On November 22, 2024, Paramount Pictures releases the highly anticipated 'Gladiator II', which has earned predominantly positive, currently holding at 78% on Rotten Tomatoes at the time of this writing. In the film, "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 ensemble cast includes Paul Mescal, Denzel Washington, Connie Nielsen, Joseph Quinn, and Pedro Pascal. But what did the critics say?
Ignatiy Vishnevetsky of AV Club says, A product of our era of legacy sequels and zombified intellectual properties, Ridley Scott’s Gladiator II sets out to one-up its fondly remembered predecessor with more grandiose set pieces, more convoluted political intrigues, and twice as many creepy, pasty emperors. The overarching idea of this exercise in maximalism à la late-period Scott has something to do with Rome (and, perhaps, any present-day institutions that Rome might stand in for) becoming a twisted parody of itself, ruled by a perverted Romulus and Remus duo who entertain the populace by recreating ancient naval victories in a flooded Colosseum. But whatever the thematic parallels (intended or not), one can’t help but feel as though the whole movie were periodically bellowing the original’s most famous line: “Are you not entertained!?” The answer is no, not really, and no amount of digital gladiatorial carnage or bug-eyed overacting can mask the prevailing air of exhausted, decadent imperial decline." Adding, "There’s political plotting and big talk about overthrowing tyranny and “the dream of Rome,” which, given the tone of Gladiator II, feels like a weak plea for the nominal values of liberal democracy. It’s bad history, but so was the original; the problem is that it’s also bad historical fiction, doubling down on the destinies and soap-operatic machinations while grasping for parallels with the present. For all of its scale and spectacle, the original Gladiator was, at its core, a story of old-fashioned righteous vengeance, with the populist instincts to back up its speechifying. Unlike that film, Gladiator II never attempts to identify us, the audience, with the spectators in the stands of the arena. Nonetheless, a viewer might, by the end, find themselves in a mindset not too different from theirs: bored by the long-winded introductions and processions of senators and soldiers and craving a more visceral level of violence."
Johnny Oleksinski of New York Post writes, "There is nothing wrong with a grunting, violent, ancient Roman holiday, especially when it boasts a supporting performance as delicious as Denzel Washington’s Machiavellian Macrinus." Continuing, "Mescal isn’t the rousing force that Crowe was, but his often-silent character isn’t written to be. He’s contemplative and open-hearted as he attempts to run from his murky past — until he chops your arm off."
Damien Straker of Impulse Gamer was less impressed, stating, "Gladiator II is bigger, louder, and more fragmented than its predecessor but not better. It looks strong but lacks emotion and concludes with a terrible finale."
Howard Waldstein of CBR felt conflicted about the film, stating, "Gladiator II is set 16 years after the events that led to the deaths of both Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix) and Maximus. Rome has undergone several changes in the wake of the former Caesar's demise. For one, Colosseum attendance is at an all-time low (perhaps the under-crowding has to do with the sequel's laxer sense of scale). The plebeians have grown less interested in numbing themselves with violent entertainment as things continue abysmally apace in the outside world. At the same time, the ruling class has become pastier, generally more effete and hedonistic, and more susceptible to syphilitic madness. If one thing is not of interest to Rome's dual rulers and their cohort, it's maintaining even a semblance of good managerial acumen. Geta and Caracalla, splitting duties as emperors, are likelier to throw childish tantrums and elect animals to the senate over pursuing what Marcus Aurelius in the first Gladiator referred to as the "dream of Rome," a fragile idea that is far easier to talk about than it is to put in action." Adding, "It would be remiss to not mention the one and only Denzel Washington as Macrinus. Washington — one of the few actors who seems not only to be able to rely on a familiar suitcase full of tics and mannerisms, but can actually make audiences thankful for being served something similar in each cinematic meal he serves — is just fantastic. He futzes incessantly with his jewelry and adjusts his robe sleeves to the point that audiences begin to wonder whether they just forgot to customize his whole wardrobe. Washington is, as expected, an almost-supernatural force of nature. He's 100cc of refreshing, often hilarious, vitality embedded within Gladiator II's self-serious storytelling. As Macrinus navigates his budding political career through swift, mercurial movements, audiences realize just how little of the sequel's rinse-repeat story and half-baked subtext really matters. Here's a character with the chutzpah to waggle a severed head in front of aghast onlookers; here's the only real reason to see Gladiator II."
 |
| Photo by Daniel Azevedo on Unsplash |
|
