For fifteen years, I might have claimed I eagerly awaited Gladiator 2, but let’s be honest: fifteen years ago, my cinematic experience revolved around childhood fare like King Kong or animated superheroes. It wasn’t until a few months ago, when news of the sequel surfaced that my excitement peaked — only to wane just as quickly upon hearing that Denzel Washington was cast as a Berber character.
To save you time: Gladiator 2 is undoubtedly entertaining, even goosebump-inducing at moments, but as a technical and narrative follow-up to its predecessor, it is profoundly underwhelming. Let’s unpack why.
Also read: Tolkien Movie Review (2019) – Treat For Fantasy Literati
The Dream of Rome… and the American Dream?
The original Gladiator was rooted in an authentic, poetic vision of ancient Rome. Russell Crowe’s Maximus declared, “There was a dream that was Rome. It shall be realized.” While arguably inspired by ideals like the American Dream, it felt organic and immersive.
Gladiator 2, by contrast, feels forced and artificial. The narrative hinges on Lucius, the nephew of Commodus, who is now an adult grappling with the legacy of the empire. However, the film takes a baffling turn by introducing a Berber-turned-slave (played by Denzel Washington) who inexplicably becomes an advocate for “the dream that was Rome.” This is an odd choice, given that Berbers historically resisted Roman imperialism.
Representation vs. Authenticity
The inclusion of Denzel Washington’s character, Jugurtha, as Lucius’ mentor felt clumsy and tokenistic. His role lacked narrative depth, making it evident that his character was shoehorned in for the sake of representation rather than storytelling integrity. Similarly, Lucius’ wife is hastily introduced and just as quickly killed off, serving only as a catalyst for his rage and revenge arc. Her death, while pivotal, is forgotten almost immediately, leaving viewers emotionally detached.
This isn’t the first time director Ridley Scott’s casting decisions have sparked controversy. The exclusion of May Calamawy’s character, reportedly due to her activism and vocal support for the people of Gaza and Palestine, underscores Hollywood’s uneasy relationship with Middle Eastern representation. In contrast, positive roles often go to African characters or actors from politically neutral regions, while villains are typecast from the Middle East. This ongoing trend detracts from the film’s authenticity and universal appeal.
The Pros: Acting, Visuals, and Action
Despite its flaws, Gladiator 2 has its merits. Paul Mescal shines as Lucius, bringing depth and nuance to a character that the script’s shortcomings could have overshadowed. His performance ensures that the audience remains invested in the story. Pedro Pascal’s brief but impactful role further elevates the film.
The visual effects and world-building are breathtaking, making Gladiator 2 one of the most visually stunning films of the year. The battle sequences are thrilling and choreographed with a visceral intensity that will keep you on the edge of your seat. While the soundtrack doesn’t deliver a standout track like Now We Are Free, it complements the film well, enhancing its emotional and dramatic beats.
The Cons: Lazy Writing and Corporate Influence
Where Gladiator 2 falters most is in its writing. The original film was a masterpiece created during a time when cinema was still largely seen as an art form. Its sequel, however, suffers from lazy storytelling and the pervasive influence of modern Hollywood’s obsession with political correctness and box-office appeal. The high bar set by Gladiator remains unmet, as the sequel’s attempts to modernize or “fix” its predecessor often come across as disingenuous.
Final Thoughts
Gladiator 2 is a paradox. It fails as a sequel to one of cinema’s greatest epics but succeeds as a standalone action-entertainment experience. It offers stunning visuals, memorable performances, and enough adrenaline-pumping sequences to keep audiences engaged. However, it’s impossible to ignore the compromises made in service of modern Hollywood trends.
If you approach the film with tempered expectations and a willingness to overlook its flaws, you’ll undoubtedly enjoy the spectacle. But for those who hold Gladiator as a cinematic masterpiece, its sequel may leave you yearning for a time when storytelling mattered more than spectacle.
Rating: 3.5/5 – Worth watching, but don’t expect another masterpiece.
