Gladiator 2. UMMM...WTF

[Ezekiel 25:17]

Late for the party but I just recently watched the Gladiator sequel.......

What a shit show. Im not even gonna dignify this with a proper review. It was ass. Im generous when I say it deserves 3.5/10.



So they pretty much recycle the plot from the original and expect us to eat it up? Could the writers get any fucking lazier?



The acting ranged from meh to shoot me. Even the production seemed half ass compared to the original from 2 and a half decades ago.


The antagonists were all cringe as f. Those twin emperors might as well have been looney toons cartoon characters. Even Denzel who is usually at the very least good in everything, managed to be meh here.

The scene with the babboons was ridiculous.



The scene with the sharks was ridiculous.



Hell, several scenes in this wacky film were ridiculous.


Im glad Crowe had nothing to do with this tbh.


This has got to be one of Ridleys biggest flops. I dont care what they review it at. Some people probably just enjoyed the nostalgia aspect. Not me. They should have stayed away.

The first Gladiator is a great film. Very well acted & directed. Had good pacing, solid use of music and excellent action with a story you can really sink into.

This seemed like a sad parody of that film.

I honestly would have rather watched the time travel idea they were trying to create originally. As goofy as it sounded, it at least would have been more original than this recycled trash.

Please Hollywood. Do us all a favour and take a break from making movies. You suck homies. You suck!!

 

[Adamant]

Hollywood ran out of original ideas years ago (save for Tarantino, maybe Nolan, and maybe a couple others).

The theme of modern Hollywood seems to be "do it again, but worse"

 

[RichardHarrow]

Wont ruin the memories of the original.

 

[San Marino]

The preview to the movie was terrible, why should the movie have been any good?
A surprisingly shitty movie for Ridley Scott. A waste of $310 million dollars. I could have made a better movie with just $10 million.

 

[Flower2dPeople]

The preview to the movie was terrible, why should the movie have been any good?
A surprisingly shitty movie for Ridley Scott. A waste of $310 million dollars. I could have made a better movie with just $10 million.

Ridley lost his touch. He's a hit or miss(most often) these days.

 

[Sobek]

To be fair, Ridley is in his late 80s I think.

A lot of people stop operating at their best long before that.

I had no plans to watch it, until it's free at least. Hollywood's portrayal of Rome often centres around debauchery and the bizarre and little else.

Even Denzel made some loose interview comment about wanting 'to tear Rome down'.

 

[Zer]

I remember a couple weeks ago seeing some article where even Ridley's Cinematographer for Gladiator 2 was saying he basically doesn't give a shit any more and just wants to rush movies out of the door

‘Gladiator II' Cinematographer: Ridley Scott Has “Changed," is Now “Lazy" and “Rushes to Get Things Done" — World of Reel

Mathieson claims that Scott has become “lazy,” and “rushes" to get things done. He further adds that Scott's current approach has negatively impacted the quality of his movies, including their look and feel.

www.worldofreel.com

Mathieson has worked as Scott’s director of photography on six films, including “Gladiator,” “Matchstick Men” and “Kingdom of Heaven.” There’s a good chance they won’t ever collaborate again after these comments.

In the podcast interview, Mathieson claims that Scott has become “lazy,” and “rushes" to get things done. He further adds that Scott's current approach has negatively impacted the quality of his recent films, including their look and feel.

He went on to claim that the director has “changed” and was now “quite impatient” on set, which he felt had a detrimental effect on the finished production. Mathieson told the podcast that Scott now shoots scenes with multiple cameras, rather than just one, resulting in less attention to detail.

“It’s really lazy,” Mathieson continued. “It’s the CG [computer graphic] elements now of tidying-up, leaving things in shot, cameras in shot, microphones in shot, bits of set hanging down, shadows from booms. And they just said [on Gladiator II], ‘Well, clean it up.’

“He is quite impatient so he likes to get as much as he can at once,” Mathieson said of Scott’s use of multiple cameras. “It’s not very good for cinematography,” he explained, saying it means you “can only light from one angle”.

He added: “Look at his older films and getting depth into things was very much part of lighting. You can’t do that with a lot of cameras but he just wants to get it all done.”

“Having lots of cameras I don’t think has made the films any better…It’s a bit rush, rush, rush. That’s changed in him. But that’s the way he wants to do it and I don’t like it and I don’t think many people do, but people love his films and he’s Ridley Scott and can do what he wants,” Mathieson continued.

“People want to shoot multi cameras because they get lots of performances and they put lots of people in,” he added. “But there’s not the care.”

“Now it is this thing of ‘generally covering stuff’ rather than me being the cook cooking you something wonderful in my kitchen downstairs,” he said. “You just go to the supermarket and get one of those really big trolleys and you just put your arm on the shelf and just chuck all that stuff in and we’ll sort it out later.”

Scott, 87, well known in the industry as a workhorse, has released four films in the last three years: “The Last Duel,” “House of Gucci,” “Napoleon,” and “Gladiator II.”

He also has a whopping eight projects currently in development, including his next film “The Dog Stars,” starring Paul Mescal, which is set start production in January. The other seven projects in development, that we know of, are his Bee Gees biopic, “BOMB,” “The Battle of Britain,” “Gladiator III,” “Big Dogs,” and “Queen and Country.”

 

[Wilmer Digreux]

I remember a couple weeks ago seeing some article where even Ridley's Cinematographer for Gladiator 2 was saying he basically doesn't give a shit any more and just wants to rush movies out of the door

He also has a whopping eight projects currently in development, including his next film “The Dog Stars,” starring Paul Mescal, which is set start production in January. The other seven projects in development, that we know of, are his Bee Gees biopic, “BOMB,” “The Battle of Britain,” “Gladiator III,” “Big Dogs,” and “Queen and Country.”


There's going to be a Gladiator 3?! Whoa

 

[ColemanwastheGOAT]

Honestly I rewatched the original a couple of weeks ago and it doesn't hold up.

The opening battle scene is great but it's all downhill from there.

 

[liner]

Sounds like shit. I was going to take a girl to this but going to a Meow Wolf instead.

go watch the TV show Spartacus for the gladiator fix. That's a fun show I think it holds up well. Rewatching it for the 3rd time

 

[Kowboy On Sherdog]

Is it on Prime yet?

 

[Protectandserve]

Gladiator 2 was complete and utter ass. Denzel was peak though.

Joseph Quinn was also a high point but other than their 2 performances it was so damn bad.

Fight scenes sucked, main character had none of the screen presence to carry a movie.

Story was absolutely dog shit.

 

[TrueBias]

Said it once and I'll say it again:

Tony Scott >>>> Ridley Scott


Coming from a giant alien fan.

 

[Renard]

You could tell from the trailer it was going to be some Hollyweird nonsense

 

[Ezekiel 25:17]

To be fair, Ridley is in his late 80s I think.

A lot of people stop operating at their best long before that.

I had no plans to watch it, until it's free at least. Hollywood's portrayal of Rome often centres around debauchery and the bizarre and little else.

Even Denzel made some loose interview comment about wanting 'to tear Rome down'.

Clint might be the exception, but ya, there should be a cut off for funding after a certain age. He just wasted a shit ton of cash making trash imo. That money could have been spread between 2 dozen indi filmmakers who would have made 2 dozen better films.

 

[Tabarnakos]

Clint might be the exception, but ya, there should be a cut off for funding after a certain age. He just wasted a shit ton of cash making trash imo. That money could have been spread between 2 dozen indi filmmakers who would have made 2 dozen better films.

I'd add Sir Christopher Lee to that. The man was 80ish when he played Dooku

A true legend.

 

[Ezekiel 25:17]

I'd add Sir Christopher Lee to that. The man was 80ish when he played Dooku

A true legend.

I think it was moreso directors we were referring to. Actors can keep going just so long as they can spit lines out. Directors have so many responsibilities though, that old age could certainly pose a big issue.

 

[Your Salad]

I'd rather watch Wicked than G2.

 

[Prex32]

Honestly I rewatched the original a couple of weeks ago and it doesn't hold up.

The opening battle scene is great but it's all downhill from there.

it also lacks an original soundtrack to be that highly regarded
never got the hype

 

[Seano]

I saw it had Denzel Washington in it, which struck me as the most bizarre and out of place casting choice I could imagine, like John Wayne as Genghis Khan level weird.