-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Gladiator 2 | Official Trailer (2024)
- Thread starter Tokio Blues
- Start date
_Idea_of_Evil_
Member
Even if it isn't as good as the first, I wouldn't entirely describe it as a pale copy. The sequel's emphasis on the Roman empire on the brink of collapse, the corrupt hedonism of the elites, and the portrayal of social disparity and civil unrest are what it has going for it, more so than the characters and overall story imo. The action wasn't bad either. I wish it had been more brutal, but that's just my personal taste.
Donald mac Ronald
Member
He has tiger blood
ScHlAuChi
Member
Who was the real Macrinus, Rome’s North African emperor?
In "Gladiator II," Denzel Washington plays Macrinus, the namesake of a historical emperor with a thrilling story.
www.nationalgeographic.com
Kar
Member
So they had to resort to questionable history so the film could be made, so what?Who was the real Macrinus, Rome’s North African emperor?
In "Gladiator II," Denzel Washington plays Macrinus, the namesake of a historical emperor with a thrilling story.
If they couldn't find something like that, the film would be bunch of angry white, powerful males again. Could you imagine? Absolutely horrifying.
Zephyranthes
Member
Just got back from the theater. The acting is pretty good all around. The action set pieces are fairly exciting and conceptually interesting. The visual presentation and soundtrack are well done also.
And then there's the writing, which is astonishingly terrible. Examples:
And then there's the writing, which is astonishingly terrible. Examples:
- "Our plan to overthrow the emperors requires utmost secrecy, so I am going to say it out loud in front my wife's servant and like 20 different senators. Surely none of them will tell anybody about this."
- "Ok son, so your father killed your evil emperor uncle like 10 seconds ago, but you're still in danger for reasons that nobody is going to bother explaining, so I'm going to send you away right this second to a location so remote that I don't even know where it is or how to get you back. But I'm definitely gonna bring you back, kay?"
- All written text in the film is depicted in Latin....except Maximus's catchphrase, which is carved into a wall in giant English
- "Hey Acacius, I know my whole objective in this movie has been to kill you because you serve tyrannical rulers and killed my wife, but you said my dad's name, so we're cool now."
- Highly trained soldier in the prime of his life, having spent the entire movie defeating heavily armored veteran gladiators, is overpowered in the final battle by a 70-year-old man wearing fancy robes.
- Aforementioned 70-year-old man, having the hero at his mercy, repeatedly tries in vain to stab him through his armor, which has been made impervious to all damage thanks to the power of symbolism.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
I think this is one of those movies you either watch it big screen or dont bother. Even if you know it might be meh, you got to go big.
It's like superhero movies. Most of them I dont watch, but if I do I'll go with family even though I know I dont care about them. But at home, I'll almost never watch them even though I can pull up every one on my stream box.
Last edited:
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
It’s got some great action setpieces no one else knows how to shoot anymore. They demand to be seen on the big screen.
I tried watching napoleon on TV in 4k hdr and the war scenes just didn’t click the same as they did on the big screen.
It is complete fiction so don’t go in expecting any historical accuracy.
Roger roger. I'll go see it in IMAX and leave my brain at the door as much as I can.
SJRB
Gold Member
Same. Had plans, got cancelled and now any interest just fizzled out. Lukewarm reception doesn’t help and I’m afraid this movie might somehow retroactively sully the original.
Might just wait for a Director’s Cut.
Last edited:
GermanZepp
Member
The movie is not good. It has nonsensical writing. Stupid lines to move the story forward and a couple of action scenes that are not even necessary. I say
. Friday night after pizza tv movie.
As mentioned, brain turned way, way off for this one. I watched the truly miserable Pompeii and Legend of Hercules beforehand as a warmup, which make this thing look like a masterpiece by comparison.
So, I thought it was fine. The action is good and Denzel and Pedro Pascal are both charismatic. A lot of fun, bloody, hard R battles, no punches pulled. The dynamic between Caracalla and Geta is sufficient to propel things along. Not quite different enough from Commodus, but you have Denzel to mix things up.
Biggest problem is the wooden lead. He invites a direct comparison to Russell Crowe, and can’t compare at all. Also, protect your wife, dumbass. His character wasn’t very likable.
Is it up to par with the original? No. The cinematographer trashed Ridley Scott publicly the other day for using a three camera setup out of laziness, so the film couldn’t be lit properly. It shows, lacking anything visually to take it from good to great.
A fun spectacle, no regrets.
So, I thought it was fine. The action is good and Denzel and Pedro Pascal are both charismatic. A lot of fun, bloody, hard R battles, no punches pulled. The dynamic between Caracalla and Geta is sufficient to propel things along. Not quite different enough from Commodus, but you have Denzel to mix things up.
Biggest problem is the wooden lead. He invites a direct comparison to Russell Crowe, and can’t compare at all. Also, protect your wife, dumbass. His character wasn’t very likable.
Is it up to par with the original? No. The cinematographer trashed Ridley Scott publicly the other day for using a three camera setup out of laziness, so the film couldn’t be lit properly. It shows, lacking anything visually to take it from good to great.
A fun spectacle, no regrets.
Putonahappyface
Gold Member
Saved myself £35 on a 4k uhd steelbook.
