FINALLY someone knows how to judge movies. Can’t believe how many ppl thought Glad 2 was a good film. It sux! Keep up the solid realist reviews. Too many critics sell out to the status quo and it’s lame. Great review thanks a lot. I subbed !!! Peace
I saw some glowing reviews so I was excited to see it. Unfortunately your review is pretty spot on. No emotion. They didn't need to touch Gladiator. It was amazing as a standalone film.
Funny the same was said about the original. I kind of liked the sequel better because it was more about the Roman politics rather than just one Roman fighting for his revenge. It has much better action and was shot better. The first one has a better lead.
@mania4270 "It was more about the Roman politics". Except that it was a pile of bilge, historically speaking. It is a fantasy with some historical Roman names thrown in. It is about "Roman politics" in the same way that "Game of Thrones" is about "medieval politics", or "Lord of the Rings" is about Anglo Saxon history and politics, (which it is, sort of, with added orcs, elves and hobbits.)
@AndriyValdensius-wi8gw and the first gladiator wasn't? The first gladiator movie was just as fake and fantastical as this new one. Y'all are obvious mad about Denzel Washington, who should be WINNING a beat supporting actor nod from the academy, it was a great performance. Comparing this to game of thrones and lord of the rings which have friggin dragons and elves is stupid. Nobody said this was based on a true story. All I said was it was more about the politics of Rome and how it was falling apart. Idk how you got lord of the rings from that, but like I said, many movies fans like you don't notice those nuances, I was watching focused on how Denzel was gonna use Lucius to take over roam, you went into this trying to hate on it and missed the point.
@mania4270 Gladiator 2 "isn't stupid" because it doesn't have elves or hobbits. It just has giant sharks, giant mutant apes, and a gladiator riding a rhinoceros. So, that's "sensible" ? Nothing stupid there then. Why not have elves, hobbits, and woolly mammoths in the arena. The first Gladiator wasn't particularly historical. Granted. But it was a great movie on every other level.
@AndriyValdensius-wi8gw gladiator 1 got mixed reviews back then with most critics praising the action and the acting from Crowe and Phoenix. It even got a thumbs down from Roger every who felt that it didn't represent roam well, so again, what ever criticism you have towards this can be said about the original. Bro did you just call a wild baboon a mutant ape? Dude you act like they had king kong in the movie, it was actually a reasonably sized baboon/mandrill. Giant sharks? Dude those sharks were maybe less than 10 feet, they weren't big at all. If you wanna say they LOOK fake, sure but to call an average sized bill shark a "giant"? You're full of shit. As for rhinos ......Ridley Scott would have put rhinos in gladiator 1, it's famously known that they cut out the rhino scene in the og gladiator because the effects weren't there yet. As for ppl riding rhinos.....that's not unbelievable because you can ride a rhino at a friggin petting zoo. And maybe the Romans did or didn't ride them, who cares? It's literally just an action movie set in Rome because it looks cool, and that's the same as the first one. I noticed nobody has anything to say about the story that's negative besides vague stuff like "the original was better ". The reason why is because the story is probably better in the sequel. There I SAID IT. I'm more entertained watching Denzel plot, scheme, and slowly conquer roam more than I am watching Joaquin Phoenix have a starring contest with Russell Crowe. I think the original is better paced and has a better score, but overall I may prefer the second one more. If this movie had come out in 04, I'm sure you and everyone would call it a classic.
Did anyone notice how *well fed* most of the actors in this movie looked. Besides the poor acting, the main character’s modern era gym +nutrition body really annoyed me 😂
In the long list of things wrong with Gladiator 2, that's probably quite low. But since you bring it up, it's a historical error. These modern movies show gladiators with gym perfect ripped torsos. Historical research shows that gladiators in the arena tended to be quite chubby, if not fat. There was a good reason for it. A sword cut into subcutaneous fat is a relatively minor injury that can heal relatively quickly, assuming it doesn't get infected. A cut into or across muscle is much more serious and takes longer to heal, IF it heals. Although gladiators DID die in the arena, most gladiator fights were more like fencing bouts, often only to first blood and no more. Trained gladiators were expensive, for a start. They were a big investment on the part of their owners or trainers. They really didn't want their best gladiators slaughtered over one show in an arena. People WERE put to death in Roman arenas, of course, but they were usually criminals condemned for one reason or other. Trained gladiators were too valuable to be lightly squandered.
@@AndriyValdensius-wi8gwBut it is a strong indication that none of the actors really could be bothered with this film. They just turned up, said the rubbish lines to a bad ageing director then went straight back to their luxury trailer and got paid. There is no heart and soul in this film. It is clearly ruined by DEI yet again. All fake and weak.
"Drunk and not paying attention" probably aren't the prerequisites for viewing Ridley Scott was looking for, but I'm sure going to tell my friends what they should do before they see "Glad II"- thanks for the tip, Maggie!
Ridley deciding to shoot 'Gladiator 2' on a digital camera for the sake of convenience gives it that actors-doing-cosplay look like a Netflix streaming release compared to the gorgeous cinematic visual quality of kodak and eastman 35mm used for the first one where it actually looks like a professional studio movie from the big 5. The other letdown is that you don't really end up caring about any of the characters so you're not that emotionally engaged in the story unfortunately. Crowe actually looks like a regal war veteran / Roman general rather than a guy you would see down at your local gym and his performance manages to provoke you emotionally. The first 2 minute entrance alone into the colosseum before Maximus instructs the gladiators to all stick together just for sheer thrill-factor, soundtrack, tension building, visual quality..etc is far better than the entirety of Gladiator 2 (5.5). Ridley is great when he has a good script to work with (The Last Duel / The Martian) but his directorial style can't elevate a lacklustre script in the same way that someone like Spielberg can.
@StimParavane Agreed, shot on the same Kodak and Eastman 35mm as 'Gladiator' and 'Troy' were, it looks a billion dollars and the director's cut really enriches the experience.
Great point about shooting digitally! God I hate that glassy lifeless look, and like you said, it makes period pieces feel phony and cheap. There's a reason people are gushing over how impressive "The Brutalist" looks (made under 10 million!), shooting on film makes all the difference in the world
@@johndoderino2609 Agreed 100%, it just gives 'The Brutalist' so much more cinematic production value in looking like a bonefide movie, same for 'Anora' and 'Strange Darling' from this year and 'Oppenheimer' and 'Asteroid City' from last year. While watching them, you're reminded of why every new movie that came out felt like an event when shooting on 35 was the norm.
@@thetalentofwhenever I hear someone mention "shot on film", they sound like the video store guy from the Simpsons. Nobody cares about it something is shot on film or digitally. Avatar 2 looks better than every movie and it's shot on camera. I also disagree with this movie feeling lifeless, nah, it had much better shots than the og gladiator. The original gladiator had so much shaky cam that you could barely see the fights. Y'all need to take off the rose tinted glasses. I love the og gladiator, but let's not act like it's this untouchable masterpiece of filmmaking.
i remember the first time watching gladiator when it came out on dvd and we had family over. i was about 11, i watched with my parents, grandparents, uncles, aunties, teenage siblings and younger sibling. everyone loved it and was totally invested. there are very very few films you can say satisfy an audience of that age range, young to old and both sexes.
i've seen a few of his films and he's a very good actor. but this 'hero' role didn't work for him. i think he didn't rise to it, but he wasn't helped by a crap script and story where you never felt invested in his character.
I agree saw it thursday night here in the UK Paul Mescal and Pedro Pascal's acting was terrible,poor direction and script to blame.The continueing fall of Ridley.
No, what Ridley Scott IS, is a walking caricature of what he once was. He's so far past a good time to retire its beginning to retroactively ensucken his past works.
I love your consistency. After 15 years, your ‘Watchmen’ book is still on the exact same shelf, in the exact same position. Honest review of ‘Gladiator II’’. Can I assume you will be reviewing ‘Wicked #1’.
CONGRATS ON 700 videos!!!! We love you Maggie! ❤ Thank you for always challenging us with your thoughtful and gnarly reviews. You've been doing this longer than anyone and it has not gone unnoticed!!!! P.S Denzel was fantastic 👏🏻
When I first heard Ridley was going to do a sequel to Gladiator, I initially thought it was a classic "one for you, one for me" type of thing, following the perceived failure of Alien: Covenant. If Gladiator II was financially successful, it would give him increased leverage to eventually get his third Alien prequel film made. (I realize these IPs are owned by different studios, but a hit's a hit.) After seeing it, the only reason I think he did it is because he wanted to have fun with all the battle scenes. [Spoilers in rest of comment] I agree with you that the emotional investment in the main character's story might have been better if they had just picked up right at the end of Gladiator and let us see a number of scenes as he grows up, gets married, and then deals with the invasion of the Roman navy that starts the beginning of the film. Also, the doubling of how both his wife and his mom both died in the exact same way was probably the moment where I truly gave up caring about what happened for the rest of the movie.
“Hose him down” - denzel, hoses didnt exist in rome. Did no one pick up that he said that? Gladiator 2 ended were the first left off, with extra steps. Lucious is emperor. At the end.
“Ridiculous and tired.” That’s the general state of event films these days. I think there’s something more subtle transpiring as well. WE’RE changing. Our perception, the way we receive and interpret narrative art. The way our minds have been altered by modern media.
What I want to know is why was everything old dilapidated and crumbling away? It was over 1800 years ago but it wasn't 1800 years ago for them at the time. There would have been lots of colourful paint work, mosaics, the finest silks and plush rugs. At least in the palace area or whatever. If this was set in 582 or something then maybe it'd have looked in that state. Even in the prison area they would have had nice shiny iron bars not rusted ones, they would have replaced those. They probably would have put a nice *coat of varnish* on the wood of the door. Those wrist bracelet things as well, they never wore them. Actors wore them in the 1960's to cover up marks left by wristwatches. Everyone's got smart phones now wristwatches aren't so common. Even then you can just touch anything like that up in editing with a computer.
Just came out of the theatre for this one and while I was entertained, I can't disagree with your thoughts. I was intrigued by the prospect of a warrior unconnected to Rome who'd rise through the ranks to kill a Roman general under Denzel's tutelage rather than Maximus' clear cut revenge on Commodus, and contrast the first film by showing how this warrior isn't Maximus but still manages to find his own way. But then they had to make Hano Lucius, Maximus' son and the heir apparent. They couldn't sell the ideas they set up. For example, Lucius is not a leader of men, but he manages to convince the other gladiators to fight for him. There were some cool set-pieces and the action was visceral, but it lacked the fire - as you so clearly pointed out. Thanks for reviewing this, anyway. I actually waited to watch this film before hearing your thoughts, so at least I had that to look forward to!
This screenplay was astoundingly incoherent. I had very low expectations but I didn’t expect to be bored. Thank god I saw a matinee otherwise I might have fallen asleep. If I’m being kind, the sets and costumes are nice to look at when there isn’t distractingly bad CGI. Fortunately in five years I’ll forget this movie ever existed.
It’s been a long time since I’ve seen “Gladiator” but from memory it at least started with some decent themes: loyalty, honor, etc. I think movies that have a good solid theme at least have a chance at greatness although of course it’s hard to call “Gladiator” “great”; best-case scenario it’s good. But I think if you watch a film and you can’t come up with a theme for the film the director and/or writer failed. But theme to me is glue that holds a picture together and gives it substance.
I had no idea of a Gladiator sequel penned by Nick Cave, I'm very curious. Also you feeling on the first film is identical to mine, so i think ill trust your takeaways. I only get to see my family a couple times a year and we always go to the cinema. Thanks for saving me wasting one of my rare outtings on this.
I dissent from your view. The political machinations were well designed and written. The characters were interesting. The conclusion was uplifting. The first was grand romance. The second a political story. Wonderful movie.
Honestly I felt Denzel Washington carried Gladiator 2, his Machiavellian-like performance elevated the film and kept me engaged. He was operating on a whole another level then his co-stars!
I always in enjoy your honest straight up reviews.I thought the sequel was unnecessary. Why not just release a 25th Anniversary release of Gladiator instead?
Sword and spear (and a lot of other weaponry) costume fare, with the usual glut of CGI, but better that the typical due to having a sort of interesting plot you can sort of follow. Denzel is a hoot.
My son and I enjoyed the movie. Was it as good as the original? No way. But I didn’t expect it to be. Opening was cool, with the ships, and Washington’s character was intriguing. For a rainy Saturday afternoon feature, you could do worse.
Hi- Are you open to reviewing the 2000 film release of Dinner Rush? It’s set in an Italian restaurant and starring the late Danny Aielo, Sandra Bernhardt and John Corbett.
I saw this kovie early and I thought it was good. Great visuals, decent story, some great acting by Denzel Washington, though I did not really care about Lucius Not as good as the original, but a solid 7/10 Edit: I rewateched the first film and sat on this, 5.5/10
That film was done very very well. The pacing felt rush but was slowed down thro the 2nd act the narrative is still there from the first one which is obviously why he wants to make a third one it’s gonna be a legacy story.. I don’t know about everyone else and these viewers.. a very well crafted film.
If you think about all the fight scenes in Gladiator, they all had a purpose beyond just action for action's sake... Germania battle establishes Maximus as a respected and capable leader. Also establishes the entire plot of movie, ie Marcus chooses him as his heir instead of his own son BECAUSE he is admired and honest. "They honor you, Maximus" First slave fight in the province shows us that Max feels he has no reason to live and will not bother fighting but decides at the last moment he must "be remembered as a man" He is chained to Juba and this reveals his character as he once again takes on the role of leader to try to keep his men alive The 10 man solo fight displays his prowess in one on one armed combat which tee's up and makes plausible whats ahead of him later in the film The Rome v Barbarian fight in the Colloseum displays his ability with battle tactics and brings his group of slaves even closer together as his tactics keep them alive. It also serves as the reveal of his true identity. Commodus must kill Maximus but it has to be in a satisfying way, so a one on one battle with a legenadry gladiator gives us another incredible arena fight where they get to showcase tigers (a must see in a film based so heavily in the Colloseum. The final fight between Commudus and Max is possibly the best of the movie as it cements Commudus as a coward and low life but also a tragic figure, who even when wounded, cannot beat the man he always aspired to be and the man his father loved as a son.
I saw the film and clearly it's not as good as the original. A pale copy in fact. It would have been much more interesting if the story was about a new gladiator having no ties to Maximus. Also the movie had Rory McCann from Game Of Thrones in it. It would have been amazing to see "The Hound" as a gladiator character but he was basically just an extra. The movie had potential but died before it even entered the arena. Great video!
I was laughing like crazy in the theater, Denzel put up more of a fight and challenge on the main guy than Rhinos, Roided monkeys, and actual gladiators 😂
Early in the film there's a continuity error that was unacceptable. Lucis bites the baboon and his mouth is covered in blood. Cut to next scene he barely has any blood on him and none around his mouth at all. And they end the scene like this too. I caught too many of these for my first time watching it.
It’s funny, because the comments criticizing this film saying that there was no emotional resonance, for example, are the same I felt about the first movie. Glad it affected so many people, but to me, it left me the same way most people felt about II: meh.
A movie I always liked but haven’t seen in a while, so who knows how I feel about it now, is Fall of the Roman Empire from the 60s. It encapsulates this kind of world and feel a lot better for me than the first Gladiator.
I agree that the 1st Gladiator was epic back in the day, It's a solid film, but not much Depth to it... not much to keep someone Coming back to it Was not expecting Gladiator 2 to be good, with Scott's more recent Films . This is just wasting Opportunity for New / Younger Directors at this point... I would appreciate Ridley stepping aside and giving a Director in their 30s/40s a chance on his next Project.
CGI muscle-bound monkeys....why? I just learned that sharks can indeed be captured....but could they be captured in historical times? -- that's an open question for me.
I genuinely felt to see this then I read about the Palestinian actress who was cancelled from the movie, her plotline completely removed with zero explanation from studio or Ridley Scott. Not hard to figure out, and not hard not to give my money to this
Love hearing your takes! Sorry you didn't enjoy it! I'm a fan of the original, so I'll check it out regardless! Great critique! Stay awesome Maggie! 💪🔥📷🖼️
For the love of all that is good in this world, can somebody take Ridley Scott's camera away from him already? He's made nothing but garbage for a decade now.
This movie haunts me since ive seen it, it was ugly, badly filmed, I dont Like the actors, and worst of All its got an insulting and incident related screenplay. Its a turd, and it stinks.
The twin Emperors look like Monty Python caricatures.
I view Denzel’s Brooklyn accent as an especially interesting choice for a Roman character.
His character was absurd
MY MAN
Even the fact that it was named "Gladiator 2" felt so uninspiring. I guess that defines the movie essence.
So was Godfather 2, Paddington 2, Toy Story 2 and Spider-Man 2 and a lot consider them better than the first.
Picturing Ryan George’s future pitch meeting where “Gladiators” is a brief contender
One thing in defense of the title. I was about to sound off in agreement about the “2,” but checked and found it is titled with a “II”
I feel that way about this comment.
@@Mixolydio "Gladiatorer!"
FINALLY someone knows how to judge movies. Can’t believe how many ppl thought Glad 2 was a good film. It sux! Keep up the solid realist reviews. Too many critics sell out to the status quo and it’s lame. Great review thanks a lot. I subbed !!! Peace
I'd rather watch ants drag a potato chip up the street than to ever see this again. A waste of time, brain waves and eye moisture.
Dang, fam. Lol. Scathing.
Agreed. I left when he was revealed to be the son of
Digital waves
Felt the same way. If I wasnt with my father I'd have even debated on walking out.
Damn, what a metaphore! I'm now worthy.
I saw some glowing reviews so I was excited to see it. Unfortunately your review is pretty spot on. No emotion. They didn't need to touch Gladiator. It was amazing as a standalone film.
Funny the same was said about the original. I kind of liked the sequel better because it was more about the Roman politics rather than just one Roman fighting for his revenge. It has much better action and was shot better. The first one has a better lead.
@mania4270
"It was more about the Roman politics".
Except that it was a pile of bilge, historically speaking. It is a fantasy with some historical Roman names thrown in. It is about "Roman politics" in the same way that "Game of Thrones" is about "medieval politics", or "Lord of the Rings" is about Anglo Saxon history and politics, (which it is, sort of, with added orcs, elves and hobbits.)
@AndriyValdensius-wi8gw and the first gladiator wasn't? The first gladiator movie was just as fake and fantastical as this new one. Y'all are obvious mad about Denzel Washington, who should be WINNING a beat supporting actor nod from the academy, it was a great performance.
Comparing this to game of thrones and lord of the rings which have friggin dragons and elves is stupid. Nobody said this was based on a true story. All I said was it was more about the politics of Rome and how it was falling apart. Idk how you got lord of the rings from that, but like I said, many movies fans like you don't notice those nuances, I was watching focused on how Denzel was gonna use Lucius to take over roam, you went into this trying to hate on it and missed the point.
@mania4270
Gladiator 2 "isn't stupid" because it doesn't have elves or hobbits. It just has giant sharks, giant mutant apes, and a gladiator riding a rhinoceros. So, that's "sensible" ? Nothing stupid there then. Why not have elves, hobbits, and woolly mammoths in the arena. The first Gladiator wasn't particularly historical. Granted. But it was a great movie on every other level.
@AndriyValdensius-wi8gw gladiator 1 got mixed reviews back then with most critics praising the action and the acting from Crowe and Phoenix. It even got a thumbs down from Roger every who felt that it didn't represent roam well, so again, what ever criticism you have towards this can be said about the original.
Bro did you just call a wild baboon a mutant ape? Dude you act like they had king kong in the movie, it was actually a reasonably sized baboon/mandrill.
Giant sharks? Dude those sharks were maybe less than 10 feet, they weren't big at all. If you wanna say they LOOK fake, sure but to call an average sized bill shark a "giant"? You're full of shit.
As for rhinos ......Ridley Scott would have put rhinos in gladiator 1, it's famously known that they cut out the rhino scene in the og gladiator because the effects weren't there yet. As for ppl riding rhinos.....that's not unbelievable because you can ride a rhino at a friggin petting zoo. And maybe the Romans did or didn't ride them, who cares? It's literally just an action movie set in Rome because it looks cool, and that's the same as the first one.
I noticed nobody has anything to say about the story that's negative besides vague stuff like "the original was better ". The reason why is because the story is probably better in the sequel. There I SAID IT. I'm more entertained watching Denzel plot, scheme, and slowly conquer roam more than I am watching Joaquin Phoenix have a starring contest with Russell Crowe. I think the original is better paced and has a better score, but overall I may prefer the second one more. If this movie had come out in 04, I'm sure you and everyone would call it a classic.
"Marcus Aurelius had a dream that was Rome, Proximo. This is not it. This is NOT it....."
I was dreaming during the film as part two was a perfect cure for insomnia!
Did anyone notice how *well fed* most of the actors in this movie looked. Besides the poor acting, the main character’s modern era gym +nutrition body really annoyed me 😂
In the long list of things wrong with Gladiator 2, that's probably quite low. But since you bring it up, it's a historical error. These modern movies show gladiators with gym perfect ripped torsos. Historical research shows that gladiators in the arena tended to be quite chubby, if not fat. There was a good reason for it. A sword cut into subcutaneous fat is a relatively minor injury that can heal relatively quickly, assuming it doesn't get infected. A cut into or across muscle is much more serious and takes longer to heal, IF it heals. Although gladiators DID die in the arena, most gladiator fights were more like fencing bouts, often only to first blood and no more. Trained gladiators were expensive, for a start. They were a big investment on the part of their owners or trainers. They really didn't want their best gladiators slaughtered over one show in an arena. People WERE put to death in Roman arenas, of course, but they were usually criminals condemned for one reason or other. Trained gladiators were too valuable to be lightly squandered.
Gladiators were def well fed and kept in shape for battles maybe not six pack but they probably weren't underweight or weak thats for sure
@@AndriyValdensius-wi8gwBut it is a strong indication that none of the actors really could be bothered with this film. They just turned up, said the rubbish lines to a bad ageing director then went straight back to their luxury trailer and got paid. There is no heart and soul in this film. It is clearly ruined by DEI yet again. All fake and weak.
@@AndriyValdensius-wi8gwA sword cut to a fat gut can heal really quickly. I’ve never heard this before. Were ancient humans superhuman or something?
"It's like a soda left out on the counter all day" - ha, fabulous
"Drunk and not paying attention" probably aren't the prerequisites for viewing Ridley Scott was looking for, but I'm sure going to tell my friends what they should do before they see "Glad II"- thanks for the tip, Maggie!
Gladiator truly didn’t really need a sequel, and just like Indiana Jones also should’ve ended after The Last Crusade (3)
And Star Wars should have ended with return of the Jedi.
Ridley deciding to shoot 'Gladiator 2' on a digital camera for the sake of convenience gives it that actors-doing-cosplay look like a Netflix streaming release compared to the gorgeous cinematic visual quality of kodak and eastman 35mm used for the first one where it actually looks like a professional studio movie from the big 5. The other letdown is that you don't really end up caring about any of the characters so you're not that emotionally engaged in the story unfortunately. Crowe actually looks like a regal war veteran / Roman general rather than a guy you would see down at your local gym and his performance manages to provoke you emotionally. The first 2 minute entrance alone into the colosseum before Maximus instructs the gladiators to all stick together just for sheer thrill-factor, soundtrack, tension building, visual quality..etc is far better than the entirety of Gladiator 2 (5.5). Ridley is great when he has a good script to work with (The Last Duel / The Martian) but his directorial style can't elevate a lacklustre script in the same way that someone like Spielberg can.
Kingdom of Heaven (Directors cut) is superb.
@StimParavane Agreed, shot on the same Kodak and Eastman 35mm as 'Gladiator' and 'Troy' were, it looks a billion dollars and the director's cut really enriches the experience.
Great point about shooting digitally! God I hate that glassy lifeless look, and like you said, it makes period pieces feel phony and cheap. There's a reason people are gushing over how impressive "The Brutalist" looks (made under 10 million!), shooting on film makes all the difference in the world
@@johndoderino2609 Agreed 100%, it just gives 'The Brutalist' so much more cinematic production value in looking like a bonefide movie, same for 'Anora' and 'Strange Darling' from this year and 'Oppenheimer' and 'Asteroid City' from last year. While watching them, you're reminded of why every new movie that came out felt like an event when shooting on 35 was the norm.
@@thetalentofwhenever I hear someone mention "shot on film", they sound like the video store guy from the Simpsons. Nobody cares about it something is shot on film or digitally. Avatar 2 looks better than every movie and it's shot on camera.
I also disagree with this movie feeling lifeless, nah, it had much better shots than the og gladiator. The original gladiator had so much shaky cam that you could barely see the fights. Y'all need to take off the rose tinted glasses. I love the og gladiator, but let's not act like it's this untouchable masterpiece of filmmaking.
Rewatched the Extended Cut last night. The first film holds up well in my opinion (even though I rewatched the extended cut). Excellent.
I heard the extended cut sucks lol and he doesn’t really add any difference to the original release I can be wrong though
I think it’s better. Add great scenes that expand on the politics and Comodus as a character. Theatrical cut I’d say is leaner.
The difference is not as big as with kingdom of heaven. The DC makes kingdom a masterpiece
@@Dartagnan88 So I hear. I have to watch the Director’s Cut.
@@freedom_rock18 Extended cut is awful.
I could tell without even seeing it that this movie was a piece of dried cat shit on a popsicle stick.
This honest review will invoke the wrath of Stuckman...we will all be "stuckmanized." Such is the price of integrity.
IGN: Denzel brings the exaggerated swagger of a 60 year old black man 11/10
More like Gamespot
i remember the first time watching gladiator when it came out on dvd and we had family over. i was about 11, i watched with my parents, grandparents, uncles, aunties, teenage siblings and younger sibling. everyone loved it and was totally invested. there are very very few films you can say satisfy an audience of that age range, young to old and both sexes.
It's such a classic
Paul Mescal has the charisma of a cinder block
i've seen a few of his films and he's a very good actor. but this 'hero' role didn't work for him. i think he didn't rise to it, but he wasn't helped by a crap script and story where you never felt invested in his character.
I agree saw it thursday night here in the UK Paul Mescal and Pedro Pascal's acting was terrible,poor direction and script to blame.The continueing fall of Ridley.
@@scatmancrothers He's good when he's good.. If that makes sense. He was appalling in Normal People for example
Paul Mescal is a very charismatic and nice seeming person...
He was out of depth in this. He's not a leading man.
If you ask me, it should have been called 'Lucius: A Gladiator Story'.
No, what Ridley Scott IS, is a walking caricature of what he once was. He's so far past a good time to retire its beginning to retroactively ensucken his past works.
I love your consistency. After 15 years, your ‘Watchmen’ book is still on the exact same shelf, in the exact same position. Honest review of ‘Gladiator II’’. Can I assume you will be reviewing ‘Wicked #1’.
CONGRATS ON 700 videos!!!!
We love you Maggie! ❤ Thank you for always challenging us with your thoughtful and gnarly reviews. You've been doing this longer than anyone and it has not gone unnoticed!!!!
P.S Denzel was fantastic 👏🏻
The most underrated movie review youtuber, she is just consistent all around and isn't afraid to have hottakes
It didn't need a sequel yet I still went out to watched it. Enjoyed Denzels character especially his actions towards the end.
It was basically Lorenzo Harris in a tunic. I enjoyed it .
I thought it would have been better without that character. 🤔🤷♂️
@@KentAndrewLang1967he's the best part of the film. He's a character who's well acted and doesn't do something really dumb like everyone else
Why did he ride his horse out to the army? And then not say anything and just have a fight? I was confused.
Finally ! I have been on the lookout for your review .
.... And yet again our takes concur. It was à "paint by number" job which needed not undertaking in the first place. Pointless venture.
When I first heard Ridley was going to do a sequel to Gladiator, I initially thought it was a classic "one for you, one for me" type of thing, following the perceived failure of Alien: Covenant. If Gladiator II was financially successful, it would give him increased leverage to eventually get his third Alien prequel film made. (I realize these IPs are owned by different studios, but a hit's a hit.) After seeing it, the only reason I think he did it is because he wanted to have fun with all the battle scenes.
[Spoilers in rest of comment]
I agree with you that the emotional investment in the main character's story might have been better if they had just picked up right at the end of Gladiator and let us see a number of scenes as he grows up, gets married, and then deals with the invasion of the Roman navy that starts the beginning of the film.
Also, the doubling of how both his wife and his mom both died in the exact same way was probably the moment where I truly gave up caring about what happened for the rest of the movie.
Maximus going John Wick in hell would be more entertaining.
Guys, go see The Wild Robot instead:) That's a moving, visually gorgeous and well-made film from beginning to end:)
Saw it twice. Might go a third time it's that good. What is that w geese and tearjerking films?!!! (Flying house?)
You know it’s bad when the main protagonist is being compared to Jaden Smith. OUCH
I don’t go to the cinema anymore but I have bluray collection of excellent old films …
Me too
“Hose him down” - denzel, hoses didnt exist in rome. Did no one pick up that he said that?
Gladiator 2 ended were the first left off, with extra steps.
Lucious is emperor. At the end.
It’s truly one of the movies of all time. Easily one of the movies I watched this year
“Ridiculous and tired.”
That’s the general state of event films these days. I think there’s something more subtle transpiring as well. WE’RE changing. Our perception, the way we receive and interpret narrative art. The way our minds have been altered by modern media.
Or 'getting old' as they say.
Was thinking the same thing. Almost 25 years have past since the original. The world and society is very different today.
Another example of why most movies should remain as stand alones.
It is rare when sequels and prequels complement or add value to the original movie.
What I want to know is why was everything old dilapidated and crumbling away? It was over 1800 years ago but it wasn't 1800 years ago for them at the time. There would have been lots of colourful paint work, mosaics, the finest silks and plush rugs. At least in the palace area or whatever. If this was set in 582 or something then maybe it'd have looked in that state. Even in the prison area they would have had nice shiny iron bars not rusted ones, they would have replaced those. They probably would have put a nice *coat of varnish* on the wood of the door.
Those wrist bracelet things as well, they never wore them. Actors wore them in the 1960's to cover up marks left by wristwatches. Everyone's got smart phones now wristwatches aren't so common. Even then you can just touch anything like that up in editing with a computer.
Lucius and the emperors are not “connected”.
Because of this, the movie seems unconnected.
*WERE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?!* 🏛️
No 🗡️ 🛡️
MAXIMUS! MAXIMUS! MAXIMUS!
Absolutely not
SPANIARD! SPANIARD!
You can’t handle the truth!
Oh sorry thought we were posting eye-rolling catchphrases from flicks used way too often.
Just came out of the theatre for this one and while I was entertained, I can't disagree with your thoughts. I was intrigued by the prospect of a warrior unconnected to Rome who'd rise through the ranks to kill a Roman general under Denzel's tutelage rather than Maximus' clear cut revenge on Commodus, and contrast the first film by showing how this warrior isn't Maximus but still manages to find his own way. But then they had to make Hano Lucius, Maximus' son and the heir apparent. They couldn't sell the ideas they set up. For example, Lucius is not a leader of men, but he manages to convince the other gladiators to fight for him. There were some cool set-pieces and the action was visceral, but it lacked the fire - as you so clearly pointed out.
Thanks for reviewing this, anyway. I actually waited to watch this film before hearing your thoughts, so at least I had that to look forward to!
are you entertained??
@@tritonyeahThat's why I'm here!
I wonder what the hell happened to the guy who gave us Alien and Blade Runner that he can only make mediocre movies this last decades.
The Martian was pretty good
Same as a great young band who finds success. They're not hungry anymore. It has no meaning, it's just a job now.
Ridley scott are one of those directors who carried by someone
@@quiredskywalker4422 Like George Lucas?
Brainrot I'm guessing
This screenplay was astoundingly incoherent. I had very low expectations but I didn’t expect to be bored. Thank god I saw a matinee otherwise I might have fallen asleep. If I’m being kind, the sets and costumes are nice to look at when there isn’t distractingly bad CGI. Fortunately in five years I’ll forget this movie ever existed.
Would you do a review on Ben-Hur (1959)?
It’s been a long time since I’ve seen “Gladiator” but from memory it at least started with some decent themes: loyalty, honor, etc. I think movies that have a good solid theme at least have a chance at greatness although of course it’s hard to call “Gladiator” “great”; best-case scenario it’s good. But I think if you watch a film and you can’t come up with a theme for the film the director and/or writer failed. But theme to me is glue that holds a picture together and gives it substance.
As always your opinions are valued and honest!
I had no idea of a Gladiator sequel penned by Nick Cave, I'm very curious. Also you feeling on the first film is identical to mine, so i think ill trust your takeaways. I only get to see my family a couple times a year and we always go to the cinema. Thanks for saving me wasting one of my rare outtings on this.
I saw the poster in the theater, pointed at it and said "that is going to suck".
I dissent from your view. The political machinations were well designed and written. The characters were interesting. The conclusion was uplifting. The first was grand romance. The second a political story. Wonderful movie.
Was it ever established in OG Gladiator that Lucius was Maximus' son? Or was it implied?
Some films should be left to stand alone.
I would’ve watched the version written by Nick Cave over the one they ended up with (which is available to read online)
I really enjoyed number 2. I’m Irish, but I didn’t think Paul Mescal was the right person. Denzel Washington was the key man
I don’t believe you are human
Honestly I felt Denzel Washington carried Gladiator 2, his Machiavellian-like performance elevated the film and kept me engaged. He was operating on a whole another level then his co-stars!
Gladiator 2 also made me feel nostalgic for the original film despite not having seen it.
I always in enjoy your honest straight up reviews.I thought the sequel was unnecessary. Why not just release a 25th Anniversary release of Gladiator instead?
I'm not at all surprised by your honest opinion on this movie, thank you.
Sword and spear (and a lot of other weaponry) costume fare, with the usual glut of CGI, but better that the typical due to having a sort of interesting plot you can sort of follow. Denzel is a hoot.
My son and I enjoyed the movie. Was it as good as the original? No way. But I didn’t expect it to be. Opening was cool, with the ships, and Washington’s character was intriguing. For a rainy Saturday afternoon feature, you could do worse.
Hi-
Are you open to reviewing the 2000 film release of Dinner Rush? It’s set in an Italian restaurant and starring the late Danny Aielo, Sandra Bernhardt and John Corbett.
Ridley Scott hasn't turned out a good movie in a long long time.
I saw this kovie early and I thought it was good. Great visuals, decent story, some great acting by Denzel Washington, though I did not really care about Lucius
Not as good as the original, but a solid 7/10
Edit: I rewateched the first film and sat on this, 5.5/10
Wow that's way way way to high
@@jmurdock8303I found it enjoyable, the visuals did carry that score though
How did Jayden Smith get involved??
That film was done very very well. The pacing felt rush but was slowed down thro the 2nd act the narrative is still there from the first one which is obviously why he wants to make a third one it’s gonna be a legacy story.. I don’t know about everyone else and these viewers.. a very well crafted film.
Any plans to see Wicked?
Have you reviewed The Last Duel? Id really love to know your take on it.
If you think about all the fight scenes in Gladiator, they all had a purpose beyond just action for action's sake...
Germania battle establishes Maximus as a respected and capable leader. Also establishes the entire plot of movie, ie Marcus chooses him as his heir instead of his own son BECAUSE he is admired and honest. "They honor you, Maximus"
First slave fight in the province shows us that Max feels he has no reason to live and will not bother fighting but decides at the last moment he must "be remembered as a man" He is chained to Juba and this reveals his character as he once again takes on the role of leader to try to keep his men alive
The 10 man solo fight displays his prowess in one on one armed combat which tee's up and makes plausible whats ahead of him later in the film
The Rome v Barbarian fight in the Colloseum displays his ability with battle tactics and brings his group of slaves even closer together as his tactics keep them alive. It also serves as the reveal of his true identity.
Commodus must kill Maximus but it has to be in a satisfying way, so a one on one battle with a legenadry gladiator gives us another incredible arena fight where they get to showcase tigers (a must see in a film based so heavily in the Colloseum.
The final fight between Commudus and Max is possibly the best of the movie as it cements Commudus as a coward and low life but also a tragic figure, who even when wounded, cannot beat the man he always aspired to be and the man his father loved as a son.
I saw the film and clearly it's not as good as the original. A pale copy in fact. It would have been much more interesting if the story was about a new gladiator having no ties to Maximus. Also the movie had Rory McCann from Game Of Thrones in it. It would have been amazing to see "The Hound" as a gladiator character but he was basically just an extra. The movie had potential but died before it even entered the arena. Great video!
Hi Maggie, will you review the Penguin??
I value your opinions. Thanks.
Appreciate honest reviews, all the “big” reviewers praising all this crap
I love me some Pedro Pascal, but even he couldn't save this lemon. And the final battle with Denzel (?) was unearned and limp noodle.
We are entertained by your review
I was laughing like crazy in the theater, Denzel put up more of a fight and challenge on the main guy than Rhinos, Roided monkeys, and actual gladiators 😂
I wish I knew your exercise and diet routine. You have done such a great job looking the same for years and years.
Being an intj helps. Maybe look into how they keep healthy. They r more cerebral food for thought oriented
@@Maderlololohio Pardon my ignorance, what is a intj?
Would of loved to have seen Cave`s version mate. Love his script for The Proposition.
I couldn't agree more. You hit the nail on the head.
Have you caught Last Duel? Didnt see a review or hear anything here. Would recommend to keep respect on sir Ridely's name.
lol at Jaden Smith
Would love to get a review for Mass (2021)
Early in the film there's a continuity error that was unacceptable. Lucis bites the baboon and his mouth is covered in blood. Cut to next scene he barely has any blood on him and none around his mouth at all. And they end the scene like this too. I caught too many of these for my first time watching it.
Gladiator 2, Electric Boogaloo
It’s funny, because the comments criticizing this film saying that there was no emotional resonance, for example, are the same I felt about the first movie. Glad it affected so many people, but to me, it left me the same way most people felt about II: meh.
In fact, I think a liked the second a bit more!
need a double feature review of Vox Lux and The Brutalist🖤
A movie I always liked but haven’t seen in a while, so who knows how I feel about it now, is Fall of the Roman Empire from the 60s. It encapsulates this kind of world and feel a lot better for me than the first Gladiator.
Ridley scotts next film is going to be called the dog stars and i hope he goes back to his old routes.
I loved this movie. It was so much fun
Thank you for not giving us a review based purely off emotion.
Really excellent review. Subscribed.
Apparently the first Gladiator film was written as it was filmed.
I agree that the 1st Gladiator was epic back in the day,
It's a solid film, but not much Depth to it... not much to keep someone Coming back to it
Was not expecting Gladiator 2 to be good, with Scott's more recent Films .
This is just wasting Opportunity for New / Younger Directors at this point...
I would appreciate Ridley stepping aside and giving a Director in their 30s/40s a chance on his next Project.
cant wait for your take on Nosferatu
I was interested in a customized print but never heard back from you
The movie is literally a remake
Uma Thurman vibes. Also rewatched Gladiator many times. G2 will be a rewatch but not as heartily as G.
"my name is maximus decimus meridius"
I think Paul is one of the best actors alive today. Him and Denzel were great.
I enjoy your reviews
CGI muscle-bound monkeys....why? I just learned that sharks can indeed be captured....but could they be captured in historical times? -- that's an open question for me.
I genuinely felt to see this then I read about the Palestinian actress who was cancelled from the movie, her plotline completely removed with zero explanation from studio or Ridley Scott. Not hard to figure out, and not hard not to give my money to this
Love hearing your takes! Sorry you didn't enjoy it! I'm a fan of the original, so I'll check it out regardless! Great critique! Stay awesome Maggie! 💪🔥📷🖼️
It's terrible
Where is the Wicked review?
For the love of all that is good in this world, can somebody take Ridley Scott's camera away from him already? He's made nothing but garbage for a decade now.
Or just watch Kubrick's "Spartacus" again.
This movie haunts me since ive seen it, it was ugly, badly filmed, I dont Like the actors, and worst of All its got an insulting and incident related screenplay.
Its a turd, and it stinks.