Before we begin it’s important to mention I watched this on IMAX. Not only I encourage everyone to watch it at the very least in theatres, but truly, you are making a disservice to the movie, and those who worked on it, watching it in anything but the big screen. Furthermore, I did go into the theatre with a sword (my pen), hesitant, and even scared about what I was going to witness. All I can say, it’s a movie. And the movie delivers.
Alright, let’s talk about it.
While I understand why a slight majority disliked it, I believe it would be disrespectful for anyone to hate it, considering: the amount of people it took to make this piece, the harmonious collaboration between the saint trinity of cinema (Production Design, Direction, and Cinematography), and not forgetting the master himself; Ridley Scott, whom I refuse to believe placed his legacy on the line hadn’t there been a worthy script and a prominent vision to work with.
Now, hadn’t it been Ridley Scott the one bringing this to life, it would’ve been a completely different story and it’d be fair for any fan to have way more scrutiny towards the overall creation of this piece. This is not to say Ridley is excused, but his accolades speak for himself, the man knows what he’s doing, how to do it, and when to do it, which brings me to the next point.
Gladiator II is a movie; a movie that whether we like it or not deserves its adequate spot in film history. While it’s still a sequel, Gladiator II is its own movie, from it’s own time, and will stand as a great contemporary piece; juxtaposing it to the great timeless work of Gladiator, 2000. And Timeless is the key word.
The greatness of the first film - in broad terms - is accomplished because of Ridley’s great understanding in the power and techniques of the 90s while betting it all in the new upcoming feel of the 2000s. Gladiator was bold, and it was precisely his defiance to the new millennium that made it the best Hollywood movie of the decade (Among few others of course). Taking away the last part of the sentence, he does this in Gladiator II, but this time around using his experience and yet again - but to a whole new level - the power of technology to bring us the greatest, most ruthless, and unapologetic vicious spectacle we have ever seen. Basically yelling at us indirectly in the audience: “Are you not entertained!?” Because while some won’t like it, everyone will be entertained.
Yes, it has some questionable editing techniques, cheap shots at the narrative, slightly excessive use of cgi, and weird screenplay connotations that while they may have made sense to Ridley, they could’ve been avoided and it wouldn’t have damaged the story, but in the contrary, it would’ve made it cleaner. But people forget something very important: THIS IS HOLLYWOOD GODDAMMIT! And it is precisely some of those cliche techniques that make this movie an epic, and for everyone to enjoy, at the end of the day, that’s what made Hollywood great in the first place.
But! To those diminishing the cast, and calling the beautiful Paul Mescal a miscast I ask: What did you want?! Who else could’ve played this? Since we know it’s near to impossible filling both Joaquin Phoenix’s and Russell Crowe’s shoes, who, then, was apt for the part? Most of the cast - yes, most - delivered accordingly; some left their soul and presence on screen, while some could’ve given slightly more. But to diminish the acting? I just personally can’t allow it.
Finally, no matter how this would’ve went; no matter which storyline they could’ve picked, and no matter who they could’ve casted, it was never going to fulfill today’s exigent audience. I also refuse to give my full review until I’ve watched the Director’s Cut. It’s known Ridley does like to take his time with pacing, build up the momentum of the scene accordingly, and give the adequate depth to both the characters and their dialogues; something I expect to see more in the Director’s cut. The preservation and proper delivery of some dialogues and the necessary build up to some scenes that may have been too long to the average spectator; considering this cut is almost touching the three hour mark. The producer’s cut did what had to be done in order to tell the story within the time-frame and shield itself against a rigid audience. For us lovers of cinema, we must wait to see the truth behind Gladiator II sooner than later, until then, acknowledge this sensational contemporary magnum opus in IMAX while you can.
Written by Tonino
*This article is posted with learning purposes only. Written by an eagerly passionate film student in the pursuit of growth and knowledge within the critique world in order to better understand motion pictures. Every critique is constructive and appreciated.*
View replies 1
View replies 0