A review by Manuel São BentoWritten on November 14, 2024

FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ https://talkingfilms.net/gladiator-ii-review-a-legacy-sequel-that-triumphs-through-spectacle-and-emotion/ "Gladiator II may not achieve the groundbreaking impact of the original film, but it remains an impressive cinematic experience, transporting audiences into an epic filled with emotional and visual grandeur. Ridley Scott once again showcases...

FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ https://talkingfilms.net/gladiator-ii-review-a-legacy-sequel-that-triumphs-through-spectacle-and-emotion/

"Gladiator II may not achieve the groundbreaking impact of the original film, but it remains an impressive cinematic experience, transporting audiences into an epic filled with emotional and visual grandeur.

Ridley Scott once again showcases his mastery in blending narrative, action, and thematic depth, delivering a sequel marked by superb technical execution and standout performances, particularly from Denzel Washington. Despite the inevitable comparisons to the classic, the iconic filmmaker presents a story that justifies its existence, even if it treads familiar ground.

Necessary or not, what truly matters is the strength (and honor) with which a work captivates us - and here, Gladiator II triumphs."

Rating: A-

A review by DeanWritten on November 14, 2024

Another trash Woke movie from Hollywood. There were never black (African) emperors in Roman empire... This movie is simply false propaganda.

Another trash Woke movie from Hollywood. There were never black (African) emperors in Roman empire... This movie is simply false propaganda.

A review by griggs79Written on November 15, 2024

_Gladiator II_, a polished echo of the original, is a testament to Ridley Scott's cinematic powers. It follows his hit-and-miss _Napoleon_ biopic last year, which was rather miss than hit. The sequel captures the original's essence while introducing elements, making...

_Gladiator II_, a polished echo of the original, is a testament to Ridley Scott's cinematic powers. It follows his hit-and-miss _Napoleon_ biopic last year, which was rather miss than hit. The sequel captures the original's essence while introducing elements, making it a worthy successor.

Paul Mescal in the lead role - inherited from the ever-growling Russel Crowe, who was at the top of his career in the original - holds his ground against Denzel Washington, whose charisma cleaves through the screen as effortlessly as his character's sword.

Ridley Scott admits he was prompted to revisit _Gladiator_ by the acclaim he received from those too young to have seen the original on the big screen. His mission to lure Gen Z away from their streaming devices may help to save cinema, ushering in a new era of appreciation for the big screen. But for the love of Jupiter, I hope they quickly learn that it isn't just a big iPad with comfy chairs. No pausing, swiping, mid-film selfies, dashes to the bar, or running commentary required. Screen four at your local cinema isn't the Colosseum but a place where the magic of film of this scale truly comes alive, offering a unique and immersive experience that can't be replicated at home.

A review by r96skWritten on November 15, 2024

'Gladiator II' is awesome! I only watched the original three years ago, almost to the day in fact, but I was anticipating this follow-up after thoroughly loving the Russell Crowe film. Honestly, I think I kinda enjoyed this sequel more...

'Gladiator II' is awesome!

I only watched the original three years ago, almost to the day in fact, but I was anticipating this follow-up after thoroughly loving the Russell Crowe film. Honestly, I think I kinda enjoyed this sequel more - at worst, the two are on the same level, for me anyway. Crowe is missed, though everyone in this movie more than makes up for his (obvious) absence.

This is the first time I've seen Paul Mescal act, despite knowing of him for quite a while now. I'm impressed! He delivers a showing of great strength (pardon the pun). Pedro Pascal is very good too, as is Joseph Quinn; I wasn't instantly sold on the latter when he appeared onscreen, though when all is said and done I rate his performance positively.

Denzel Washington... what a geezer. I'll never tire or turn down the chance at seeing that man act. Needless to say, given he's one of two favourite actors of mine, I loved his performance all the way through. The likes of Fred Hechinger and Connie Nielsen merit fair praise as well, interesting to see Rory McCann and Matt Lucas in there too.

Oh, and the score... superb! Deafeningly grand.

A review by CinemaSerfWritten on November 16, 2024

Sixteen years after "Maximus" (Russell Crowe) bit the dust, we find ancient Rome under the control of twins "Geta" (Joseph Quinn) and his brother "Caracalla" (Fred Hechinger) and thanks to their general "Acacias" (Pedro Pascal) continuing to expand their empire....

Sixteen years after "Maximus" (Russell Crowe) bit the dust, we find ancient Rome under the control of twins "Geta" (Joseph Quinn) and his brother "Caracalla" (Fred Hechinger) and thanks to their general "Acacias" (Pedro Pascal) continuing to expand their empire. It's this latter man who leads an attack on the home "Nanno" (Paul Mescal) shares with his wife "Arishat" (Yuval Gonen). That doesn't go so well and next thing, she's gone on ahead of him to the wheat fields and he's now a slave owned by the manipulative "Macrinus" (Denzel Washington) heading to the Colosseum to entertain the emperors and their cousin "Lucilla" (Connie Nielsen). What now ensues is a well produced and good looking rehash of the first film paying homage en route to "Spartacus" and it's the sheer predicability that I struggled with. It's episodically delivered with far too much script and though Mescal tries hard, his performance is largely charm-free and as wooden as a rudius, especially once the rather far-fetched familial back-story has been established. Sir Derek Jacobi sparingly appears as the other survivor from 2000 reprising his role as the senator "Gracchus" but to no real effect and the scene stealer for me is really only the megalomanic Quinn's imperial offering as he and his bonkers sibling teeter on the brink of inbred, sexually fluid, madness. Washington does well enough as the scheming slave-master, but he hasn't really enough to work with to stand out amongst what really are a mediocre collection of undercooked characters that just don't deliver any real sense of the hedonism and menace of this debauched and corrupt state. As with Sir Ridley Scott's "Kingdom of Heaven" (2005) the battle scenes are superb and action packed, as are the combat scenes in the vast marble auditorium filled with baying plebs and rhinos, but I am afraid that the shallow characterisations just didn't work well enough to keep this engaging and the plot was just too thin to stretch over a couple of hours that could have been so very much better. It really does need a big screen to appreciate the creatively crafted visuals, but I was still pretty disappointed, sorry.

A review by DWPWritten on November 19, 2024

Comparisons will be inevitable and Gladiator II will never be as iconic as the 2000 classic. However it is very good, strong all-around with gripping action and a well executed script. Performances are very good, with some pleasant surprises.

Comparisons will be inevitable and Gladiator II will never be as iconic as the 2000 classic. However it is very good, strong all-around with gripping action and a well executed script. Performances are very good, with some pleasant surprises.

A review by Chris SawinWritten on November 20, 2024

Gladiator II features some impressive action sequences. Every battle in the Colosseum is fantastic despite how historically inaccurate they may be. The monkey sequence showcases how skilled Hanno (Paul Mescal) is not only as a fighter but also in how...

Gladiator II features some impressive action sequences. Every battle in the Colosseum is fantastic despite how historically inaccurate they may be. The monkey sequence showcases how skilled Hanno (Paul Mescal) is not only as a fighter but also in how he interacts with others. Then there's the rhino sequence that plays out much like Bugs Bunny’s interactions with Toro the Bull in the Chuck Jones-directed Looney Tunes short Bully for Bugs (1953).

While those sequences are fairly believable, the shark sequence seems like pure fantasy and that’s why it’s so incredible. They fill the Colosseum with water and let sharks loose while the opposing gladiators try to survive the onslaught on boats.

It’s also interesting to note that every major actor who dies in the film has a spectacular death. Not only that but these gruesome deaths get increasingly more grisly and memorable as the film progresses. These bloody triumphs rarely delve any deeper than someone getting shot with a bunch of arrows or a beheading or appendage severing of some kind. This level of brutality escalates throughout the film and eventually culminates with the most satisfying kill that takes two and a half hours to achieve.

The performances fluctuate between being top-tier perfection and mediocre overacting. Denzel Washington is having the time of his life as Macrinus. He has the most interesting storyline and Denzel dances in every scene with a giddiness that is unparalleled. Joseph Quinn seems to be acting in an entirely different film than everyone else as Emperor Geta. His mannerisms are operatic and theatrical with his wide eyes that rarely blink, grand body language and hand gestures, and explosive line delivery.

Pedro Pascal doesn’t do anything in Gladiator II as Marcus Acacius that he didn’t do in Game of Thrones apart from having more screen time. Much like how his character is written, Paul Mescal’s performance is muddled. The Hanno character and who he is is a poorly kept secret that consistently pulls the character in several directions.

Hanno is vengeful at first before succumbing to being the hero of the film and the evolution isn’t earned. The writing and pacing of Gladiator II feel like the film drops Hanno’s fate in his lap halfway through, which he’s either forgotten about over two decades or never knew until the audience did.

Connie Nielsen, one of the few returning actors from the original film, is awful in this. Her acting in Gladiator II always comes off as forced as her crying scenes are often portrayed as constipated grunts with crocodile tears. Her dialogue delivery is also strained and broken despite being given some of the most important sequences of character connections and reawakenings of sorts in the sequel.

Calling Gladiator II action-heavy is misleading because the film drags between every fight sequence. The film is largely dull and difficult to indulge during its quieter moments. The film is gorgeous with its incredible set pieces, intricate costume design, and impressive use of infinitely numerous extras. Director Ridley Scott reunites with all of the set decorators (Sonja Klaus, Crispian Sallis, and Emilio Ardura) and costume designer (Janty Yates) that he worked with on Gladiator in 2000. From a visual standpoint, Ridley Scott's films are highly detailed masterpieces.

Denzel Washington’s extravagant performance makes Gladiator II worthwhile. Still, not even its excessively violent action sequences, beautiful cinematography, and masterful set and costume design can save the sequel from how boring it is. Ridley Scott waited over twenty years to make a sequel that is more than twice as expensive as the original only to rehash the same story points.

A review by GenerationofSwineWritten on November 24, 2024

pssst.... it's woke, but that's no surprise. What is a surprise is that people are giving spoiler alerts. I don't understand why. Like so many movie squeals and reboots what you have here is Gladiator with everything intelligent and entertaining...

pssst.... it's woke, but that's no surprise.

What is a surprise is that people are giving spoiler alerts. I don't understand why. Like so many movie squeals and reboots what you have here is Gladiator with everything intelligent and entertaining sucked out of it. So it's the same movie, but shorter. There are two emperors rather than ones. Rome is falling, but not from the debauchery, intellectual laziness, and over stretched militarism that really caused it's fall... that would be anti-woke to point out it collapsed for all the reasons they love. Instead some lazy leftism the right is evil crap, peppered with fiery but mostly peaceful protests blamed on the thinly veiled reference to Trump. Might as well have the baddies wear red hats that read "Make Rome Great Again."

With lectures. And I don't need to go over the political lectures, they are all the same. Woke Hollywood is predictable and best described as "The Who to Hate Network."

The worst part is Denzel, I mean I know he still needs to work, but come on man, you're better than this.

A review by MovieGuysWritten on November 26, 2024

Are you not entertained? Well, quite frankly, no.... Gladiator II or Gladiator lite as I like to call it is the "essentials" brand version of Gladiator. You know like, the "essentials brand" of underpants as opposed to known brands like...

Are you not entertained? Well, quite frankly, no....

Gladiator II or Gladiator lite as I like to call it is the "essentials" brand version of Gladiator. You know like, the "essentials brand" of underpants as opposed to known brands like Bendon or Jockey. They do the job, they're okay but still the brand names are just "better".

Gladiator lite (II) mimics its predecessor but its predominantly just a bare essentials remake of a superior, original film. The story is a rather basic "almost" version of the year 2000 film starring Russell Crowe, the protagonists more or less fill the same or similar roles and well, that's about it. Oh but for a dash of difference, they do have CGI sharks, monkey's and rhino's, if, for whatever weird reason, that's your thing.

In summary, this is really just a rather uninspiring "almost" facsimile, of a vastly superior, original film. Its not bad as such, its just feels like a beige re-run of sorts, that need not have been made.

A review by Elif Duru AlacaWritten on November 27, 2024

After many years, the sequel of the movie is really great, go to the cinema and watch it.

After many years, the sequel of the movie is really great, go to the cinema and watch it.

A review by Chandler DanierWritten on December 14, 2024

Denzel is a badass. I love Denzel. He does the tongue thing from Joaquin's role in the first. Not even he could save this pile of crap. The CGI somehow is worse than the original. Historical battles are cool but...

Denzel is a badass. I love Denzel. He does the tongue thing from Joaquin's role in the first. Not even he could save this pile of crap.

The CGI somehow is worse than the original. Historical battles are cool but not even historical battles could save this pile of crap.

The Mandalorian is cool. Not even the Mandalorian could save this pile of crap.

It's a pile of crap.

A review by RalphRahalWritten on December 29, 2024

When Ridley Scott decided to revisit Gladiator, it sounded like an opportunity to expand on one of the greatest historical epics. Instead, we got a rehash that feels more like a missed opportunity than a bold sequel. The first act...

When Ridley Scott decided to revisit Gladiator, it sounded like an opportunity to expand on one of the greatest historical epics. Instead, we got a rehash that feels more like a missed opportunity than a bold sequel.

The first act rushes through familiar territory. A general, born out of combat, loses his family and ends up as a slave. Sound familiar? It’s the same setup as Maximus’s story, minus the emotional weight. And sending Lucilla’s son away to protect him? That’s not just a weak plot point, it spits on everything Maximus and Marcus died for.

The second act brings nothing new to the table. The “twist” is predictable, the plot messy, and the villains uninspired. Commodus worked because he was layered, a mix of insecurity and cruelty. Here, the two emperors are generic placeholders. Even the attempted coup feels like déjà vu, with none of the intensity or buildup that made the first movie iconic.

The third act delivers a visually stunning battle but lacks substance. The final showdown offers nothing fresh, and the death of the antagonist in front of everyone feels like it’s trying to copy the original. The speech about “Maximus and Marcus’s dream”? We’ve heard it before, and it meant more the first time.

What was the point of that last scene? There were so many ways to end this movie with a high note, something meaningful to honor Lucilla or Acacius. Instead, we get a hollow, pointless ending that adds nothing to the story.

Credit where it’s due: the cinematography, CGI, and score are outstanding. Visually, the movie is a masterpiece, with breathtaking scenery and polished editing. The music, while clearly inspired by the original, carries the mood well. But great visuals can’t save a story that refuses to move forward.

Gladiator 2 had potential, but it’s stuck trying to recreate past glory instead of delivering something new. It’s visually impressive but ultimately hollow.

A review by FerdinandoLMWritten on January 4, 2025

$250 million, and the best we get is… rabid monkeys? Ridley Scott’s Gladiator 2 feels like a parody of itself. Pascal’s character is utterly unnecessary, a cardboard figure who exists solely to fill runtime without contributing anything memorable or meaningful....

$250 million, and the best we get is… rabid monkeys? Ridley Scott’s Gladiator 2 feels like a parody of itself. Pascal’s character is utterly unnecessary, a cardboard figure who exists solely to fill runtime without contributing anything memorable or meaningful. D.W., despite his undeniable talent, is saddled with a bafflingly underwritten role, spouting clunky dialogue as the story collapses around him.

As for the central narrative about Maximus Meridius’ son? Trivial and painfully predictable. The "legacy revenge" arc is telegraphed so clearly you could write the script after the first act. No twists, no depth—just a paint-by-numbers retread of the original’s emotional beats.

Glory to Dondus indeed.