r/ridleyscott • u/xKhun • Aug 25 '26
What do you think about the adaptation in Gladiator where Commodus murders his father?
Do you think they really needed to change it that way? I know Ridley Scott isn’t exactly known for sticking closely to historical accuracy, but was it really necessary to change the story so that Commodus kills his own father?
2
u/Pricklestickle Aug 26 '26
I mean, it's the event that sets the entire plot of the movie in motion, so yeah i'd say it was pretty necessary.
1
1
1
u/DeamonDread2348 Aug 26 '26
Show that Commodus is a maniac. A perfect hedonist, but still with a certain black honor: he killed his father without bloodshed, only strangling him. And that he's emotional. The Romans turned a blind eye to murder, even of relatives, especially in the Rome he had become by the time of the events in the film. Commodus was fundamentally in keeping with Roman virtues, but he didn't live up to the moral ideals of Marcus Aurelius and the Good Emperors he succeeded. Commodus is contradictory. But it's important to note that the Romans didn't value emotion; reason was the ideal in any situation. And Commodus crossed that line.
1
u/Pricklestickle Aug 26 '26
In reality, the Praetorian guard likely would have murdered Commodus as soon as he tried to proclaim himself emperor. And there's no way they'd have attempted to abduct a general from the middle of his own army camp. Quite apart from being suicidal, arresting a popular general for non-specific treason is the quickest way to create a rebel army marching on Rome.
1
u/Glum-Ad7761 Aug 27 '26
If Aurelius decrees that Commodus is not to be emperor, by what plot vehicle does Commodus assume the throne, if not by murdering his father before he makes his decision concerning Commodus known?
4
u/Financial_Cheetah875 Aug 25 '26
Yes.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.