Score: 5.5/10
In an era where unasked-for sequels and prequels run rampant at the box office (Moana 2, Mufasa: The Lion King, Joker: Folie à Deux, and much more) in lieu of new, creative, and original films, Gladiator II has entered the arena as a follow-up to the 2000 swords and sandals epic Gladiator. The original film, starring Russell Crowe as the titular protagonist, was a cultural phenomenon that resonated with audiences everywhere, managing to snatch up Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Costume Design, and more at the following year’s Academy Awards.
A whopping 24 years later, Ridley Scott has returned to direct the sequel film, Gladiator II. The plot follows Hanno, a young man captured by the Roman army and sold into slavery. Under the sly, watchful eye of trader and gladiator mentor Macrinus, Hanno seeks his own revenge in the arena. The twist that Hanno is in fact Lucius Verus, the bastard son of Lucilla and Maximus from the first film, was made public before the sequel’s release, adding an extra, more convoluted layer to Hanno’s motivations.
The Gladiator franchise is, without a doubt, a member of what I like to call the Boy Movie™ club. A Boy Movie™ is, essentially, a film geared toward stereotypically (straight) male interests, whether that be the primitive violence in Fight Club, the mechas and Megan Fox in Transformers, or the corny plane combat and U.S. military propaganda of the Top Gun films (The Revenant and Joker are also top contenders). If TikTok’s “Roman empire” trend is any indication, men allegedly like to think about ancient Rome. Like, a lot. And the Gladiator films have all of the violence, glory, battles, and inspirational speeches about honor and legacy that a guy could want, and is probably seeking, in a Rome-themed Boy Movie™.
On the other end of the spectrum, a Girl Movie™ is the same concept, but catered to typically female interests. However, Girl Movies™ are more convoluted, going beyond the common chick flick tropes centered on rom-coms and girl comedies (Bridesmaids, Mean Girls, etc.) and at times expanding into “dark and fucked up” territory. Ari Aster’s Midsommar is a Girl Movie™ as much as Greta Gerwig’s Barbie is a Girl Movie™. If a moody, attractive indie film star (e.g. Timothée Chalamet) is attached to a project, consider it an immediate success in the Girl Movie™ realm.
With these two vastly different cinematic worlds in mind, Ridley Scott has accomplished the almost-impossible with Gladiator II: combining both elements into a perfect blend of Boy-Girl Movie™. There’s all of the male-orientated fanfare with ancient Rome, gladiators, and crazy violent fights, and to keep the girlies entertained, there’s Paul Mescal’s big, beautiful biceps and Pedro Pascal’s handsome, weathered face. A true win-win for all.
Although it will keep you happy and entertained for most of its 2.5 hour runtime, when you look past the surface-level entertainment value of Gladiator II, the film doesn’t look so appealing underneath. With poor writing, shallow character development, and an all-too predictable plot, the film seems like nothing more than another sequel cash grab.
To be fair, I found the Gladiator of 2000 to be far less deserving of its current legacy than I had originally envisioned. It felt “fake deep” or pretentious on purpose, like a cinema-fied K-drama or daytime soap that had been specifically crafted to be as dramatic and heart wrenching as possible. My biggest takeaway after watching the film for the first time was “that was it?” For me personally, it fell under the umbrella of “movies that I heard were amazing but were actually just alright.” It had a solid plot, good dialogue, and talented actors, but overall was not a revolutionary addition to the world of cinema by any means.
*Spoilers for Gladiator II follow*
With that in mind, how does a mediocre sequel compare to a mediocre original? To start with some positives, the visuals of Gladiator II were undeniably stunning. The opening battle scene was exhilarating to experience in the theater, with flaming fireballs being flung across the sky and arrows whizzing past men engaged in vicious close combat. Although the historical accuracy of some of the scenes in the Colosseum have been contested, the rhino-riding gladiator and ship-on-ship naval battle scenes were visually spectacular to behold.
Paul Mescal is, of course, the star of the film. Even with a barely fleshed out character, he gives his all to put on a dramatic and heart wrenching performance as Hanno/Lucius. You can see the rage spewing from his hard, intense gaze even when the rest of his body and face are perfectly still. He is built to fight, kill, and survive any situation, and executes his very physically demanding role with highly believable fight choreography and, of course, muscles on muscles on muscles. You best believe my eyes were GLUED to that screen during every scene featuring the handsome, young Irish actor.
Weirdly enough, although he was featured just as prominently as Mescal during the press tour, Pedro Pascal’s General Acacius felt like a far more insignificant and poorly written protagonist. His lines were clunky and unnatural, and despite being a major driving force of the pot, it felt like he was barely in the film. He led the siege in the opening, he talked with Lucilla for a bit, and next thing you know he’s being shot dead in the arena. His internal battle between being a faithful general and wanting the best for the people of Rome was a great hook for his character, but this idea was hardly elaborated upon before he died. We know from The Last of Us that Pascal excels at portraying complicated, hardened men, so this was truly a disappointing waste of his talents.
The twin emperors, Geta and Caracalla, were nothing short of clowns. Their dialogue and acting were foolish, exaggerated, and gave more “children being forced to act in the school play” vibes than serious actors taking on a serious role. The concept of twin corrupt emperors is interesting, sure, but they were so cartoonish that it was hard to take either one seriously. It was also frustrating how the sequel did not care to elaborate on how these two took control, despite Maximus’ impassioned speech about creating a free Rome at the end of the original film.
Denzel Washington’s Macrinus, with his effortless swagger and natural charm, was definitely one of the more intriguing characters. He was cool, collected, and very believable as a villain who waits for the right time to strike, like a venomous snake. Although I wasn’t completely sold on his very quick (and kind of easy?) ascension to power, Macrinus overall was a very fun character to watch. If only they hadn’t rushed the third act so badly…
While most of the actors gave great performances individually, the biggest downfall of this film is the many, many parts of the plot that just don’t make any goddamn sense. Why would Hanno, who made it very clear that he only cared about avenging his dead wife and killing Acacius, suddenly have a change of heart about his motivations after discovering that Maximus was his real father? The scene between him and Lucilla where he angrily rebuffs her efforts to reconcile was a great scene, but its credibility immediately crumbled when he decided to forgive her, love her as a mother again, and also take on her father’s “dream of Rome” in the span of about 12 hours. It doesn’t make sense why somebody as blind with rage as Hanno would have such a quick change of heart.
Although Mescal’s performance is absolutely stunning, the writing was all-too eager to transform Lucius into a new hero, a new Maximus to take over the persistently talked about dream of Rome. Some critics have drawn parallels to Star Wars’ Episode IV and VII for how similarly Gladiator II’s third act mirrors its predecessor. Lucius is too happy to carry on the dream of Rome and end the corruption once and for all, despite hating the empire and being determined to leave it or destroy it for most of the film. It’s a quick turnaround for someone whose whole deal is being angry and hellbent on revenge.
It always struck me as funny when an individual in the film would be talking, whether that be in the massive Colosseum or in the middle of a field surrounded by thousands of troops that spread as far as the eye can see, and we as the audience are just supposed to believe that everyone present can hear what is being said. Remember in Harry Potter when Dumbledore enhanced his voice with magic to have a booming, mic-like quality? That’s basically what was going on in Gladiator II, because there is no fucking way people in the top stands of the Colosseum would be able to hear a thing.
I was having a chuckle to myself just imagining being a spectator turning to their buddy and saying “what do you think he’s saying down there?” Realistically, only a dozen or so soldiers would have heard Lucius’ inspiring speech at the end of the film. It’s the small mistakes in attention to detail like this that negatively affect the overall quality of the film.
Although the action and battle scenes were fun to watch, the lazy plot led to a very unsatisfying conclusion. Lucilla and Senator Gracchus were old and tired, and Acacius didn’t even get to do much before he was killed off. By the end, the emperors are dead, Macrinus is dead, and Lucius has magically stepped up to… take over? It’s hard to suspend disbelief when the savior of the Roman empire is a guy who just got here and decided he cared about this place mere hours ago.
The finale leaves Lucius in a strange position where it feels like his suffering thus far hasn’t amounted to much, if he is going to throw his complicated values away and gladly step up as the bright and shiny new leader everyone wants and needs. If he was going to breezily take over his father and grandfather’s legacy, then what was all of his character development up until now even for? Mescal really gave it his all, but it wasn’t enough to save his character or the film.
Would I watch this film again? Perhaps, although I’m inclined to believe I would be better off just watching a 2-minute TikTok fancam of shirtless Paul Mescal/Lucius scenes stitched together. That being said, Gladiator II is a great theater experience. Good music, awesome visuals, epic battle scenes, and lots of sweaty men fighting in skirts can only lead to a good time. However, if a deep, thought-provoking, inspirational film is what you’re after, then perhaps you should give a different film a shot; you most certainly won’t find it in this arena.
Photos are property of Paramount Pictures
The Path/パス is an online bilingual journal of arts, culture, and entertainment bringing you in-depth reviews, news, and analysis on the hottest properties in sci-fi fantasy film, television, and gaming.
Through in-depth research on intellectual properties and major franchises, we develop content covering your favorite books, series, films, games, and shows, such as The Witcher, Cyberpunk 2077, Lord of the Rings, House of the Dragon, Fallout, and Shogun.
If you enjoy our takes, consider buying us a coffee! Your support will help us continue producing excellent pop culture writing in English and Japanese for a true East-meets-West entertainment experience! Arigatō gozaimasu!