Gladiator II: Film Review
Making a sequel to a highly-regarded movie after 24 years is a huge risk and unfortunately for Ridley Scott, the gamble doesn’t quite pay off with Gladiator II.
The film is set 16 years after the death of Marcus Aurelius in the original. The Roman Empire is now ruled by twins Geta (Joseph Quinn) and Carcella (Fred Hechinger), two corrupt tyrants who are the opposite of the former ruler’s dream for Rome. The story focuses on Lucius (Spencer Treat Clark in the original, Paul Mescal now), the heir of the empire. He was sent away from the city as a child for his protection by his mother Lucilla (Connie Nielsen). After his African home falls, he is made a slave and brought to Rome to fight in the Colosseum.
Let’s start with the positives. Gladiator II is a film of epic proportions, with impressive locations, hundreds of extras, huge action sequences and exciting gladiator fights. You don’t see such spectacles on film often these days and Scott is one of the best to do it on such a grand scale.
Another highlight is Denzel Washington as Macrinus, a smooth-talking power player and master manipulator who buys Lucius and uses his gladiators to help his social climb. The charismatic Washington looks like he’s having the best time and is just operating on another level than everybody else.
Now it’s time to turn to the negatives. After 24 years, you’d think Scott wouldn’t go into production on a sequel unless the script is airtight but that’s not the case. The writing is very weak overall. The dialogue is iffy, the characters are underdeveloped and it tells us very little about what happened to Lucius and the leadership in Rome in the past 16 years. How did the evil twins come to power? There is a plot to overthrow the emperors but so little time is dedicated to fleshing this out.
I am a huge Mescal fan but I wasn’t so wowed by him in Gladiator II. He physically looks the part but he’s not as emotionally open as he usually is. Perhaps his subtle work got swallowed up by the size of the production. It is his first blockbuster after all. Or is it the script’s fault for giving him such a poorly developed character or decisions that didn’t ring true? Either way, I didn’t feel as emotionally invested in him as I did in Maximus (Russell Crowe) from the original. For a while, I thought the sequel was going to redo the Maximus story as it hits a lot of the same beats so I was grateful when it became its own thing.
Given the star-studded cast, it’s wild that Washington is the only one that stands out but his character is written the best and he could have fun with it, whereas his co-stars have to be so serious. Pedro Pascal barely registered because his character was so bland. I’m sure some will criticise Quinn and Hechinger’s big, OTT acting as the emperors but I quite enjoyed them hamming it up.
I also have to mention the CGI. It is not good in places, which is baffling considering the budget. Why have a fight featuring crazed baboons if you can’t make them look realistic?! Purely in a visual sense, I genuinely think the 2000 original will hold up better than this in 10 years.
Gladiator II delivers on the action and spectacle but it lacks emotional heft and doesn’t feel like a fully developed, substantial story. It doesn’t even come close to the original!
In cinemas from Friday 15th November