Written by Andreas Babiolakis

I’ve discussed the idea of making a list of films that changed me as a cinephile. These works don’t necessarily have to be films I still like (or even liked at all), but motion pictures that made me discover a new side of myself as a lover of cinema. One such example is Ridley Scott’s Best Picture winner, Gladiator: a film that spellbound ten-year-old me when I first saw it (especially those insane battle sequences), but a work that I don’t think all that much about anymore; however, the scope, intensity, and passion I saw in this film was something I craved from motion pictures from that day forth. I feel like Gladiator is responsible for the resurgence in sword-and-sandals epics, because Scott and company reminded filmmakers that these can exist and matter. Having said that, a lot has changed within both the genre and cinema, and I feel like a number of the films Gladiator inspired to exist are much worse (300, Troy, et cetera), and watching them only reminded me what I don’t like about Gladiator, hence it aging a little weakly. This includes the heavy emphasis on action over story, pacing issues, and the macho fantasy of just having destruction at any cost no matter the detriment.

I must also point out that we continue to ride the tour of Scott’s “not-giving-a-shit” era, where the acclaimed director no longer cases about public opinion or what he’s “supposed” to be doing. Previous sights we’ve had on this ride include the hilariously cheesy House of Gucci, and the “fuck it, why not” approach to Napoleon that feels like we’re watching a kid playing with his toy soldiers. Next up is Gladiator II: an idea that always felt kind of beneath Scott until this wave of brash decisions. Iconic musician Nick Cave always teased the idea of his own concept of a Gladiator sequel, involving Maximus, now dead and in purgatory, being reborn on Earth so he can be tasked with killing Jesus Christ and preventing Christianity from taking place. Maximus accidentally murders his son instead, which “curses” him to live forever, and he partakes in World Wars and CIA operations. As much as I love Cave, this thankfully didn’t happen despite the worst of Scott’s decision making as of late, and we get something more level headed (but not by much) instead.

We do have the son of Maximus in this film, but, no, he isn’t killed by his rebirthed father. It’s Lucius, or “Hanno”, played by Paul Mescal, who has somehow followed similarly in his deceased dad’s footsteps (in the sense that he had his freedom stripped, was brought into slavery, and wound up in the gladiator arena); it would still be foolish to call this highly coincidental, because it was quite common for these kinds of circumstances to happen back then, so the odds of Lucius having the same fate as his dad — whose efforts for freedom appear to sadly be in vain, now — are high enough. To try and make this film matter even more, we have a supporting character named Marcus Acacius (Pedro Pascal) who was a general who trained under Maximus. This incorporation of previous concepts aren’t for no reason, as Gladiator II actually cleverly combines both characters and their provenance in ways that benefit both films; we cannot control what happens after we die, but, with that, we will never know in what ways our decisions may drift apart or collide.

Even though parts of *Gladiator II* feel like Ridley Scott tossing whatever he feels like at the wall to see what sticks, enough of the film actually feels of sound mind for it to be watchable.

One of the major talking points of the film is the strong acting, and I can attest that Mescal is commanding (only proving his case as one of the greatest stars of recent memory); he can turn even the corniest moments into sights to behold. Pascal is as compelling as always, and not much more needs to be said there. While there are other actors and performances worth shouting out (Connie Nielsen as Lucius’ mother, and Joseph Quinn as Emperor Geta), most viewers have singled out one Denzel Washington as Macrinus, an arms dealer and former slave who vows to be emperor one day. While I can’t pretend that this is Washington’s greatest performance ever (like some are saying), this is still Denzel-fucking-Washington, who — and it goes without saying — is one of the best actors of all time, so his highest moments are untouchable, even for him. In Gladiator II, it’s business as usual for Washington, which means he’s sublime. He steals every scene, makes every word, breath, and beat count, and will actually convince you that you are watching a masterpiece every time he’s on screen. He’s that good. He elevates every actor and moment that surrounds him. Even if the rest of Gladiator II was awful, it’s worth watching just to see Denzel Washington shine once again in a performance that is likely going to be discussed a lot more during the upcoming awards season.

Fortunately, that isn’t the case for Gladiator II, but it isn’t exactly brilliant, either. My main issue with Gladiator is that the action scenes are far stronger than the narrative moments which felt like I was refusing to take gross cold medicine and then feeling the bitter sludge finally crawl down my throat and amalgamate with the clogged phlegm after giving in to that dreaded spoonful of expectorant. These scenes just weren’t pleasant and felt like a chore is all. Gladiator II, I’m pleased to say, has far more interesting storytelling, so gone are the passages that feel like they take an eternity and can put me, an insomniac, to sleep.

However, Scott has upped the tone and electricity of all scenes, so now the majority of the action sequences feel borderline silly at times. As many online users pointed out once the film’s promotional trailers came out, there are many moments that are not only historically inaccurate (which I don’t mind nearly as much, since we nearly had a film where Maximus comes back from the dead and wants to go mano-a-mano with Jesus H. Christ) but are crazy to the point of silliness. Where else can you see a film where Paul Mescal has to wrestle rabid baboons, a gladiator arena can somehow hold enough water to support a battle of ships (with sharks in the water to boot), and a fight between humans and giant rhinos that rival the ones that felt out of place even in Black Panther? This goofiness and hyperbole occasionally spills out into the out-of-arena moments which drags Gladiator II down just a teensy bit more, but the majority of this extremeness can be found in action scenes that feel like they were made for TikTok obsessed youths; Scott’s throwing everything at the screen in case there’s a smidgen of a second where one’s attention may not be captured.

As strange as it is to say, Gladiator II is stronger than Gladiator. It’s got more to say (particularly with generational repetition of trauma and misfortune, heavy emphasis on the worshiping of invisible deities and corrupt individuals, and the toxicity that stems from power), knows how to convey its narrative progressions far more interestingly, and — dare I say it — boasts stronger performances (particularly through Mescal and Washington). However, Gladiator was rooted more in reality (or, at least, it felt far more grounded), and Gladiator II cannot help but periodically get derailed in its attempts to please crowds (such is the dilemma with coveted sequels: filmmakers who don’t know how to neither crumble under pressure, or, in the case of Gladiator II, go too far in one’s efforts to meet expectations).

If Gladiator II managed to not feel like a ten-year-old boy’s hyperboles of what could happen in a gladiator arena during the Roman Empire, I’d actually call this film an improvement (but only slightly); case in point, we have a climactic moment with Lucius and another prominent character (I won’t spoil) which feels like the epicenter of the entire film because of Scott’s trust in the moment’s emotional and narrative impact without any juvenile gimmicks to try and make the film appeal to teenagers who don’t actually know what they want. Then again, many continue to quote Maximus in the original Gladiator, who famously asks the coliseums audience “Are you not entertained?” To the point of Maximus’ question, maybe the focus always was on spectacle and the chasing of the public’s approval and enthusiasm.

If action that doesn’t really make much logical, historical, or narrative sense doesn’t matter, then Gladiator II may entertain. If you prefer some semblance in your epics, you may feel like you’re endlessly walking in a wheat field and trying to feel something during Gladiator II, with glimpses of purpose within some strong performances and sporadic passages where the stars align. Ridley Scott may still be marching to the beat of his own drum in his old age, but Gladiator II will sometimes remind you of what the iconic director is capable of. Gladiator II isn’t desultory, but it feels a bit unfocused amidst its authorial certainty and confidence.

Andreas Babiolakis has a Masters degree in Film and Photography Preservation and Collections Management from Toronto Metropolitan University, as well as a Bachelors degree in Cinema Studies from York University. His favourite times of year are the Criterion Collection flash sales and the annual Toronto International Film Festival.