can, but that just ends up leaving his recent movies feeling undercooked imo.
Hey carrying family (??). Love the videos.
I know the Gladiator is considered a classic and here in Italy it's no different. There are certain movies that while they are very loosely based on real history of a country they enjoy a lot of appreciation from the population, like The Last Samurai.
For some reason I never got to watch it from start to finish but I did watch some parts of it, so I was never the biggest fan of the first one. I didn't dislike it, I just didn't really see it.
Me and my partner thought that this second one was good. I don't think it was great, overall it was predictable in some places, but the cinematography and the directing was really enjoyable. I think the audience at the movie theater also enjoyed it since they gave it a short applause at the end (first time I saw something like that happen).
I think it was good enough, maybe not as good as the original but I think it was a success.
I was entertained. The first one is still better, but I enjoyed the 2nd.
since historical accuracy isn't a thing anyway, somewhere out there there was a story of lucius who now stripped of his privilege and needing to survive becomes like denzel's character to claw back his way to power. the contrast to ideals he was raised with and needing to return to the 'good' side. if that kind of character returned back to ideals it would have so much more weight and conflict.
Funny to hear Jake’s criticism and then the guys who are like “DEI Wokeness etc”
Ya jake actually explains why it’s bad while those people just find bad movies then say it’s bad because DEI
@ Happens way too often
you guys replaced Chris Struckmann for me, it’s Jeremy and then you guys. Thank you!!
Also, baby coming soon💚💚💚
Mescal's speech at the end didn't even really seem like the corny anachronistic liberalism you get in Gladiator I - like, he spends his whole climax talking about 'strength and honour', predicates his authority on being the grandson of a prior emperor, and makes his appeal directly to a pair of militant armies with whom he presumably intends to take over the city. So, like, basically old school Mussolini fascism?
Something something John Carter of Mars
Minor correction, more like speech to a military and secret service. The Praetorian are basically body guards. Hate that both films don't have their edgy scorpion banner cause the Praetorian were historically cartoonishly evil.
i think it wouldve been cooler if this movie had followed paul mescal playing a random dude that denzel plots to present as the son of maximus as a way of seizing power. paul mescal and the audience could have been told by denzel that he was the son of maximus, without it being true. it might be too silly but he could have had to fight the real son in the coliseum later.
Watch "I'm Still Here", one of the best movies release this year.
Yea, I'm big with Jake on this one. Watched Gladiator before II like you guys, so similiar experience. This movie's plot is so damn lazy! Felt no emotion at all while watching it. Some of my biggest gripes (I could write a 20pg essay but I will try to keep it short):
1- It's like they split Maximus' character into Mescal and Pedro. Pascal is the general that falls out with the Emperor, and Mescal is the "husband to a murdered wife". None of the two gets enough motivation and characterization to really get behind them.
2 - The murdered wife at the beggining was so obvious and lazy. The first second I saw her i went "oh so they are going for the murdered family thing again".
3 - Mescal's character is extremely bland and has very little charisma. You understand why the Gladiators get behind Maximus on the first movie; in this one, it feels like it happens just because it has to.
4 - Denzel's plan was so off the charts insane. This dude murders two Emperors easily, with no consequences, has basically no political or military support but one single senator, and expects to rise to power just because the Emperors are disliked by the people? And because he is made consul by one of them, which he publicly murders. Why would anyone side with him after the Emperors are dead?
5- Lucilla sending Lucius away is so contrived. Why would he be in danger? She is basically one of the most powerful people in Rome by the end of the 1st movie. Why would she send the sole heir to a freaking village in Africa? Couldn't you just protect him in Rome? So dumb.
6- The way everyone just believes he is Lucius is fucking insane.
Honestly, just felt like they made a much worse version of the first movie. Would have been better to make something more original.
"...just felt like they made a much worse version of the first movie..." The main problem with every bad sequel.
Could've used more of that missing lover footage trope from Community.
11:10 These were baboons, only some had lost their hair. The filmmakers were trying to show the poor conditions in which the animals were kept.
I personally loved the movie. 8/10
Gotta agree with Jake here
i have only seen 3 videos from this channel but does nadiya love every movie?
Thank you Jake. This movie was lazy and I kept thinking about how much I wanted to rewatch Gladiator as well as Top Gun: Maverick cuz that was an excellent lega-sequel.
I really like the first movie. I also liked the second movie, but more as a guilty pleasure.
I have to be honest. I saw the first Gladiator movie last year after finding out about the 2nd movie being in production. I had always seen several scenes from it on cable TV when i was younger but never got around to it.
I gotta say, the first movie is overrated af. I was expecting some kind of masterpiece but all i got was a pretty good movie. That's it. I felt sympathy but not empathy for Maximus' loss. The same goes for this movie except this movie missed the mark on some of the motivations for several characters and has a rushed ending.
Overall:
Gladiator I: 7.5 to 8/10
Gladiator II: 6.5 to 7/10
II is worse than I but not by much. And i found Gladiator 1 a bit underwhelming given the hype and accolades surrounding it.
I agree, I just watched the first one before the second came out. First Gladiator was fine, I think it was a solid revenge movie but it didn’t impress me. I think it’s fun to look at these movies at plays put on screen, but I feel really have to suspend your disbelief, moreso than other movies.
more like badiator poo amirite
If you wanna see the bottom of the trough in terms of ridley scott then you should watch Exodus. Not having seen glad2 yet I am confident it is high art compared to Exodus 😂
I definitely don't hate it as much as Jake did...but I'm more on his side than Nadia's.
I found it fine to decent for the most part-with a few performances and moments that made their way into "great"
But overall it didn't work out to anything exceptional; and as the first Gladiator is *so* good, just being "okay" hurts it all the more.
Jake is spot on.
I think they both make good points, but I have to say it is indeed hilarious how this movie just straight up tells us Maximus’s sacrifice was pointless since his son’s life was still in danger anyway, so much so that he was sent away to basically a life of suffering.
And OMG those fucking terrible ugly CGI monkeys. Yes, the rest of the movie was compelling, but that scene almost killed any type of interest I had for the movie (which was at that point pretty low because I think the beginning pretty much sucks).
These were baboons, only some had lost their hair. The filmmakers were trying to show the poor conditions in which the animals were kept.
I never intended to watch the sequel but was forced to because my family was weirdly excited about it, the trailer looked like a mindless rehash of the first film, but i guess that's what some folks want, just the thing they liked but done again
So i watched it expecting just a fun movie with no substance, and that's what i got 🤷♂️ it was fun, dumb and i liked the scene with the river styx
It wasn't great like the first film
Ridley Scott is just cooked. He made 2 iconic movies in the span of 3 years early in his career, then made Thelma and Louise and Gladiator later, but other than that he is a director who has churned out a bunch of forgettable movies that have only gotten worse as he has aged
Seriously I suggest just go to watch Benhur instead if anyone like Gladiator but want something different.
I thought... it was really, really bad.
The movie was what what it wanted to be it just did not want to be a good movie
I hadn't seen the first movie until last weekend, thought it was great. Saw the second one yesterday, it was just okay. I think the best way to describe it was Braveheart wearing a Gladiator skin suit.
Frankly i kind of resented that lucius was related to maximus. I understand that its incredibly plausible. But maximus' story has such strong finality to it that it feels really foolish to add even a single word more to it, instead of just fleshing out lucius and lucilla as people seperate from maximus. This sort of decision feels like if the sequel trilogy of star wars had rey be related to luke skywalker. Just leave him out! Or at the very least do not make them related.
I'm somewhere between you guys, it was fine and entertaining but nowhere near as good as the first. I don't remember the first movie being as vibrant as Jake says though, I always thought that movie was quite muddy and washed out, intentionally so. Maybe thats just the dvd and Blu-ray copies I've been watching all these years
4:33 🤦♂️
18:30 😂😂
watch gladiator II before (re)watching gladiator
Human carrying Woman? Woman carrying Human?
Love the videos but let her speak 😭
I really found this movie frustrating, not cuz its unnecessary, but because the writing sucked so much. And sure its an ‘action’ movie but you actually gave a shit in the first film, the story was engaging, the characters, the ideas. None of that here. The same screenwriter from Napoleon and All The Money in the World wrote this film and it shows from minute one when the movie can’t conjure up a fucking inkling of engaging interesting dialogue, his wife is a token default dead wife character, the speech Lucius makes is so dull and confusing it makes no impact, we see none of his prior life or what he cares about or his leader Jugurtha. And thats just the start. The dialogue is so childishly dull and dumbed down that none of the stakes are interesting at all except as visual noise
I'm really not into that first film having watched it for the first time yesterday. Maybe I had to be there for it back then, but it was very played out, cheesy, and the action choppy. Not sure how I'll like the second one.
I agree with the guy. The story was terrible. Spoiler:
How do we even know Macrinus was bad or good? He wanted go get rid of current authorities and rule Rome, but to do what with it??? And Lucius is going to do what? He is not competent in ruling.
The death od the wife was at battle, it was not personal, taking it personally made Lucius look like a moron.
It makes sense for him to take it personally. Rome messed up his life and the one happiness he found was then lost as well
I don't think 'It's worse than the original' is particularly helpful criticism when the original is one of the best films ever made. I came out of Alien Romulus and my friend's only feedback was that it was worse than Alien. I was like.... you were expecting it to be better than than Alien? Are you stupid? Compare it to other action films you've seen this year.
Wow Ridley's made some bangers hasn't he
As a history nerd and cinemaphile, this movie made me sick, and had me almost walk out 5 times.
Also the only genuinely good or great Ridley Scott movie in the last 10 years is The Martian.
The rest have been like Jake said, he just is sleepwalking his way through the twilight of his career.
9/10? hahahahhahaahahahahahahha
I'd genuinely give this a 3/10. I was that disgusted by just about every aspect of this film. It failed in EVERY capacity. And I say that because the only good things were ripped straight from the first one, so I don't even give it credit. Oh yeah Denzel was servicable, but miscast. (or told to perform in a miscast manner)
I was waiting for Jake to go off on this one. It was a disjointed mess
Nadia's review scores are always so entertaining, she's always so different to how I see things haha! I think Jake's summary of the films points, how it was shot and cgi'd out the wazoo with cheesy liberal values chucked in at the end, retconning Gladiator 1's ending... That's kind of what I was expecting from it really, never planned on watching it
Ever since Prometheus, Ridley Scott should have just bounced or otherwise pulled a Francis ford Coppola. Just start doing weird, maybe bad, at least memorable shit. He keeps trying to chase James Cameron with these big movies that are boring.
Man’s favourite author is Solzhenitsyn. Also, cute couple.
The ending of both movies (restoring the republic) is such nonsense, if Napoleon ended with Bonaparte uniting Europe and founding the EU it would be as inaccurate as Paul Mescal restoring the Republic in the 3rd Century AD.
ha ha ha ha ha