Based on his career as a filmmaker, Ridley Scott is a man who has made bold choices. He’s the kind of director where many people, even his deepest fans, will not know what film he’ll decide to make next.
His latest, “Gladiator II” (2024), perfectly encapsulates a daring decision: producing a sequel to a beloved Best Picture-winning original many people didn’t ask for.
In its context, “Gladiator II” takes place 16 years after the demise of Marcus Aurelius in an era where corrupt twin brothers, Geta (Joseph Quinn) and Caracalla (Fred Hechinger), both serve as emperors of the Roman Empire.
General Acacius (Pedro Pascal) and his Roman army invade and attack the city of Numidia, where Lucius Verus Aurelius (Paul Mescal), going by “Hanno,” lives with his wife Arishat. In the battle, Arishat is killed. Lucius, along with many others, is enslaved and taken to Rome.
To ensure whether the captives were suitable to be potential gladiators, the Romans placed them up against vicious baboons. Lucius is the only one to savagely kill a baboon with his bare hands and teeth, impressing the stable master Macrinus (Denzel Washington).
Macrinus meets with Lucius and proposes a deal with him: if he wins enough challenges in the Colosseum, he can personally kill Acacius. With vengeance in his heart, Lucius accepts Macrinus’ offer for the deadly games to satisfy his wrath and restore the strength and honor needed to be returned to the Roman citizens.
“Gladiator II” is difficult to distinguish from “Gladiator” (2000) because it doesn’t do enough to stand on its own, not because it’s a sequel to a classic film and one of Scott’s best. It falls into the trap most sequels, prequels and spin-offs have in common: no purpose.
This doesn’t necessarily mean the film is bad as there are a lot of good qualities in the film. Its lead actor, Mescal, does a tremendous job taking up the mantle and playing the son of Maximus Decimus Meridius (Russell Crowe).
Mescal’s mannerisms from the way he speaks to the minor things like rubbing sand between his hands (like his father did) are all perfectly executed. He never feels like somebody doing an impression or trying to copy the magic Crowe created for Maximus in the first film.
He matches Crowe’s cadence and makes the audience believe the guy they see onscreen is Maximus’s son. Mescal and Crowe looking very similar to one another also helps.
The acting is mostly solid for everyone, especially Washington. However, some of the character writing isn’t fully developed for those such as Quinn’s Geta and Hechinger’s Caracalla. Both do a fine job, but their characters feel like they should’ve had more to do.
Unlike Mescal, Quinn and Hechinger feel like they are trying to do their variation of Joaquin Phoenix’s Commodus. This isn’t an acting issue but a writing issue, and other characters in the film feel like they are missing developmental scenes.
Scott is no stranger to making and using amazing sets and locations for his films. While the historical accuracy of “Gladiator II” may be a bit questionable periodically, there is no doubt the production crew paid great attention to detail when recreating Rome.
The awesome costume design is equally impressive. Every character has a nice and distinct look from one another and is probably the most accurate to what actual Roman people wore.
This film lacks a creative musical score, something the original did beautifully. Hans Zimmer and Lisa Gerrard created a haunting and memorable score for “Gladiator” that was in everyone’s heads after they saw it for the first time. In “Gladiator II,” the score by Harry Gregson-Williams is bland and does not match what the original had done.
As the film’s title suggests, there are many scenes where Lucius is fighting against other gladiators with a mix of animals such as a rhinoceros and even sharks at one point. Whether or not there is sufficient evidence that this happened in ancient Rome is out of the conversation. It is a glorious spectacle to witness on screen.
At the end of the day, “Gladiator II” is a solid film. It may not make all fans of the original happy, but that is their own opinion. For what it is, it’s worth at least one viewing.
Rating: 3.5/5
