Ridley Scott did many things in the year 2000. He gave material to all sports coaches to motivate their teams before games. He encouraged many people to move forward in difficult times with Máximo Meridio’s hero’s journey aided by slow motion symbolism and Zimmer’s music. And, why not say it, with that “strength and honor” he also unintentionally gained many fans among that group that adores a certain Austrian painter. Because, in 2000, Ridley Scott released the wonderful ‘Gladiator’, which won 5 Oscars, including best film and best actor, and whose impact was such that in June of that year there was already talk of a sequel. Which is a bit funny, because that sequel has arrived twenty-four years later.
There was the question of how to continue the original story. Something completely independent that expanded the universe of the original? Maybe it would have been riskier, maybe it would have been considered sacrilege, and maybe it would have also resulted in a better movie. Because this sequel plays it safe, to the point that it could well be called “Gladiator II: More gladiator than ever!” Russell Crowe’s character needs to be resurrected, because it presents a very similar story, connects directly with the first part (we won’t say how to avoid spoilers, although it is quite obvious), and they even repeat characters from that one, such as those played by Connie Nielsen and Derek Jacobi.
‘Gladiator II’ begins when General Acacius invades Numidia, enslaving survivors like Hanno, who swears revenge for the murder of his wife, and begins to plan it when he is bought by Macrinus.
There is a lot of talk about whether Paul Mescal and Pedro Pascal have enough charisma to sustain this, about whether Mescal is “simply” a good actor who they want to turn into a Hollywood star. But the shots don’t go there. If ‘Gladiator II’ is not good, it is because of a script (by David Scarpa based on the story he wrote with Peter Craig) supposedly serious in the “what” but not in the “how”, with no interest in the motivations of its characters, and on top of that he has to do with a director in enjoyment mode* (*not enough, as happened in ‘La Casa Gucci’) and with a montage where there has been an hour and a half of scissors. That’s why ‘Gladiator II’ works best when we take it least seriously, and when it takes itself least seriously.
It is in the naumaquias with sharks where many will roll their eyes, but, if you abandon yourself to what good Ridley is doing, you have no choice but to applaud. Or at the moment rhinos, which seems like a crossover between ‘Gladiator’, ‘Jumanji’ and ‘Mad Max’. Or Denzel Washington having a great time, and the queer coding of the villains. Or, of course, in Joseph Quinn and Fred Hechinger (you’ll be familiar with ‘Stranger Things’ and ‘The White Lotus’ respectively) taking the emperors Gala and Caracalla to a cross between Caligula and an evil Ryan Murphy twink. How wasted they are is, in fact, a perfect example of how Ridley Scott does not fully embrace the circus that would make a film whose tone is not really intended to be comical much better. Not even in the nods to the original where the characters need to break the fourth wall and say “hehe, do you get it?”
Instead, we have three or four movies at the same time, with many stories that do not have consistency and that contain a thousand holes in the script, especially in the final part. The transcendental nature of ‘Gladiator II’ works against it, unlike what happened in the first, no matter how much it wants to replicate what worked there. And, if you don’t take it too seriously, ‘Gladiator II’ does work as a very entertaining blockbuster, even if it is far from the quality of the first. And be careful, because Ridley Scott says he is writing a third part, with “an idea he has always had, based on ‘The Godfather II’.” Say yes, Ridley.
