Gladiator II Is a Lavish, Empty Spectacle
Ridley Scott heard you liked Gladiator, so he thought he'd give you some more gladiators with your gladiator.

When Gladiator hit theaters in the summer of 2000, there were no post-credits scenes teasing sequels. There were no plans for a Gladiator expanded universe. The very idea of a post-credits scene or an expanded universe would have been strange, as the superhero movie boom was still in its primordial stage, and neither of those concepts had found their way into moviegoing and moviemaking parlance. The first Gladiator was just a movie—a crowd-pleasing, sword and sandals epic for the modern age. It had a beginning, a middle, and even an end. It won Best Picture, and everyone went on with their lives. There wasn't supposed to be another one.
And yet, now, 24 years later, there is, somehow, for some reason, another one.
The question how is easy enough: Director Ridley Scott decided to make another one.
Why is a harder question to answer: Scott is in his 80s, but he's made 10 movies over the last dozen years, several of which have revisited themes and settings from his earlier work. Maybe, like so many men, he's obsessed with the Roman empire? Perhaps he had more to say on the subject of premodern gladiators?
Gladiator II is certainly more Gladiator: The action scenes are grander, more ambitious, emboldened by advances in special effects and Ridley Scott's late-career confidence as a director. The first Gladiator gave viewers a man fighting a computer-generated tiger with a Roman short sword. The sequel gives viewers a gang of chained-up gladiators fighting off wild monkeys with nothing but chains. There's a sequence where a rhinoceros is ridden into a gladiator pit like a medieval tank, and another where the Colosseum is flooded so that miniature boats can stage a water battle, complete with sharks.
But more Gladiator is not necessarily better Gladiator. Yes, Scott's lavish set pieces are impeccably produced. But there's no urgency to the story, no emotional pull, since most of the story is just a flat replay of the first film's major beats.
Once again, we start with a young man who has a grudge against Rome after its army kills his wife. Instead of Russell Crowe's Maximus, however, we get Paul Mescal's Lucius, whose connections to Lucilla (Connie Nielsen, reprising her role from the original) and the first film become clearer as the film goes on. Lucius ends up in the arena, making his way toward Rome, with the hope of killing Marcus Acacius (Pedro Pascal), the general behind the attack that killed his wife.
Mescal looks the part, but his canned revenge storyline leaves him very little to do except survive various battles. Worse, he lacks Crowe's gruff gravitas, which anchored so much of the first film.
For screen presence, the film turns to Denzel Washington, as Macrinus, the owner and overseer of a gladiator crew. Macrinus has plans and ambitions of his own, and the movie is at its best when allowing Washington to chew Scott's elaborately designed ancient Roman scenery. Washington gins and winks and dances through his scenes, taking obvious pleasure in show off-y line readings. He is so much more magnetic than anyone else on screen that he practically rides off with the movie. A film fully focused on his story, and the political machinations he attempts to set in motion, would have been far more interesting.
From time to time, Gladiator II threatens to become a contest of ideas, with Washington's scheming slaver viewing it as a degenerate society that can only be tamed by will and raw desire for power, and Mescal's Lucius representing the dream of a free and decent Rome that echoed through the first film. Scott is a cantankerous humanist, and his recent films, especially, have taken aim at power-mad, ambitious men and the carnage they leave in their wake. But developing this notion would have shifted the drama away from the gladiatorial arenas and the elaborate battles Scott stages within them.
The main reason Scott seems to have made this late-breaking sequel, then, seems rather prosaic: He wanted more swords, more sandals, more rhinos and elephants, and flooded fighting pits. He knew how fondly audiences recalled the first film, and he's never been able to resist staging another grand historical spectacle. Scott wanted a sequel because he wanted more Gladiator, too.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
There's plenty of space for movies like this. Did you not catch Spartacus? Game of Thrones is basically Gladiator in a different setting. Do you think you've made some kind of point here?
Game of Thrones is basically Gladiator in a different setting.
Da Fuck?
Captain Oveur : Joey, do you like movies about gladiators?
hey! you're Kareem Abdul-Jabbar!
Gay is so 20th century.
and another where the Colosseum is flooded so that miniature boats can stage a water battle, complete with sharks.
The sharks are added, but flooding for a water battle is recorded in ancient sources.
As long as the sharks don't have laser beams on their heads.
Trying and failing to brainstorm Oscar-winning movies whose hypothetical sequels sound as cash-grabby as Gladiator II. Unless they make The King's Speech II this will be tough to top.
Casablanca 2.
I'm shocked -- shocked -- to find that arms dealing is going on in Ukraine!
Perhaps just the tip of the iceberg, but how about Titanic II ?
Amazingly there is a Titanic II. I doubt James Cameron approved.
Lol. It got a 1.7 rating out of 10.
Godfather 2 and Rocky II may be the exceptions to garbage following excellence.
At least it won't crash and burn.
Another Mutiny on the Bounty?
Back with the Wind?
Around the World in 8 Days?
Still Unforgiven?
Gandhi II.
Next week on U62, he's back. And this time, he's mad. Gandhi II. No more mister passive resistance. He's out to kick some butt. This is one bad mother you don't wanna mess with.
Bambi II: Rise of the Deer
Titanic III opens on a 1916 scene of Cunard's new Titanium Dreadnaught liner sinking an iceberg en route to winning the Battle of Jutland and saving the Czar from the Bolsheviks.
rubicon. crossed.
The actual events at the colosseum were so wild that you dont need to invent anything to make it an astonishing scene on screen.
Action scenes should exist to illustrate the preceding ideas. We are in turmoil, socially, politically, worldwide. We need a sane solution not "mutually assured destruction" created since WWII.
The only politics allowed by the rulers is totalitarianism/collectivism. The majority are silent or silenced by censorship. A movie can slip by the censors and so can humor. Scott provided neither. It's a waste of opportunity and money, a sad legacy.
if it makes money for him then it wasn't a waste at all. Actions scenes should exist to be action scenes and provide entertainment. Not everything has to be an anecdote or morality play. Wtf is wrong with reason these days?
Gladiator 2 was a great movie and I really enjoyed it.
However, Ridley Scott missed a chance to tell the true story of the brother Emperors Caracalla and Geta, and the usurper Macrinus.
And the women who ran the Severan family dynasty, all of whom seemed to be named Julia.
And most amazing of all, when Julia Domna defeated Macrinus, she installed her sister Julia Maesas’ son, Elagabalus as Emperor.
He was a transsexual who tried to make a giant stone idol, Elagabal, the supreme deity above Jupiter.
Julia Maesa was forced to have him assassinated because of his sexual and religious deviancy in favor of her grandson, Alexander Severus.
Alexander had his father in law executed for an assassination plot, exiled his (third) wife and was murdered by his own soldiers along with his mother after buying off invading German tribes instead of honorably fighting them.
Really an incredible story that would fill 3 entire movies.
Just the story of Caracalla and Geta hating each other, partitioning the Imperial palace, and supporting different factions in the chariot races and the murder of Geta in his mother’s (Julia Domna ) arms during a peace conference with Caracalla.
Then Julia Domna goes to work for Caracalla handling Imperial correspondence.
Now that would be a movie!