BetterHelp agreed to pay $7.8 million to settle the FTC's charges, first announced in March 2023, that it used and revealed sensitive consumer data-specifically email addresses, IP addresses, and answers to personal health questions-for advertising purposes.
Everyone's been screaming this for the last few years at him but he's never gonna stop. I don't get it. I know we all need to pay bills but there has got to be other sponsors out there on YT
Then your quibbling over semantics moron. People don't watch movies to criticise the reviewer, they watch movies to criticise the film. And if the review isn't descriptive enough for you. Then go see it and judge for yourself. Thats the point of the question, genious.
Agreed it was a terrible movie... it was bland and had absolutely nothing to add to the original, plus Denzel was on his trainning day MO... it was awful...
@@channelZER01people who try to dismiss peoples opinion on someone else’s opinion is a dumb opinion because everything being said is an opinion therefore your opinion about his opinion about Chris’ opinion being wrong because he likes all movies is pointless.
Hasn't made a good movie since the Martian. Feels like he's doing like Clint eastwood just pumping them out faster as he ages he delegating all the work which makes decent but not great products.
Ridley Scott has to be on the Mt. Rushmore of filmmakers for not only creating some of the most influential films ever, but to still be this strong at this age, and this consistent.
Note: I prefer Cameron as a filmmaker, but Scott is fantastic. You think of those two with someone like Spielberg and Kubrick. Hitchcock too. That has to be the 5 most influential imo.
@ I just mean consistently putting out well made films still is crazy. It’s a team effort too though. The last film of his I really enjoyed was The Last Duel. Solid film.
No. Tarantino, Spielberg, Scorsese, Kubrick. Ridley Scott, while the director of some of my favorite movies, has been pretty inconsistent. It's hit-or-miss.
@flonoiisana4647 Nah. He's alright. You're just an asshole. You want to watch a reviewer who tears one every movie you don't like? There are plenty of reviewers like that. Just go watch those.
I think the dude is trolling us by now. He sounds so robotic and fake. I haven't watched any of his videos in YEARS since that video of him telling us about his preference identity. I couldn't care less. Now... He's not even the shadow of himself, just a robot programmed to praise Hollywood. And he's either really bad at it or just trolling us. lol
Seeing a lot of people talking shit about Chris' opinion as if he should just follow what the "majority" thinks about. He has stated in the past that he would review movies with a more optimistic view and only the ones that he liked or wanted to talk about. I think a lot of you guys are just too deep into the hateful reviews that youtube has pushed over the years. You can enjoy a movie or two without thinking if sharks ruin it or not (not particularly a fan of it myself, but I enjoyed the movie as a whole) Let chris speak his mind however he wants, because its HIS opinion, not yours. You can desagree, of course, in a healthy way instead of a toxic one.
I would totally agree with this point if the review was articulated well enough. Most of the opinion he had was "it's good cause it was good," and that's not exactly the job of a reviewer. Reviewers exist to help the consumer make choices and to spark discussion about works of art. There was no passion behind this overly positive review that mostly ignores huge inconsistencies in the narrative. Also, the better help ad was a bad move.
People blame Chris for being too safe and afraid to say anything critical. Yet Chris is saying he doesn't rate the first "Gladiator" as high as a very large number of people do:) Despite him focusing on the positive things he has outlined for himself in terms of film making and trends in big studio movies, I still don't see this review proclaiming the sequel is great, so I don't know why people are so upset he's not just bashing the movie (most everyone expected to be mediocre at best either way). P.S. Or maybe I'm wrong and we have a production podcast with Riddley Scott coming out next, but then I'll listen to it gladly:)
Better Help is a dangerous and misleading product/service. Also, does anyone know that guy who made the Stuckmann cartoon thing still going? Lol that guy was awesome.
Nah, Better Help's gotten better. I think there's testimony for UA-camrs on Reddit who did some research and say they feel safe doing ads for them now.
I've never seen the first movie, so I can't judge it, but I realy liked the sequel. The only thing I thougt was realy stupid were the sharks. How the f did they get the sharks, all the way from the ocean to the collosseum?? They are fish! They can't breath air! How the hell did they transported them? They didn't had tanks back then! And they could've easily solved this by switching the sharks with crocodiles. Crocodiles are reptiles and therefore breath air. They can survive on land and being transported in boxes. I know it's a historical fact that they actually could floaded the collosseum and they did had water-battles back then. But I highly doubt that they had sharks in the water. Otherwise, great movie. (Sorry for my bad english.)
Terrible take. Gladiator II is rubbish. Story was incoherent and full of holes or unreasonable events. No back story given to the main villains and those emperors were so pathetically weak in character that I was surprised anyone with a sword put up with them for 5 mins if they were real people. I was yawning non stop half way into the movie. You don't get any connection to the main character and he doesn't earn his respect like Maximas does in the original - just starts randomly leading. His ending speech was completely uninspiring, the resolution to the tension between him and his mum came out of nowhere with no explanation, the final fight is meh, the cgi animals are horrible and finally the music is completely forgettable. How can you even think of praising this movie?
I really wanted this movie to be good, but i share you exact sentiment, plus the dialogue was bordering on cringe at times. I feel like this should've been stretched into a miniseries with explanation of characters and some build up.
@ nah, Cleopatra involves Julius Ceasar, Augustus, Marcus Antonius, Agrippa, the two civil wars of rome, battle of Actium +++ One of the most eventful periods in history that changed the world forever.
And a war general probably responsible for a lot of other people's tragedies. For the glory of Rome... That's my main problem with the first film, even though the character acknowledges this himself, but we as audience tend to ignore it. Because the movie is that good.
Just seen it and I wholly disagree with you. The story was all over the place, with no real protagonists, no real villains, no real goals. They tried to do several things at once and it totally messed up the pacing and all character arcs fell short, which made it feel like being too short and too long at the same time. The action was good, the cast's acting was good, but apart from that the movie just wasn't good.
It was NOT good. I don't even take Chris's reviews seriously anymore, he caters to powerful people in the industry. I've already unsubscribed, I was just bored and wanted to hear other's thoughts on the film.
Honestly I never understood the hype around that movie...it's just some bland movie to me to the point I like Troy better (and I find Troy bland too).it's not that epic..maybe it's just me🤷🏿♂️
@@demejiuk5660 Those are fine... huge sharks on the other hand?? How do you transport them across land? How do you fill the Colisseum with salt water?? Not fresh water they could get through the aqueducts?? And yeah, there were naval fights in the Colisseum, but the water was most likely very VERY shallow and the ships on wheels... otherwise the basement floors would have flooded. Anyway, the least of the problems.
Yes! Thank you for being a good reviewer of movies! I can’t take people criticizing this movie seriously, it was fantastic.. CGI was not great in a few scenes, but other than that, it was an extremely well made movie.. After watching this film, my only guess for the “critics@ is that they consist of People want to hate it because that’s the internet told them to think, or they’re butt hurt a sequel was made at all, or they can’t separate historical accuracy from entertainment
I really felt Denzel was a complete miscast for this movie. Fantastic actor but just not for this role. This movie was pretty good but had a lot of flaws… more or less the same plot of the first movie, cartoonish villains, baboon cgi, rushed plot at times and characters you don’t really care about.
Ridley Scott one of the only directors using the r rating in a movie in a way that seems worth it, he also utilized current VFX the right way, achieving gore that is better than the only practical methods of the past, he also understands when to use CGI. The scale of the sets and the amount of extras he uses really ground the rest of the effects.
I don't think Gladiator II is anywhere as good as the first movie. Or even one of Ridley Scott's best. But there was ONE set piece in the Colosseum that made me go "That is SO cool," so it's nice to see Scott knows how to make cool action in his 80s.
The movie was not bad. But I think this review was too nice to the movie. The First Movie: The first movie was a very well-executed epic with great story beats and a plot that is grounded in reality and sets up characters and their motivations very well. I wasn't crazy about it, but it's a good 8/10 movie with minor problems like Commodus being way too evil and not having his own motivations to rule Rome except for being evil and insecure, or the fact that the romance between Maximus and Aurelius' daughter was very forced and unnecessary. Beyond that, the movie had a great narrative that legitimately made you worry about what happens next. It had great suspenseful moments like when Commodus realized who the Gladiator was or when Maximus had to fight Commodus with an unfair stab to his chest before the fight. Those were incredibly great moments. --- The Second Movie's Problems: I enjoyed the second movie thoroughly, but there are certain things like the unbearable number of characters and the failure to flesh these characters out well enough that brought the movie down for me. Pedro Pascal's character was like a copy-paste of Russell Crowe, and it felt like his entire arc could have been replaced by Lucius' own mother, as the conflict between the two was basically identical to the conflict between Lucius and his mom. I would not be surprised if the execs wanted a famous face to stamp on the posters and wrote a character just for Pascal. The two brothers were by far the worst part of the movie. They were described as evil and corrupt rulers of Rome, but it was never shown in the movie itself. They mostly behaved like edgy, pretentious stoners in their late teens who love to watch gore, and any motivation beyond that was completely missing. The monkey that one of the two had was an incredibly weird attempt at comedy, and it felt out of place. Lucius' motivations were flown over at a rapid pace. He had a wife who was killed in battle, and the bond they had was not conveyed well enough. In the first movie, the bond was conveyed through Maximus' insatiable need to see his family. He was in huge mental distress at the thought of not seeing his family, and the build-up to him losing his wife and child took the time it needed to. It happens around the 40-minute mark in the first movie. Lucius lost his wife within the first 5 minutes of the movie, and he pretty much forgets her in order to replace his motivations for his seething hate of Rome. His "power" wasn't set up as well as Maximus'. The first movie took a great deal of time to prepare how strong and intelligent Maximus was, and you feel that during the fights. Lucius, on the other hand, was exactly like Maximus in battle strength and intelligence, but there was no real reason why he would be so triumphant. Denzel Washington's character was underwhelming. The way he moved the chess pieces in the narrative was not conveyed well enough, and his intentions weren't clear, in a way that made him look more like a loose cannon and less like a mysterious mastermind. He did have a pretty impeccable smile, though. The movie attempted to have these very strong story beats similar to what I mentioned about the first movie, where you genuinely feel for the consequences of what is happening, like the moment when Lucius meets Pedro Pascal's character, but these moments lacked a lot of weight. The stakes felt less important because they weren't treated with the same thoughtfulness and patience for the narrative. The final showdown was incredibly weak compared to the first one, which was very unexpected considering the fact that most of the action scenes were a big improvement from the first movie. There wasn't a huge presence of conflict between Lucius and Denzel Washington's character. Yes, it was the good guy vs. the corrupt guy, but the interpersonal weight of why Lucius was fighting this guy just was not there. In general, the relationship between these two characters was incredibly weak. It was the classic good man vs. bad man and not much beyond that. The movie even does this extremely weird thing at the end, where it teases you with this MASSIVE amount of soldiers ready to fight against each other, and it purposely does not deliver, which would have been okay if the final showdown wasn't such a wet towel of a fight. The small moments, like when Maximus put down his sword when Commodus pretended to not have one anymore, only to pull out a hidden dagger from his chest piece, added SO MUCH to the interpersonal conflict within the action scenes that sadly was missing in the second movie. The score was a complete reuse of the score from the first film. I admit the original score was amazing, but it relied way too much on it. There was not even one new theme, and while it's okay to repurpose music from the first movie, it stripped a lot of essence away from this movie, and it felt like it was attempting to recreate certain emotions by only using the original score. The cinematography was quite boring, and a few shots were even pretty awful to look at. Certain dialogue scenes were shot in ways where the frame composition felt lopsided and filled with weird empty space that felt uneven. --- The Second Movie's Successes: Lucius' character was great, in my opinion. A fear I had was that he was going to be a bland copy-paste of Maximus, but he successfully managed to be his own character-a way more in-your-face, verbal version of Maximus with a great deal of depth. I enjoyed seeing him open his mouth and say these very aggressive things during moments where Maximus would have remained quiet. He definitely managed to be his own character with his own faults and attributes. The action scenes were executed a lot better-no more shaky visuals and no more awkward cuts when anything gory happened. And also gone is the choppy, slowed-down footage from the first movie. The main conflict and story felt like a very valid continuation of the first film. It made perfect sense for Lucius to be the next main character, and the very broad strokes of the narrative-the bones-were definitely strong enough to get invested in. There was definitely heart in the relationship between Lucius and his mother. I enjoyed the weight of a long-lost son, who had completely changed since he was a kid, hesitantly reconnecting with his mother. The doctor was a great character. Yes, he was very nice and not fleshed out as much as I would have liked, but there was still enough substance to his personality, and he felt like one of the few genuinely kind-hearted people in the movie. It was really satisfying to see him do as Lucius said, calling the troops and releasing him from his cell, as the bond between the two felt very believable. Although the doctor definitely did trust Lucius a little too quickly. It's a very basic 6/10. It didn't feel like a waste of time. But it definitely lacks a great deal of the careful writing present in the first film. Chris, u went too easy on this one.
He's doing this to get his directorial career off the ground. Actually critiquing the work of others will make him enemies. I get the rationale but he ends up abandoning his core fanbase
sooo true , once people become popular they play safe, his reviews became very boring and not interesting. i would rather hear something i disagree with but at least i can see that the person is speaking from his heart . p.s. that is why Roger Ebert will always be my fav movie critic
This is such a shitty take and it’s on every stuckmann review. How hard is it to understand that a guy who is now making films, doesn’t want his main job to be constantly shitting on others work. Being a “reviewer” is already a lame ass job. You constantly judge others work while not making anything yourself or ever having to prove any credentials. The man had a change of perspective once he actually got real experience making films and decided to stop pumping negativity into film discussion. The reviews still point out what is well done in every movie which is really the most important part. There’s also about 10,000 + movie review channels that are also on UA-cam you can watch. Stop fucking complaining that the endless free content this man provides isn’t exactly what you want it to be.
I disagree this movie didn’t reed a sequel and Denzel totally took me out of movie walking and talking like he does in all his movies, it wasn’t time period appropriate
I used to go to your channel all the time before going to see a movie, like a little ritual to myself. Sadly I don't think I relate to your videos anymore. I'm sad to see shorter videos with a lot of gushing over Hollywood and the scale/looks of movies. Where's the complex character analysis, the articulate, cinema-lover discourse that you used to have? I'll still support your works and your channel because you work hard and I know you're passionate, but I'm a bit disapointed honestly. :(
Clocking at around 2 hours and 30 minutes, I have been totally engaged throughout without getting disengaged for one second. After a long time, I saw a movie where I wanted to have more even after 2 hours and 30 minutes of run time. A masterpiece of a movie.
Its honestly an indictment on his role as a reviewer. The first one is literally my favorite film of all time. For him to admit hes only seen it twice is insane.
The movie should had came out around the late 2000s(between the final destination/paranormal activity days). It was a cool movie concept but you feel like you already know what they plan to do with the concept and then they hit you with an ending that felt out of nowhere(like some kingdom of the crystals type of pazaz) 6.9/10
It’s got big boots, sorry, sandals to fill. If you like epic historical films, Ridley Scott’s Kingdom of Heaven (must be the directors cut though, which is infinitely better than the theatrical) is up there
I'm thankful you mentioned you're not a huge fan of the original. I am. I actually think it's the greatest achievement in modern cinema. So I'm skeptical to see II out of fear it will tarnish the original.
If you're a huge fan of the first one, you'll definitely feel like something's missing. I'm not going into detail, but it'll feel like most sequels out there: too big of a shoe to fill
Glad to see Ridley Scott didn't try to push his boots with gladiator. Alien he can get away with being a smart story and slow paced but something like Gladiator. I'm glad to see Ridley just made something entertaining
Pedro and Denzel stole the show. When Pascal claimed Numidia for Rome, you could tell right there he was struggling with the pressures put upon him. Excellent performace.
Yet another review that Chris Stuckman is avoiding any real criticism. The closest thing to a real criticism is "some people might say this" or "some people will say that".
Chris says it's good, Jeremy Jahns says it's okay, and the girl from beyond the trailer says it terrible. I tend to believe Chris over all. We have very similar taste is movies. I think I'll enjoy this film.
The public cannot trust Chris' opinion anymore, hence the low views 😢 Especially if it is a director he reveres, Chris is not going to be transparent in his reviews.
Movies are very subjective, I've discovered that if they have more than 7.5 or 8 on IMDb, most probably it's good, 6.5 to 7 is ok but forgettable and lower than that won't be enough to pay the ticket
2000 / People watch Gladiator and go home with their own opinions. 2024 / People watch Gladiator and go home and watch UA-cam reviews, scroll social media for unconscious biases, and have it out in comment sections.
I know it's a Hollywood movie, but the historical innacuracy really took me out of it. There are TOO MANY anachronisms to count. And I get it, it's not really the point of the movie, but some things were so easily avoidable (the actress wearing a corset? In ancient rome?) !
@@rtleesontrue, but historical accuracy allows for credibility. The colosseum was flooded but no sharks. Do you think if they included a few dragons, it would have made for a better movie.
Gladiator 1 is like Terminator 2 for me. It all ended with those movies. Granted, I might catch this one eventually on a rental sale, but I really have zero interest to revisit this. I feel like Gladiator had the perfect ending to an incredible movie. There is no reason to come up with something just to justify a sequel, even 24 years later. There is a reason every Terminator movie after 2 has been horrendous. It's what happens when studios request a movie to be made just to bank coin and not really put that much effort in the grand scheme.
Gladiator 1 was based on the works of David Franzoni, who pitched to Steven Spielberg, sparked the interest of DreamWorks Pictures, they bought it and re-wrote multiple times with the talents of those days before hiring Ridley Scott to direct the movie. Gladiator 2 was pitched by Ridley... and the rest is history.
@awesomedavid2012 I pick my battles. I have to live with the downsides of UA-cam if i want the user generated content I consume. But why would i pay better help to sell all my most confidential information when there are plenty of alternatives that don't.
The big difference between the 2 movies, to me, is the feeling you end up at the end. In Gladiator, at the end, I was really moved. In Gladiator II I was "yeah, whatever..." Bonus point: If you are an european like me with some knowledge about the Roman Empire, the threshold for the suspension of disbelief is way higher. Gladiator I also had its problems with historical accuracy but it was so good that I didn't care. The second one do not really past my test. PD: Denzel Washington was great (as always).
_Anyone_ not obsessed with the first film is weird. My mom went to see it in her 40s, and when she got home, she said, "Oh my god! Burst! Spatter! Slash!" She was so cranked that she pulled a kitchen knife out and started waving it around and making the noises. The Roman Empire impresses everyone in the collective Western world, not just men, who do not, in fact, think about it every day or whatever that ridiculous meme was lol.
@@squamish4244I yawned while watching the first movie. A d I barely remember anything about it although I just watched it last year. Lol It's overrated. Highly
Booked to watch this in IMAX with Laser on the UK’s widest screen on Saturday. Looking forward to it. Shall rewatch the first movie in 4K a day or two beforehand. Thank you Chris.
Gladiator 2 - Is the Wish version of the original Gladiator, at best.. Mescals character was under developed.. His fight scenes were all the same (I mean, how many times can you lose your weapon??). Washington, whilst easily the best actor by a country mile, could have been in American Gangster or training Day again, rather than ancient Rome.. And the story line was pissweak - I mean Mescal goes from hating Rome to wanting to defend it, overnight, for no given reason.. Goes from wanting to kill Pascal, to fight for his honour, for no substantive reason.. A very ugly second cousin at best, to the original.. And shouldnt have been invited to the wedding.. 6/10
This review is insane. It’s absolute trash and a stain on the first. It’s a carbon copy in plot with AI writing, horrendous casting and acting with jarring editing.
Napoleon, House of Gucci, Covenant, All The Money in The World...Exodus God's & Kings. Not what I'd call "running circles" I'd take any of, Del Toro, Villinuve, George Miller, Scorsese, Nolan, Fincher, Tarantino, PT Anderson over him these days.
Ok, napoleon director cut is actually good, House of gucci whilst underwhelming is still a decent movie, Alien covenant is a solid movie, all the money in the world and Exodus I really like. I'm not ridley fanatic but ur trying to pretend he's been making stinkers when he simply hasn't, look at all the Imdb scores for these movies and you'll see. Also u casually forgot to mention The last Duel and prometheus which are good
@@joebond545 some good points of discussion there. I'd like to ask you though, do you think he's Running Circles Around Everyone in the Business? That's the point I was trying to make. I think that's a pretty wild statement & one I feel would be difficult to argue. I don't think most people would have him as a top 10 director (currently). Obviously Chris disagrees.
I'm just glad the movie doesn't suck. If it's good I'll go and see it just to make sure we get more movies like this, and hopefully even better, perhaps even original.
BetterHelp agreed to pay $7.8 million to settle the FTC's charges, first announced in March 2023, that it used and revealed sensitive consumer data-specifically email addresses, IP addresses, and answers to personal health questions-for advertising purposes.
1:41 the review for this movie starts in this time stamp
honestly I'll just stop watching, this is ridiculous
thankyou
Thanks hero
I was about to say the same! Wow Chris really has sold out. Embarrassing
Sad states of affairs that one has to point this out.
Better help is a scam. Stop Chris!
No they aren't
No one cares
Everyone's been screaming this for the last few years at him but he's never gonna stop. I don't get it. I know we all need to pay bills but there has got to be other sponsors out there on YT
Evidently he’s getting something out of the sponsorship
Why is better help a scam?
You will better help us by not advertising for them!
We said that dozens of times alread yet he doesn't give a fuck about our opinion while we should be okay with his...
What's wrong with better help?
@@krabben135 You're better off with another help.
You guys have a victim mentality and don't actually use critical thinking at all
@@christophermd216 lmaoo rich coming from a blind religious nut case
It's all about Hans Zimmer with the first one
Yes love Hansi ❤️
Agreed!
Maybe, but there were other strengths in that film, beyond Hans Zimmer's amazing score.
@@herbsuperb6034 Yet watching the second movie, by far the best scenes are the ones that feature his music.
@@herbsuperb6034I only remember the music.
Ridley Scott is perpetually 55 in my brain. Hearing that he’s 86 was jarring. Excited to see this
he's still going strong, it's inspiring for sure. Nothing can stop him.
@@thiscorrosion900he’s sharper than Joe Biden
@@thiscorrosion900till he’s 90 rings a bit too true for him
Then your quibbling over semantics moron. People don't watch movies to criticise the reviewer, they watch movies to criticise the film. And if the review isn't descriptive enough for you. Then go see it and judge for yourself. Thats the point of the question, genious.
@@thiscorrosion900 Nothing can stop him...except time.
Can’t wait for saving private Ryan 2 !
Russia defeated Nazi Germany.
@@eazymethod01troll
That was directed by Spielberg lol unless I'm missing something ?
@ congratulations ! you missed the point !
Earn this
The original is so nostalgic to me, one of my favorites. 😊
The problem with Chris is that he likes every movie. Including ones that are obviously bad to everyone else.
I was like .. did we watch the same movie 😂😂😂
It's called an opinion lol. I liked the movie too
Ikr, this was mid as fuck
Agreed it was a terrible movie... it was bland and had absolutely nothing to add to the original, plus Denzel was on his trainning day MO... it was awful...
@@channelZER01people who try to dismiss peoples opinion on someone else’s opinion is a dumb opinion because everything being said is an opinion therefore your opinion about his opinion about Chris’ opinion being wrong because he likes all movies is pointless.
I like Gladiator II. Went to see it with my dad and brother. A worthy successor to the first film, which is a rarity of a sequel.
“Are you not entertained!?”
Audience: NO!!!!!
Gladiator II is a failure
I loved it. Had so much fun. The only bit I thought was not great was Paul's acting a bit.
@@nathanborger6551 The Baboon fight is when I clocked out for a while and was like HUH? the VFX was laughably bad and then Denzel sucked me back in
I was.
I was very much entertained
Ridley turns 87 this month by the way.
shows with the quality of his movies turning to a pile of Alzheimer's and shit
@@guneytopal7076 He could direct a better movie with Alzheimers than a young punk like you with ADHD or Autism.
Giving Ridley credit for energy of the movie when he's not acting in it is odd.
The release timescale of Chris's shit movie will also exceed 87 years too.
Hasn't made a good movie since the Martian. Feels like he's doing like Clint eastwood just pumping them out faster as he ages he delegating all the work which makes decent but not great products.
You can't beat that first movie. You just can't. Especially the amazing soundtrack.
The second movie don't have to beat the first movie to be a good movie on its own... we already know the first one is a masterpiece to begin with bruh
But it in my opinion it needed to be more to exist, because there was no reason for it to exist.
yes you can lol
the 2nd movie is good. That's all I got to say
That’s what they said about the matrix and terminator 1 now in the future everyone likes the sequels and let’s not mention aliens too
Ridley Scott has to be on the Mt. Rushmore of filmmakers for not only creating some of the most influential films ever, but to still be this strong at this age, and this consistent.
Note: I prefer Cameron as a filmmaker, but Scott is fantastic. You think of those two with someone like Spielberg and Kubrick. Hitchcock too. That has to be the 5 most influential imo.
@@TheProphegyprobably like 15 years ago but nowadays he’s been very inconsistent. Im glad Gladiator 2 is good though.
@ I just mean consistently putting out well made films still is crazy. It’s a team effort too though. The last film of his I really enjoyed was The Last Duel. Solid film.
No. Tarantino, Spielberg, Scorsese, Kubrick. Ridley Scott, while the director of some of my favorite movies, has been pretty inconsistent. It's hit-or-miss.
@ Scorsese, I agree, I don’t know how I forgot him. I’m a massive Tarantino fan but Cameron >>>
Just checking in. Are yall still pretending bad movies dont exist over here?
Yup, just confirmed it myself
@flonoiisana4647 Nah. He's alright. You're just an asshole. You want to watch a reviewer who tears one every movie you don't like? There are plenty of reviewers like that. Just go watch those.
he said he won't present any more bad films. apparently he still needs content to upload
Do you watch movie reviews just to have your opinion confirmed by someone else?
I think the dude is trolling us by now. He sounds so robotic and fake. I haven't watched any of his videos in YEARS since that video of him telling us about his preference identity. I couldn't care less. Now... He's not even the shadow of himself, just a robot programmed to praise Hollywood. And he's either really bad at it or just trolling us. lol
I watched this movie in IMAX in a packed theater, and mostly everyone came out saying how good it was.
Seeing a lot of people talking shit about Chris' opinion as if he should just follow what the "majority" thinks about. He has stated in the past that he would review movies with a more optimistic view and only the ones that he liked or wanted to talk about. I think a lot of you guys are just too deep into the hateful reviews that youtube has pushed over the years. You can enjoy a movie or two without thinking if sharks ruin it or not (not particularly a fan of it myself, but I enjoyed the movie as a whole) Let chris speak his mind however he wants, because its HIS opinion, not yours. You can desagree, of course, in a healthy way instead of a toxic one.
I would totally agree with this point if the review was articulated well enough. Most of the opinion he had was "it's good cause it was good," and that's not exactly the job of a reviewer.
Reviewers exist to help the consumer make choices and to spark discussion about works of art. There was no passion behind this overly positive review that mostly ignores huge inconsistencies in the narrative.
Also, the better help ad was a bad move.
In 2024 Chris doesn't want to review or be honest with bad movies. This movie is as Mid as it gets. Its not terrible not good. Just mid
Despite its good or bad, Denzel Washington is gonna be the best part of the movie, he looks so badass as the bad guy
He is not the bad guy, Pedro Pascal and the Twin emperor are smh
Denzel Washington is the mentor of the main protagonist in the movie
@@Sssaid17 Denzel, Washington from the trailer seems to be a mix of both, I think he’s going to be more of an antihero type character
"My man!!"
No one watches something called Gladiator set in Ancient Rome to see Denzel Washington
@@Sssaid17 wrong, denzel is the bad guy
People blame Chris for being too safe and afraid to say anything critical. Yet Chris is saying he doesn't rate the first "Gladiator" as high as a very large number of people do:)
Despite him focusing on the positive things he has outlined for himself in terms of film making and trends in big studio movies, I still don't see this review proclaiming the sequel is great, so I don't know why people are so upset he's not just bashing the movie (most everyone expected to be mediocre at best either way).
P.S. Or maybe I'm wrong and we have a production podcast with Riddley Scott coming out next, but then I'll listen to it gladly:)
Better Help is a dangerous and misleading product/service. Also, does anyone know that guy who made the Stuckmann cartoon thing still going? Lol that guy was awesome.
Nah, Better Help's gotten better. I think there's testimony for UA-camrs on Reddit who did some research and say they feel safe doing ads for them now.
@@andrewmathewson341 thank god the people financially incentivized to like them like them
@@andrewmathewson341 Oh well, as long as the people who are getting paid to hock it to consumers approve, then I guess it’s okay…..
video stars at 01:40
Thank you!
bruh. respect. how do yhou think the bills get paid. smh
@@Reelcargo I dont think a guy with 2 million subs is struggling with the bills , get a grip
@ I don’t think you know how this works. Do some research.
Thanks brotha!
I've never seen the first movie, so I can't judge it, but I realy liked the sequel. The only thing I thougt was realy stupid were the sharks. How the f did they get the sharks, all the way from the ocean to the collosseum?? They are fish! They can't breath air! How the hell did they transported them? They didn't had tanks back then! And they could've easily solved this by switching the sharks with crocodiles. Crocodiles are reptiles and therefore breath air. They can survive on land and being transported in boxes. I know it's a historical fact that they actually could floaded the collosseum and they did had water-battles back then. But I highly doubt that they had sharks in the water. Otherwise, great movie.
(Sorry for my bad english.)
Please watch the original movie I beg you!!
Terrible take. Gladiator II is rubbish. Story was incoherent and full of holes or unreasonable events. No back story given to the main villains and those emperors were so pathetically weak in character that I was surprised anyone with a sword put up with them for 5 mins if they were real people. I was yawning non stop half way into the movie. You don't get any connection to the main character and he doesn't earn his respect like Maximas does in the original - just starts randomly leading. His ending speech was completely uninspiring, the resolution to the tension between him and his mum came out of nowhere with no explanation, the final fight is meh, the cgi animals are horrible and finally the music is completely forgettable. How can you even think of praising this movie?
@@alexChook exactly
Relax you troll, he likes the movie. Its his opinion, just let him be
I really wanted this movie to be good, but i share you exact sentiment, plus the dialogue was bordering on cringe at times. I feel like this should've been stretched into a miniseries with explanation of characters and some build up.
@@ericyabadabadoo lol interesting how you think this only apply to me commenting on his opinion but not to you commenting on my opinion...
@@ericyabadabadoobro is doing tricks on it 🤡
I really hope Villeneuve gets to make Cleopatra as intended, that will be an epic!
That would be incredible!
Hatshepsut will be more interesting, the female faraón 👸🏻
@ nah, Cleopatra involves Julius Ceasar, Augustus, Marcus Antonius, Agrippa, the two civil wars of rome, battle of Actium +++ One of the most eventful periods in history that changed the world forever.
“Husband to a murdered wife…Father to a murdered son…”-Maximus Decimus Meridius
He has another son
" And i shall have my vengeance, in this life or the next."
And a war general probably responsible for a lot of other people's tragedies. For the glory of Rome... That's my main problem with the first film, even though the character acknowledges this himself, but we as audience tend to ignore it. Because the movie is that good.
Just seen it and I wholly disagree with you. The story was all over the place, with no real protagonists, no real villains, no real goals. They tried to do several things at once and it totally messed up the pacing and all character arcs fell short, which made it feel like being too short and too long at the same time. The action was good, the cast's acting was good, but apart from that the movie just wasn't good.
Amen.
It was NOT good. I don't even take Chris's reviews seriously anymore, he caters to powerful people in the industry. I've already unsubscribed, I was just bored and wanted to hear other's thoughts on the film.
Hollywood has Chris by the balls when it comes to honest film criticism like he used to give.
My exact same thoughts
Yea that’s why Jeremy undefeated
At this point, I think he's trolling. LOLOL You couldn't sound any more fake if you tried.
@@icemann1419 I mean, Jeremy also liked this movie.
@@icemann1419lol Jeremy also liked this movie, dum dum.
How are you not a fan of the original Gladiator?? Mind boggling
Yeah so odd to me
He literally said he really likes it.
Honestly I never understood the hype around that movie...it's just some bland movie to me to the point I like Troy better (and I find Troy bland too).it's not that epic..maybe it's just me🤷🏿♂️
The soundtrack alone 🔥
@@wambokodavid7109 it’s you.
When i see a man enter the arena riding a giant rhinoceros, i know this gonna be an action shlock.. love it
You need to drop betterhelp for a sponsor
Nah
Why?
Search youtube for BetterHelp Lost 97% In 3 Years
@@mariomario1462literally were sued and paid like a billion dollars out but ok
money is money. get that bag and stop crying
*Chris grew up as a Gladiator.*
He was never manly enough for such an honor, more like nanny or caretaker
I can't believe they actually put sharks. That's just so stupid that it's almost insulting.
Baboons?
Rhino?
@@demejiuk5660 Those are fine... huge sharks on the other hand?? How do you transport them across land? How do you fill the Colisseum with salt water?? Not fresh water they could get through the aqueducts?? And yeah, there were naval fights in the Colisseum, but the water was most likely very VERY shallow and the ships on wheels... otherwise the basement floors would have flooded. Anyway, the least of the problems.
@@Bayard1503 i'm not talking about the "how would they have done it?" angle. I just mean how extremlly OTT. And just 🤦♂🤦♂🤦♂
The movie has “jumped the shark”
I think it's a reflection to how ambicious and grandiloquent roman empire was, doesn't take the fact that was incredibly stupid
I'm seeing it with my dad in IMAX opening weekend. I can't wait!
SAME!
Yes! Thank you for being a good reviewer of movies!
I can’t take people criticizing this movie seriously, it was fantastic.. CGI was not great in a few scenes, but other than that, it was an extremely well made movie..
After watching this film, my only guess for the “critics@ is that they consist of
People want to hate it because that’s the internet told them to think,
or they’re butt hurt a sequel was made at all,
or they can’t separate historical accuracy from entertainment
All 3 of them I believe.
How much are they blackmailing Chris to have him still use BetterHelp as a sponsor.
nothing... just bunch of money. go get that bag chris.
weird take. they don't need to blackmail someone if they just pay them... ??
Holy crap dude, I haven't seen you in years
Blackmailing? How?
At this point I'm just here to know which movie is out and about. Chris has little to offer anymore.
Washington always commands the screen.
I really felt Denzel was a complete miscast for this movie. Fantastic actor but just not for this role. This movie was pretty good but had a lot of flaws… more or less the same plot of the first movie, cartoonish villains, baboon cgi, rushed plot at times and characters you don’t really care about.
Nice new lighting set up Chris. Looking pretty cinematic
Looks like he put a bright yellow light in the right side of his
Ridley Scott one of the only directors using the r rating in a movie in a way that seems worth it, he also utilized current VFX the right way, achieving gore that is better than the only practical methods of the past, he also understands when to use CGI. The scale of the sets and the amount of extras he uses really ground the rest of the effects.
Gladiator 2 is the Paul-Tyson fight.
😂😂😂
no the movie is good
I don't think Gladiator II is anywhere as good as the first movie. Or even one of Ridley Scott's best. But there was ONE set piece in the Colosseum that made me go "That is SO cool," so it's nice to see Scott knows how to make cool action in his 80s.
You saw it already?
The movie was not bad. But I think this review was too nice to the movie.
The First Movie:
The first movie was a very well-executed epic with great story beats and a plot that is grounded in reality and sets up characters and their motivations very well. I wasn't crazy about it, but it's a good 8/10 movie with minor problems like Commodus being way too evil and not having his own motivations to rule Rome except for being evil and insecure, or the fact that the romance between Maximus and Aurelius' daughter was very forced and unnecessary.
Beyond that, the movie had a great narrative that legitimately made you worry about what happens next. It had great suspenseful moments like when Commodus realized who the Gladiator was or when Maximus had to fight Commodus with an unfair stab to his chest before the fight. Those were incredibly great moments.
---
The Second Movie's Problems:
I enjoyed the second movie thoroughly, but there are certain things like the unbearable number of characters and the failure to flesh these characters out well enough that brought the movie down for me.
Pedro Pascal's character was like a copy-paste of Russell Crowe, and it felt like his entire arc could have been replaced by Lucius' own mother, as the conflict between the two was basically identical to the conflict between Lucius and his mom. I would not be surprised if the execs wanted a famous face to stamp on the posters and wrote a character just for Pascal.
The two brothers were by far the worst part of the movie. They were described as evil and corrupt rulers of Rome, but it was never shown in the movie itself. They mostly behaved like edgy, pretentious stoners in their late teens who love to watch gore, and any motivation beyond that was completely missing. The monkey that one of the two had was an incredibly weird attempt at comedy, and it felt out of place.
Lucius' motivations were flown over at a rapid pace. He had a wife who was killed in battle, and the bond they had was not conveyed well enough. In the first movie, the bond was conveyed through Maximus' insatiable need to see his family. He was in huge mental distress at the thought of not seeing his family, and the build-up to him losing his wife and child took the time it needed to. It happens around the 40-minute mark in the first movie. Lucius lost his wife within the first 5 minutes of the movie, and he pretty much forgets her in order to replace his motivations for his seething hate of Rome.
His "power" wasn't set up as well as Maximus'. The first movie took a great deal of time to prepare how strong and intelligent Maximus was, and you feel that during the fights. Lucius, on the other hand, was exactly like Maximus in battle strength and intelligence, but there was no real reason why he would be so triumphant.
Denzel Washington's character was underwhelming. The way he moved the chess pieces in the narrative was not conveyed well enough, and his intentions weren't clear, in a way that made him look more like a loose cannon and less like a mysterious mastermind. He did have a pretty impeccable smile, though.
The movie attempted to have these very strong story beats similar to what I mentioned about the first movie, where you genuinely feel for the consequences of what is happening, like the moment when Lucius meets Pedro Pascal's character, but these moments lacked a lot of weight. The stakes felt less important because they weren't treated with the same thoughtfulness and patience for the narrative.
The final showdown was incredibly weak compared to the first one, which was very unexpected considering the fact that most of the action scenes were a big improvement from the first movie.
There wasn't a huge presence of conflict between Lucius and Denzel Washington's character. Yes, it was the good guy vs. the corrupt guy, but the interpersonal weight of why Lucius was fighting this guy just was not there.
In general, the relationship between these two characters was incredibly weak. It was the classic good man vs. bad man and not much beyond that.
The movie even does this extremely weird thing at the end, where it teases you with this MASSIVE amount of soldiers ready to fight against each other, and it purposely does not deliver, which would have been okay if the final showdown wasn't such a wet towel of a fight.
The small moments, like when Maximus put down his sword when Commodus pretended to not have one anymore, only to pull out a hidden dagger from his chest piece, added SO MUCH to the interpersonal conflict within the action scenes that sadly was missing in the second movie.
The score was a complete reuse of the score from the first film. I admit the original score was amazing, but it relied way too much on it. There was not even one new theme, and while it's okay to repurpose music from the first movie, it stripped a lot of essence away from this movie, and it felt like it was attempting to recreate certain emotions by only using the original score.
The cinematography was quite boring, and a few shots were even pretty awful to look at. Certain dialogue scenes were shot in ways where the frame composition felt lopsided and filled with weird empty space that felt uneven.
---
The Second Movie's Successes:
Lucius' character was great, in my opinion. A fear I had was that he was going to be a bland copy-paste of Maximus, but he successfully managed to be his own character-a way more in-your-face, verbal version of Maximus with a great deal of depth. I enjoyed seeing him open his mouth and say these very aggressive things during moments where Maximus would have remained quiet. He definitely managed to be his own character with his own faults and attributes.
The action scenes were executed a lot better-no more shaky visuals and no more awkward cuts when anything gory happened. And also gone is the choppy, slowed-down footage from the first movie.
The main conflict and story felt like a very valid continuation of the first film. It made perfect sense for Lucius to be the next main character, and the very broad strokes of the narrative-the bones-were definitely strong enough to get invested in.
There was definitely heart in the relationship between Lucius and his mother. I enjoyed the weight of a long-lost son, who had completely changed since he was a kid, hesitantly reconnecting with his mother.
The doctor was a great character. Yes, he was very nice and not fleshed out as much as I would have liked, but there was still enough substance to his personality, and he felt like one of the few genuinely kind-hearted people in the movie. It was really satisfying to see him do as Lucius said, calling the troops and releasing him from his cell, as the bond between the two felt very believable. Although the doctor definitely did trust Lucius a little too quickly.
It's a very basic 6/10. It didn't feel like a waste of time. But it definitely lacks a great deal of the careful writing present in the first film.
Chris, u went too easy on this one.
I'm not sure how to feel about this random massive block of text from being the movie's best review I've seen
So... thank you?
@Watch-Yisus writting massive youtube comments is like my favorite pass time. It's good writing exercise and it's fun. Thank u too!
Finally a honest review that gives the film its flowers but also recognizes where it has its flaws. Thank you for this review! I enjoyed it!
@marylou2668 thanks!
I've not seen the film, but damn, many people didn't liked this film.
Chris is such a sellout. All his reviews are so safe and complimentary. What’s the point if him anymore?
he has no point anymore...
He's doing this to get his directorial career off the ground. Actually critiquing the work of others will make him enemies. I get the rationale but he ends up abandoning his core fanbase
Yes, how dare he like something!
sooo true , once people become popular they play safe, his reviews became very boring and not interesting. i would rather hear something i disagree with but at least i can see that the person is speaking from his heart .
p.s. that is why Roger Ebert will always be my fav movie critic
This is such a shitty take and it’s on every stuckmann review. How hard is it to understand that a guy who is now making films, doesn’t want his main job to be constantly shitting on others work. Being a “reviewer” is already a lame ass job. You constantly judge others work while not making anything yourself or ever having to prove any credentials. The man had a change of perspective once he actually got real experience making films and decided to stop pumping negativity into film discussion. The reviews still point out what is well done in every movie which is really the most important part. There’s also about 10,000 + movie review channels that are also on UA-cam you can watch. Stop fucking complaining that the endless free content this man provides isn’t exactly what you want it to be.
How can anyone watch that film and claim that Mescal is "so good"? Seriously, were we watching the same film?!
The lighting in this review seems different. It looks better than your other videos i think.
Gladiator 2 is AMAZING… go see it..
The thumbnail is Chris thinking about how much money this sponsorship will get him
I disagree this movie didn’t reed a sequel and Denzel totally took me out of movie walking and talking like he does in all his movies, it wasn’t time period appropriate
I used to go to your channel all the time before going to see a movie, like a little ritual to myself. Sadly I don't think I relate to your videos anymore. I'm sad to see shorter videos with a lot of gushing over Hollywood and the scale/looks of movies. Where's the complex character analysis, the articulate, cinema-lover discourse that you used to have? I'll still support your works and your channel because you work hard and I know you're passionate, but I'm a bit disapointed honestly. :(
Clocking at around 2 hours and 30 minutes, I have been totally engaged throughout without getting disengaged for one second. After a long time, I saw a movie where I wanted to have more even after 2 hours and 30 minutes of run time. A masterpiece of a movie.
Chris, the guy that's a massive childhood fan of most movies isn't a fan of Gladiator. He gave us a curve ball with this one.
@andrewlaxton50 He literally said he wasn't a big fan of it.
Its honestly an indictment on his role as a reviewer. The first one is literally my favorite film of all time. For him to admit hes only seen it twice is insane.
Not what he said.
So I should basically unsubscribe because he’s never gonna tell the truth anymore.
It's good?! That's amazing! Cant wait to see this during the weekends!
Chris smiling on a thumbnail gives me hope.
Sorry chris your just becoming a bias now. Cant trust your reviews anymore.
Not bringing Hans Zimmer back is a huge loss. The score was a big part of why the original is so memorable.
I'm surprised Chris never reviewed Late Night with the Devil. 😮
Probably didn’t like it
It was trash
@@austinrash3963 😅
Its too Late Now , probably didn't like it
The movie should had came out around the late 2000s(between the final destination/paranormal activity days). It was a cool movie concept but you feel like you already know what they plan to do with the concept and then they hit you with an ending that felt out of nowhere(like some kingdom of the crystals type of pazaz) 6.9/10
Chris has completely lost it. He used to be so fresh, honest and entertaining with his reviews.. it’s sad to see his change to a Yes man of Hollywood.
It’s got big boots, sorry, sandals to fill. If you like epic historical films, Ridley Scott’s Kingdom of Heaven (must be the directors cut though, which is infinitely better than the theatrical) is up there
I'm thankful you mentioned you're not a huge fan of the original. I am. I actually think it's the greatest achievement in modern cinema. So I'm skeptical to see II out of fear it will tarnish the original.
I have the first one in high regard also. So I was cautious about this one. Not sure if I'll see it at the theather.
Same.
If you're a huge fan of the first one, you'll definitely feel like something's missing. I'm not going into detail, but it'll feel like most sequels out there: too big of a shoe to fill
@@JoeyDezzz thx for the feedback, I think I'll skip this.
The arena boat battle in the first trailer was enough to make me want to see the movie, glad to hear that I’ll be in for a good time
It looks cool, but sharks in the water?? I dunno...
@@classicvwbugs Exactly. It just goes into "beyond ridiculous."
@@DRod1517 a shame, the original is a classic! Why such stupidity?
Glad to see Ridley Scott didn't try to push his boots with gladiator. Alien he can get away with being a smart story and slow paced but something like Gladiator. I'm glad to see Ridley just made something entertaining
This guy was once the best novie reviewer on youtube, now he is so washed, only his girlfriend wants to get stuckmanized
😂😂
🤣🤣🤣 bro
Pedro and Denzel stole the show. When Pascal claimed Numidia for Rome, you could tell right there he was struggling with the pressures put upon him. Excellent performace.
Yet another review that Chris Stuckman is avoiding any real criticism. The closest thing to a real criticism is "some people might say this" or "some people will say that".
And here you are watching it 😂
@nizzanator After a long time. One can only hope.
Yep, Stucky is stuck being diplomatic.
I’d be able to help myself a lot better with anybody BUT better help. I know times are tough, but you should find another sponsor
This video deserves an award!
For what exactly, a long boring commercial, and kissing profusely the behind of the movie director?
@@Befree898 lol stop judging if you haven't watched it. Never judge a book by its cover. Its a good movie, maybe you're too young to understand
@@mistlegion1182 actually hes on the money, Chris is a shill
People keep saying the story is predictable. But I actually didn't predict Denzel Washington to be the final villain at the climax.
Good to know it's good. Seeing it's trailer. I had my hopes so low. Will watch this one soon.
we haven't watched the same movie apparently
Denzel getting an Oscar for this? Nah no way. He’s Frank Lucas with a robe and sandals, come on
I will watch it only because of Denzel’s part.
Chris says it's good, Jeremy Jahns says it's okay, and the girl from beyond the trailer says it terrible. I tend to believe Chris over all. We have very similar taste is movies. I think I'll enjoy this film.
It's terrible
@manuelpineda9067 😆😆😆😆
I stopped believing Chris since he became a filmmaker and reviews ONLY film he likes.
The public cannot trust Chris' opinion anymore, hence the low views 😢 Especially if it is a director he reveres, Chris is not going to be transparent in his reviews.
Movies are very subjective, I've discovered that if they have more than 7.5 or 8 on IMDb, most probably it's good, 6.5 to 7 is ok but forgettable and lower than that won't be enough to pay the ticket
2000 / People watch Gladiator and go home with their own opinions.
2024 / People watch Gladiator and go home and watch UA-cam reviews, scroll social media for unconscious biases, and have it out in comment sections.
Better Help??!!! That's 1star review FFS
I know it's a Hollywood movie, but the historical innacuracy really took me out of it. There are TOO MANY anachronisms to count. And I get it, it's not really the point of the movie, but some things were so easily avoidable (the actress wearing a corset? In ancient rome?) !
Unlike Chris, Gladiator IS my all time favorite movie. I hope the sequel is AT LEAST good to me. 🤞🏽
How would they have captured and kept the sharks alive until the water battles?
Films aren’t real mate. It’s easy to break the suspension of disbelief just got to go with it.
@@rtleesontrue, but historical accuracy allows for credibility. The colosseum was flooded but no sharks. Do you think if they included a few dragons, it would have made for a better movie.
@ it’s not meant to be historically accurate, neither was Gladiator 1
@ true again, but if they gave the romans guns, it would have been a stretch.
How the hell did the romans read newspapers? That was the more stupid scene than the shark scene.
Chris grew up with Gladiator 2
I didn't think this story was too close to the original at all. I think it took the story and changed it in a really fun and transformative way
Gladiator 1 is like Terminator 2 for me. It all ended with those movies. Granted, I might catch this one eventually on a rental sale, but I really have zero interest to revisit this. I feel like Gladiator had the perfect ending to an incredible movie. There is no reason to come up with something just to justify a sequel, even 24 years later. There is a reason every Terminator movie after 2 has been horrendous. It's what happens when studios request a movie to be made just to bank coin and not really put that much effort in the grand scheme.
Gladiator 1 was based on the works of David Franzoni, who pitched to Steven Spielberg, sparked the interest of DreamWorks Pictures, they bought it and re-wrote multiple times with the talents of those days before hiring Ridley Scott to direct the movie. Gladiator 2 was pitched by Ridley... and the rest is history.
I wouldn't say every Terminator has been horrendous, the new Anime on Netflix is dope like really cool, and Salvation was really decent
Here come the better help comments
Stop taking Better Help as a sponsor, they sell all your personal data
finally a proper criticism that goes into detail. Alright. Tho ironic considering you're posting on UA-cam who is also doing the same.
@awesomedavid2012 I pick my battles. I have to live with the downsides of UA-cam if i want the user generated content I consume. But why would i pay better help to sell all my most confidential information when there are plenty of alternatives that don't.
Chris is just a fan boy.Not a filmmaker.
Please let this be good
Spoiler, it's not
@@paddy1451Shut up
@@paddy1451Bro, you prolly haven’t even seen it yet so quit that mess
@@paddy1451 yapping
@@paddy1451it opened to good reviews from even sceptical critics
Man that last scene was so training day like i was waiting for Denzel to yell "Ceasar ain't got shit on me!"
My RO-man!
Ridley Scott jumped the shark.
Quite literally.
The big difference between the 2 movies, to me, is the feeling you end up at the end. In Gladiator, at the end, I was really moved. In Gladiator II I was "yeah, whatever..."
Bonus point: If you are an european like me with some knowledge about the Roman Empire, the threshold for the suspension of disbelief is way higher. Gladiator I also had its problems with historical accuracy but it was so good that I didn't care. The second one do not really past my test.
PD: Denzel Washington was great (as always).
A man not finding himself obsessed by the first gladiator film, almost makes me question the man entirely, that’s a weird thing to say but it’s true
_Anyone_ not obsessed with the first film is weird. My mom went to see it in her 40s, and when she got home, she said, "Oh my god! Burst! Spatter! Slash!" She was so cranked that she pulled a kitchen knife out and started waving it around and making the noises.
The Roman Empire impresses everyone in the collective Western world, not just men, who do not, in fact, think about it every day or whatever that ridiculous meme was lol.
@@squamish4244I yawned while watching the first movie.
A d I barely remember anything about it although I just watched it last year. Lol
It's overrated. Highly
@@rajeebdas1724 Then you will probably enjoy this.
Trying to troll me over a movie isn't going to work. Sorry :P
*when a person has a diff opinion on something*
the internet:
@@rajeebdas1724 Oh i agree. About 10 mins was above average, the rest was overly sentimental slop with a plot as complicated as the Baby Shark song.
Seen it last night in Imax, great movie really enjoyed it, that actor Paul, I would love to see more of him in action movies going forward hopefully
No way. He has a deformed face.
Booked to watch this in IMAX with Laser on the UK’s widest screen on Saturday. Looking forward to it.
Shall rewatch the first movie in 4K a day or two beforehand.
Thank you Chris.
in London?
Gladiator 2 - Is the Wish version of the original Gladiator, at best.. Mescals character was under developed.. His fight scenes were all the same (I mean, how many times can you lose your weapon??). Washington, whilst easily the best actor by a country mile, could have been in American Gangster or training Day again, rather than ancient Rome.. And the story line was pissweak - I mean Mescal goes from hating Rome to wanting to defend it, overnight, for no given reason.. Goes from wanting to kill Pascal, to fight for his honour, for no substantive reason..
A very ugly second cousin at best, to the original.. And shouldnt have been invited to the wedding.. 6/10
Ooooh...the edge lighting
Better help is a scam. It's been exposed several times
This review is insane. It’s absolute trash and a stain on the first. It’s a carbon copy in plot with AI writing, horrendous casting and acting with jarring editing.
Take it easy
Absolutely agree💯🚮
Is the AI in the room with us now??
Damn what movie review yall pissed about? 😂😂Chris got pretty good taste.
Napoleon, House of Gucci, Covenant, All The Money in The World...Exodus God's & Kings. Not what I'd call "running circles"
I'd take any of,
Del Toro, Villinuve, George Miller, Scorsese, Nolan, Fincher, Tarantino, PT Anderson over him these days.
Don’t forget “The Counselor” that shit was so bad 😂🗑️
Ok, napoleon director cut is actually good, House of gucci whilst underwhelming is still a decent movie, Alien covenant is a solid movie, all the money in the world and Exodus I really like. I'm not ridley fanatic but ur trying to pretend he's been making stinkers when he simply hasn't, look at all the Imdb scores for these movies and you'll see. Also u casually forgot to mention The last Duel and prometheus which are good
@@joebond545 some good points of discussion there. I'd like to ask you though, do you think he's Running Circles Around Everyone in the Business?
That's the point I was trying to make.
I think that's a pretty wild statement & one I feel would be difficult to argue.
I don't think most people would have him as a top 10 director (currently). Obviously Chris disagrees.
I'm just glad the movie doesn't suck. If it's good I'll go and see it just to make sure we get more movies like this, and hopefully even better, perhaps even original.