1 week Ago
Gladiator II review: Right from its opening battle sequence, Ridley Scott's Gladiator II grabs you by the collar to have your attention and refuses to let go. Even in its slow moments of exposition, the film commands it. Add some spectacular battles, visually stunning sets, and a host of powerful performances, and you have a winner on your hands, right? Well, almost! Despite its grandeur and finesse, Gladiator II suffers because of the bar raised by Part 1.
It stays unmemorable, failing to deliver the emotional highs and quote-worthy lines that made Part One such a cultural phenomenon. And that is where Gladiator II fails, if one may use the term slightly unkindly. ( Also read: Gladiator 2 first reviews: Critics call Paul Mescal, Denzel Washington sequel ‘imitative’ but ‘entertaining’ ) What is Gladiator II about Gladiator II is about Hanno (Paul Mescal), a Numidian soldier who hates Rome.
After his wife is killed and he is captured in battle with General Acacius ( Pedro Pascal ), he vows to have his head. Forced to be a gladiator in the stable of Macrinus (Denzel Washington), Hanno becomes a crowd favourite, and it is soon revealed that he is the son of Maximus and Lucilla (Connie Nielsen), making him an heir to the throne of Rome. Now, opposing factions want to use him in their power grab against the twin Emperors - Geta and Caracalla (Joseph Quinn and Fred Hechinger).
Right from the story to its background score, Gladiator II fails to shake off comparisons from Part 1. Every character here seems to be a substitute for someone from Gladiator - Hanno for Maximus, Geta for Commodus, Lucilla for herself, and so on. The comparisons don't help the film's cause because it is a pretty good standalone film.
On its own, Gladiator II is among the better films of 2024 - great to watch, entertaining, possessing good character arcs, and effectively humanising politics of the time. What works and what doesn't What particularly works against Gladiator II is that everything that makes the film great is a callback to the first one. Be it shots of Maximus in the arena, the score from part 1's climax, or Hanno slipping in an 'in this life or the next' in one of his lines, the film's best moments are evocative of its predecessor.
It has nothing of note that could make it stand out on its own. Yet, despite that, Gladiator II is not a bad film. It has a tight screenplay that does tend to over-complicate things at times but stays true to its cause.
The characters are layered, and the conflict seems real. It even allows for some misdirection, having you look at Joseph Quinn's Emperor Gato as the big bad even as Denzel lurks in the shadows. It does all that beautifully but then also slips in some rather large defiances of logic, where people can ride hundreds of miles in a few hours, and soldiers stand to watch as generals fight.
The USP of Gladiator II is its visual appeal. Rome and the Roman Empire have never looked more decadent. Scott evokes disgust for this rotting behemoth in every frame, filling us with the same rage that Hanno harbours for the city and its rulers.
The games themselves are a step above what we have seen so far, with Scott going all out to raise the bar in that department. Sure, historians may disagree with the use of sharks and baboons, but I don't go to IMAX and watch a Ridley Scott film for a history lesson. The grey zone in which all characters live makes Gladiator II more interesting than its predecessor.
Here, nobody is truly right. Even Hanno, our protagonist, can get on your nerves for his hatred of General Acacius, a just man caught in an unjust role. But it's Denzel who gets the most delicious role to play, and the veteran shows just what he is made of, delivering the film's standout performance.
Pedro Pascal isn't far behind, either. However, Paul Mescal and Joseph Quinn suffer because their characters are reduced to Maximus-lite and Commodus-lite. The young actors try.
But clearly, the director chose fan service over substance here. To sum it up Gladiator II is a great watch for anyone who hasn't watched the first part. This one is grander, more spectacular, and even more visceral than the first one, turning it up by a few notches in every department.
But alas, the comparisons - which are clearly intended by the makers - drown it. Also, Ridley Scott becomes the latest filmmaker to fall to the Game of Thrones syndrome. He introduces the main characters and kills them off so casually so often in the film that it loses its novelty pretty quickly.
Gladiator II is a film for its times, but not a film for all times..
