GLADIATOR II Movie Review

Here is my review of Gladiator II! #gladiator2 #paulmescal #denzelwashington #oscars #academyawards #filmreview #moviereview #theawardscontender

THE AWARDS CONTENDER ON PATREON
Exclusive Videos, Vote for Elusive Oscar, and More!

BECOME AN AWARDS CONTENDER MEMBER ON YOUTUBE!
Exclusive Videos every week at the Oscar Stage level!

WRITTEN AND PRODUCED BY BRIAN ROWE

FOR ALL INQUIRIES

The following music was used for this media project:
Music: Airport Lounge by Kevin MacLeod

[pureb]

Wow I think you're the only reviewer who prefers Gladiator II to the first one. 😂

[hothotheat]

For me, I spent the runtime wishing that Pedro Pascal was the lead instead of Paul Mescal. There’s not a single second where I believed that men would rally behind Mescal’s character. Crowe had charisma to burn in the original, and Mescal is playing it much more internal.

I think the story was engaging, but I wish we’d gotten a little more from Denzel, and a little more motivation from the villains.

[ThisisNOHA]

I largely agree with this. I'm one of those weirdos who appreciated the madness of Napoleon (the director's cut is better as per usual) and thought The Counselor was an underrated and misunderstood masterpiece - what can I say? I prefer it when Sir Ridley gets weird. Gladiator II only occasionally gets weird and I just couldn't bring myself to care much about Mescal or Pascal. They took it too seriously, whereas Denzel understood the assignment perfectly and acted circles around everyone. I love Gladiator but I don't have the reverence for it that others do, so maybe that's why I enjoyed the sequel enough. T2 Trainspotting was a much better case of a sequel that understood it was a nostalgic follow-up and mostly used that to its strengths. It's a film about sad middle-aged men looking back. Gladiator II could've done a lot more with the legacy of Maximus beyond constantly reminding the viewer of how cool he was - it certainly didn't do Lucius any favors. Neither Ridley's best nor his worst.

[singstreetcar]

Gladiator 1 is a masterpiece.
Brian u are so wrong here.
The acting, the story, the music, the costumes, the arena fight battles especially the one with the tigers.

Watching this film as a kid, I was blown away. I didn't even know joaquine phoenix was the actor who played the emperor (I was a kid back then so I didn't care about actors or celebrities)

[piadox]

No shot this gets into Picture. It’s probably Denzel and a few technicals, at best. Not even audiences are loving this. You’re a true outlier, Brian. Heheh

[albertooo]

Sadly I disagree with you ^'
I took my parents to watxh the movie with me and it kinda felt pointless movie. I've slept throughout the movie.
6.5/10

Original Gladiator: 9.5/10

[donna]

A pale imitation of the original. I was not entertained.

[jasonwebster]

Gladiator (2000) was driven by the performances by Russell Crowe, Joaquin Phoenix, Oliver Reed, Derek Jacobi, and Richard Harris, the costume design by Janty Yates and the score by Hans Zimmer. Russell Crowe thoroughly deserved the Best Actor Academy Award for his performance as Maximus.

[thetrison]

You opened the video saying you didn't even like the original Gladiator made me feel like taking a gut punch.

[gordongekko]

Maybe a "Ridley Scott and the elusive Oscar" is overdue?

[gavo]

Couldn't be more agree with the review in general but I think it is not better than the original, mainly because of 2 reasons:
- Russell Crowe was outstanding in the first movie (Paul Mescal did it great anyway).
- the score in the first movie is one of the best ever. Hans Zimmer was just incredible. And that is almost imposible to beat.

[Ldvcts]

I disagree with you. Obviously, Paul Mescal is no Russell Crowe, who was nominated 3 years in a row - in widely divergent roles - the Insider, Gladiator and a beautiful mind. Plus he should have had one for Master and Commander and Cinderella Man, but was hurt by his bad boy image overblown in the press and as good as Denzel is, he overacted in this and Joaquin was outstanding in the 1st. This was a sequel that should never have been made. Come on Hollywood, enough with the sequels. I was not impressed.

[justaname]

What the heck are those "animals"?! That is like the werewolf guy Lupin in Harry Potter mid-transformation.

[alextttttt]

Totally agree it's better than the original!

[FaydOgolon]

I saw "Gladiator" when it first came out. I was a big fan of Ridley Scott and I had been following Russell Crowe's career since "Proof" in 1992. I was rooting for him to win the Oscar for "The Insider." I found "Gladiator" very entertaining and was happy that it would boost Crowe to stardom. But I never expected it to get nominated in any of the major categories, and I don't think Crowe and Scott were expecting that, either. But yeah, "Gladiator II" does feel like Scott is hoping to strike Oscar gold this time.

[gregg]

I wanted to root for it but it was a 6/10 for me.
1. the horrible pacing and drawn out exposition scenes suffocated the epic, incredible action scenes.
2. The acting was painfully mediocre - even from Denzel. I’m not sure why people are hyping him up so much.
3. The casting choices were mostly misses. Paul and Pedro were just popular vote casting.
4. The sets felt like 2024 not Ancient Rome.
5. THE CGI ANIMALS.

[drdavid]

No mention of the ridiculous sharks and baboons and the whole pointlessness of the project (apart from making a billion at the box office)

[Aurorak-il]

Gladiator II is as excellent as the first film. I managed to enhance my viewing experience by getting and listening to the soundtrack beforehand. And I can tell because at the credits, I closed my eyes, took deep breaths, and held my hands outward while hearing the Now We Are Free part

[mihohomundo]

I think the script didn't give Mescal more material to really stand out

[iamsoverybored]

I recommend the Spartacus TV show it takes a couple of episodes to get going, but it's worth it.