Directed by: Ridley Scott
Distributed by: Paramount Pictures
Written by Taylor Baker
34/100
Nearly a quarter century has passed since Ridley Scott’s original “Gladiator.” His shift in sensibility has been gradual, while the material he shoots is often similar to the fare he’s directed for decades.
In “Gladiator II,” Scott exchanges the grim and focused look at the excesses of the powerful and the limitations of lower classes in his original for a cartoonish, unmoored sequel. The cacophony of the Colosseum is mixed absurdly loud, the sprawling land and sea battles look and feel phony, and the figures that hold power–Emperor Geta (Joseph Quinn) and Emperor Caracalla (Fred Hechinger)–are absurd caricatures. Even the hero Lucius (Paul Mescal), though well performed, seems artificial.
Scott’s spectacle is drug down by its constant use of CGI, with sharks, rhinos, fire, trebuchets, fleets, blood, wounds, and much more that is obviously and painfully digitally rendered. Three short years ago, Scott’s “The Last Duel” exhibited battle sequences and interpersonal relationships between those with and without power more tactfully. In last year’s “Napoleon” and now “Gladiator II,” Scott conjures his cityscapes digitally, unmooring the audience from any grounding his central figure was able to convince the audience of.
Denzel Washington’s Macrinus is amusing but suffers from the bungled narrative central to the film’s thrust. One can see Denzel believes in the import of his lines and allusions to his history, but through a convoluted presentation, the film ends up cutting what should be its standout performer off at the knees. The film continuously elevates its “point” above the humanity and depth of its players and their relationships. It leaves one feeling like they’re watching Scott stand in the arena waggling a sword at anyone in the crowd who’ll hear him. And in a way, he is. “Gladiator II” plays as if Ridley is standing everyone’s multiplex, waggling his new two-hundred-plus-million-dollar historical epic like a disillusioned teacher that can no longer find the joy in the classroom but doesn’t know how to do anything else.
The narrative and presentation of “Gladiator II” has an uncanny valley quality. It seems like an imitation of what a “Gladiator” sequel should be. It seemingly accounts for the mechanics and narrative details of the original. It appears to account for the sensibilities of audiences today. But almost every minute of it seems unsubstantial and false. Its relationships are forced, the conveniences overwhelming, and its dialogue mechanical. The historical inaccuracies accentuate this slightly off rendition in the way that staring too long at an AI-generated image accentuates false fingers, backward legs, or inanimate objects that are ever so slightly wrong.
Like its final battle sequence, the film is a garish CGI redo of something more sincere that came before. It’s a pity to see Scott flounder in the historical action genre, where he once seemed king. “Gladiator II” has the unique and flummoxing quality of being lousy despite the efforts of many talented craftspeople and performers. What a pity.
“Gladiator II” Trailer
You can follow more of Taylor’s thoughts on film on Letterboxd, Twitter, and Rotten Tomatoes.