Ridley Scott’s Gladiator II is just around the corner (by the time I was writing this), and I can’t say I’m not intrigued. But as I sit here, freshly acquainted with the original 2000 Gladiator—yes, it took me 24 years to finally watch it—I’m left wondering if we truly need another grand tale of revenge, honor, and heroism in 2024.
Let me make one thing clear: Gladiator is a great movie. The sweeping battles, Hans Zimmer’s hauntingly beautiful score, Russell Crowe’s magnetic performance—there’s a reason it became a cultural landmark. But watching it for the first time in the here and now, I couldn’t shake the feeling that it belongs to a bygone era. The themes of righteous vengeance and singular heroism feel... distant. Today’s audiences, myself included, seem drawn to messier, morally ambiguous stories—the kind that reflect the chaos of our own world, not one where the lines between good and evil are so sharply drawn.
Now let's return to Gladiator II. The trailers are predictably epic—glorious Roman architecture, dirt and sweat-streaked warriors, Paul Mescal looking determined in all the right ways. And yet, I can’t help but feel hesitant to watch it.
For one, Ridley Scott’s last foray into the historical epic, Napoleon, was, let’s say, not much of a success. Despite having Joaquin Phoenix in the lead and a marketing campaign that screamed “large-scale filmmaking”, the film struggled to connect with audiences or critics. If even Napoleon Bonaparte—one of the most fascinating and complex figures in history—couldn’t inspire a hit, what does that mean for Lucius, a character only tangentially related to the original Gladiator?
And then there’s the question of relevance. Is the Gladiator formula—mighty men fighting for glory and justice—still what people want to see? In a time when “hero” has become a word steeped in irony, and we’re more likely to question power structures than cheer for their defenders, a straightforward tale of valor might struggle to resonate.
Even visually, the historical epic genre seems at odds with the digital age. Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure Gladiator II will look stunning on the big screen, but there’s a growing sense that these larger-than-life spectacles are losing their allure. With the rise of streaming platforms and the dominance of tightly paced, character-driven dramas, people want intimacy and immediacy, not grandeur.
That said, I do admire Scott’s determination. At 86 years old, the man is still swinging for the fences, creating films designed to lure people back into theaters. And that’s something we need—the communal experience of cinema, if not the stories themselves.
Of course, Ridley Scott isn’t the only veteran director attempting to keep the theatrical experience alive with grand, ambitious projects. Take Martin Scorsese, for instance. Last year’s Killers of the Flower Moon was a sweeping, meticulously crafted crime epic that was meant to be seen on the big screen, even though its pacing and runtime polarized viewers. Similarly, Christopher Nolan continued to champion cinema as a collective experience, with Oppenheimer proving that even dense historical dramas can draw massive crowds—provided they’re anchored by strong narratives and inventive filmmaking.
Meanwhile, some have stumbled in their efforts to marry spectacle with substance. James Cameron’s Avatar: The Way of Water delivered stunning visuals and pushed technical boundaries, but its narrative felt like a rehash to many. Steven Spielberg, too, struggled to find his footing with The Fabelmans, a deeply personal story that, while critically acclaimed, failed to resonate with mass audiences the way his past blockbusters did.
These examples highlight a truth: the balancing act between artistry, commercial appeal, and audience expectations has never been trickier. For every success, there’s a cautionary tale—a reminder that even legends of the industry are not immune to the ever-shifting sands of contemporary cinema.
So, do we need Gladiator II? Honestly, I’m torn. Maybe the film will surprise me, offering a fresh spin on a classic formula. Or maybe it’ll feel like a relic of a different time, desperately clinging to meanings that are gradually fading. Either way, I’ll be watching—partly out of curiosity, partly out of respect, and partly because, well, it’s Ridley Scott.
But as I wait, I can’t help but wonder: in a world grappling with uncertainty, where stories about survival, empathy, and connection feel more urgent than ever, are we still looking for gladiators? Or are we ready to step forward and leave the arena behind?
View replies 0