Gladiator II serves as a thrilling return to ancient Rome. While it doesn’t quite recapture the emotional punch of the first film, it’s brimming with high-stakes action and dramatic performances. If nothing else, it’s a testament to Ridley Scott’s undying ambition, though it may not fully satisfy history and peplum movie (‘tunic’ film referring to Roman or Greek dramas) fans still captivated by the original’s singular magic. Gladiator II is released in the UK on 15 November 2024.
The story
Years after witnessing the death of Maximus at the hands of his uncle, Lucius must enter the Colosseum after the powerful emperors of Rome conquer his home. With rage in his heart and the future of the empire at stake, he looks to the past to find the strength and honor needed to return the glory of Rome to its people.
The trailer
The verdict
Gladiator II is undeniably epic, albeit with a few corny elements, and doesn’t quite re-create the grandeur of Ridley Scott’s best recent work. Paul Mescal steps up as a capable action star, but he doesn’t quite fill the shoes of Russell Crowe’s Maximus. As for Denzel Washington, he delivers a compellingly Machiavellian villain, but his character is held back by a somewhat predictable plotline. Still, Denzel’s name is all but engraved on the Best Supporting Actor Oscar for this role. He’s magnetic, relishing every moment as he dominates the screen.
Visually, Gladiator II is a feast for the eyes. The action sequences are rich, grandiose, and satisfyingly brutal – but perhaps overly so. Bloodshed abounds, seemingly more to cater to modern audiences raised on a diet of vampire dramas (The Vampire Diaries and The Twilight Saga) than to serve the story itself. Some of the more extreme scenes, like the throat-slitting of one of the twin emperors, felt gratuitous and a distraction from the film’s core narrative.
While Gladiator II boasts stunning visuals and intense action, it lacks the emotional depth and focus of the original. The screenplay lacks depth and development which is reflected in poor dialogues. Honour and strengh seem the only memorable lines you will remember at the end of the movie. The storyline doesn’t resonate as strongly as the first. Yet the film redeems itself with epic battles, vibrant set pieces, and Denzel stealing every scene he’s in. For fans of grand historical dramas, it’s still a worthy addition to the genre. Having said that, history fans will be disappointed but as much if they know Ridley Scott’s approach: only entertainment matters not historical accuracy.
Watching the original Gladiator again recently reminded me just how potent it was, even over two decades later. That film’s storyline felt more substantial, with Crowe’s powerful performance elevating it into a cinematic classic. As much as I enjoyed Gladiator the first time, I remember feeling it didn’t quite match the emotional weight of Braveheart, which remains my benchmark for historical epics. But Gladiator holds up remarkably well, a testament to its timeless storytelling and the enduring appeal of Maximus’ journey.
This brings me to one burning question: did we need a sequel? Director Quentin Tarantino recently remarked on the perils of unnecessary sequels, pointing out that Toy Story 3 ended the trilogy perfectly, and Toy Story 4 – while decent – detracted from that sense of closure. I find myself agreeing. Gladiator was complete in itself, and while Gladiator II offers some spectacular moments, I wonder if it can ever truly live up to the legacy of its predecessor.
Surprisingly, Scott’s recent film Napoleon, though flawed, might just edge out Gladiator II in historical intrigue.
Definitely not a movie for young children. 15+.
London Mums’ rating: 7/10
