Gladiator II-Movie Review

By Rob Hinkal

At 86 years old, Ridley Scott doesn’t have much more to prove. And for the last decade or so of his career, it has felt as though he is of the exact same mindset.

For every, The Martian, there is an Alien: Covenant or a House of Gucci. Even last year’s historical epic Napoleon felt like a dull thud compared to the maestro’s previous iconic works such as Blade Runner, Alien, and Black Hawk Down. So here we are nearly a year out from Napoleon, seeing Scott return to the world of his Best-picture-winning Roman epic, Gladiator. A movie that is now nearly a quarter of a century old and has remained a talking point in popular culture since its release.  The question on everyone’s minds this weekend is “How is Gladiator II?”. The answer? It’s a mixed, but overall enjoyable bag   

This has a pretty sloppy start. Sure, its scale is grandiose and, I imagine, comparable to how it felt watching the first Gladiator, with its epic reconstruction of Rome and the Coliseum, but it doesn’t feel like there is much there beyond what you can see on the screen. The subtext and emotional stakes feel paper-thin, and it all seems thrown together without much passion or care. Elements of its predecessor are echoed throughout, but only work to draw comparisons between the quality of the two films. There’s no Joaquin Phoenix so it feels like they needed to write in two emperors to replace his commanding presence.

The performances in Gladiator II vary widely. Paul Mescal turns in a strong central turn as our lead character this time around. Other reviews have criticized him in the film, but while I did agree that he felt out of place for some beats, by the end he is a truly commanding presence. Denzel Washington is… Denzel Washington. If you love Denzel, you’re going to love how many levels he turns up in this one. Pedro Pascal tries his best to take on a stoic stature as a Roman general, but I can’t say that I truly connected with his character until his very last scene. I love me some Pedro, but he just wasn’t bringing it enough for me here. Connie Nielsen is also quite good and is given a wealth of material to work with to express a range of emotions. An assignment she aces without ever feeling forced or unnatural. Interestingly enough, I found her character to be the one whose internal struggles are the most interesting and thought-provoking. Especially moving into the second half of the film…

The second half of Gladiator II is where, as Martin Lawrence would say, shit gets real. I’m not sure what happened here, perhaps Ridley ate his Wheaties when they were shooting these scenes, but it gets good. The fights in the Coliseum are already fun, but when the plot gets cooking, this thing picks up like you wouldn’t believe. Suddenly the gladiatorial battles take on a much more important role in the story. Machinations come to fruition and a sense of urgency is felt for the first time. By the end of the film, while it was a bumpy and uneven road getting there, it feels like a true Hollywood epic. Ironically, it reminded me a great deal of Scott’s 2021 medieval tale, The Last Duel, for a stretch, with its focus on the internal struggle of the film’s female lead being one of the more fascinating elements of the story. This isn’t a masterpiece, but it is leagues better than the slog that was Napoleon and the laughably over-the-top House of Gucci. There are glimpses of how great a director Ridley Scott can be in here. They stand out for good reason, but even with the welcome rebound the movie makes by its end, there are still noticeably large flaws in the first half of the film which is sadly, just not interesting at all.

Gladiator was slow and methodical in its approach to storytelling. This one is, most definitely, not. If you are looking for spectacle and pure cinematic entertainment, you will enjoy Gladiator II. If you are looking for a film on par with the original in terms of story and overall quality, you may walk away disappointed. That said, I would recommend that fans of the original check it out purely for the highly-enjoyable second half of the film. I can’t say that I can quite understand what Ridley Scott’s game plan is when choosing projects anymore, but what I can say is that it is certainly one of the more interesting careers in modern film history.

3 out of 5 stars