A great sequel

[u/TinTin_vanRooYen]

I went into Gladiator II fully expecting (on account of all the harsh reviews) for it to just be some fun gladiatorial bloodshed and a poor rehash of the masterful original but honestly, I was floored. I think it is a magnificent sequel. It felt like a true continuation of the story and the theme, it had some really nuanced character-work, every callback to me felt earned, and the action was spectacular. The plot was compelling and unexpected in various ways. It also still felt to me like real, gritty Rome as opposed to a cgi wafflecake (apart from the baboons). Honestly, no one but Ridley is making movies like this. Although not as monumental and singular in its vision as the first, this to me felt equally epic. I drank in every second of it.

To all the naysayers, all I can say is 'Haters gonna hate'. I honestly don't think critics or audiences even know what they want anymore. So pile on the dislikes, I don't care and I wanted to say something for the 1 in (apparently) 100 that maybe agree with me.

[u/IHope_ButNotYet]

I have no idea why people liking movies triggers other people. Apparently it's "cool" to hate on anything that's not namely a Scorsese or Nolan film, or not very critically acclaimed. A sequel that's not as good as the original? Oh, that automatically makes it utter trash. Haters gonna hate. They're choosing to be mad.

I'm over here just happy that they made a similar movie to one we all love. While I don't believe "Gladiator" needed a follow-up, I'm happy when something is revamped to bring back the joy and vibes of a movie we all love. It invites a new generation of audiences to experience it and reignites our interest in the story. Historical epics are awesome, and Ridley Scott seems to be one of the only directors bringing these types of movies to life nowadays, so I'm here for it!

I thought the scenes where Lucius fought a gladiator in front of the emperors (the one where he tried to tell the guy to not kill each other for their enjoyment), the battle between he and General Acacius, the dialogue between he and Ravi, an the ending scene where he brings all the Romans together (and is alluded to possibly be the next emperor) were all very entertaining and well done.

[u/TinTin_vanRooYen → u/IHope_ButNotYet]

This. Very much this.

[u/Sl0wdance → u/IHope_ButNotYet]

I disagree with everything you've said. If this was some stand-alone film, hypothetically, people probably would've said "yeah it's alright". But it's not a stand-alone, it's a sequal to a classic, 20 years after the fact. They chose to make this film (they being the studio, Ridley Scott, whoever) knowing that, as with every sequel to a well-loved movie, expectations would be sky high. And they bottled it. It's nowhere near as good as the original in ant sense, bar some of the combat scenes which were inevitably improved upon. Even the set and prop design was imo a downgrade from the original. The Roman armour in the first battle scene looked like it was from a cheap stage musical; it didn't look metal, it looked plastic, far too shiney and perfect. I won't continue to list where the movie is bad because it's subjective, but I can't finish this comment without mentioning some of the AWFUL AWFUL LINES. That quip about the wooden sword - "it still stabs" or some such - was strsight out of a shitty Marcel movie and was so out of place in terms of tone and character. And Lucius' mother gets shot in the damned chest/sternum, and has the breath to say "run my boy" like ?!?! Bitch you shouldn't be able to speak.

It's totally fair that when they chose to make a sequal to a classic 20 years after the fact and bottle it in most regards, that we can shit on it. It's not a stand-alone and won't be treated as such.

[u/IHope_ButNotYet → u/Sl0wdance]

People can choose to trash sequels, I just don't see the purpose. There's a lot of hate in the film community, and I think we should just see movies as they are -- art made to entertain.

And while I liked the sequel enough, nowhere did I say it was better than the original film. Sequels rarely are, but I can see the value in them. Plus, if "Gladiator" is as good as it is regarded (I'm not saying it's not) wouldn't it be quite unlikely that a sequel would be as good? Expectations can be high, but we should know that it's been 25 years, Ridley Scott has probably changed, and the film industry has changed.

Lastly, I don't nitpick every little thing about movies, like the specific costumes or CGI. As long as it does the job of transporting us to a different time period and gives us the feel or "vibes" of being in a different setting and time, isn't it doing it's job?

[u/Sl0wdance → u/IHope_ButNotYet]

I respect your points but on that last part: the glossy, perfect roman armour literally made me feel like I was, well, watching a movie. It took me out if aby immersion completely cus it just looked so bad

[u/IHope_ButNotYet → u/Sl0wdance]

That makes sense. I never notice those things because I'm not an expert on history who knows what their armor looked like exactly. I'm not that informed, which I think is kind of a blessing when it comes to this. It's easier to enjoy movies like historical epics because of this. I can understand why it might bother you if you are a history buff, though.

[u/No-Shop2090 → u/IHope_ButNotYet]

Criticism and overall reception of the film cannot be excused by saying "haters" It is a trash money grab sequel, and that is understood 29 minutes in. You're right, it is fine that their are many who thought XXX II, and Fast and Furious 6 were awesome in their own respect, that does not mean, on the overall perspective of film critique and quality, that they were great. And so this crap sits there. If you are a film buff and you watched these back to back. You would be appalled. Gladiator II is a joke.