Mucking with Movies: ‘Gladiator II’

How could you ever possibly top the original “Gladiator?” And how did Ridley Scott find the time to direct two historical epics in back-to-back years? At this point, I believe he’s driven entirely by spite, as there are several hubris-soaked decisions that, in the right context, could have been beneficial but are lost in a movie that radiates as underdirected. 

If Scott wants it, Scott is going to get it.

Casting aside how disassociative it could be for an audience, at various points, we receive such absurdities as a man defeating an ape with his bare hands, secret passageways with doors that open automatically with a press of a button, and kids playing soccer in Ancient Rome. Through this willingness to cast aside the shackles of realism on a whim, I got my lifelong wish to see a version of the naval battles once staged in the Coliseum on the big screen.

But here we see a prime example of taking things one extra step over the edge. Scott elects to add man-eating sharks to the circumstances, and I would like a 750-word explanation of why. The idea is historically accurate and holds so much potential on its own on a design level, what the water would have looked like mixed the blood, silt, and sand, or maybe a nice long-drawn, out battle scene that contains a mini-story with multitudes. But instead, they made the easy decision to raise the stakes unnecessarily.

It takes the minimum amount of creativity to add sharks. It’s the equivalent of having your television series go to space when your writer’s room has already emptied its imagination, and their brains are only filled with cobwebs. I understand making historical accuracy concessions for the sake of the story, I adore “Gangs of New York,” and that flick might as well be a fairy tale, but there’s no entertainment in this. It did not add anything to the movie; it was only a detraction and a distraction. If you’re playing with the timeline entirely like Tarantino does, it’s one thing to present an alternative timeline and thus warp history to your liking, but this feels like splitting the difference. Scott is playing close enough to realism that his films warrant enough attention paid to the grounding details. 

But, Scott’s skills have not abanded him entirely. Somebody suggesting such would be a fool. Perhaps better than anyone, he knows how to project a lionheart upon his characters. Calling all the way back to “Thelma and Louise,” where he was able to turn two suburban women into two of the baddest warriors to ever grace the screen. Think back to that iconic shot of Susan Sarandon and Geena Davis leaning back against that convertible, that low-angle shot that gives his characters the full frame. Scott is still utilizing the same tricks, and it still works. While the lighting design is much flatter and frankly much more mundane than the original “Gladiator,” it still has the identical ability to make the audience awestruck at their heroes. 

But the extraordinary from “Gladiator II” is the script and, of course, Denzel Washington as gladiator-owning, power-hunger Macrinus. Playing Macrinus right down the middle, the totality of his character isn’t revealed until the third act. We are never let into his plotting that is going on underneath the surface, if he truly wishes to champion Hanno (Paul Mescal) or if that desire is secondary to rebuilding Rome in his own image. Mescal and the rest of the cast are always leaning on that strong script to carry them through their scenes, Washington is the only one bringing it to life. While Mescal and fellow principal players Pedro Pascal and Connie Nielsen lack any nuance in their performances, their intentions lie nakedly upon their faces without decorum, Washington makes use of whatever screentime he is given to add layers upon layers of texture to his performance. Through reaction shots, silent looming, and a daringly stilted speech cadence in a film with a breakneck pace, he sucks the whole film towards him. With a gravitas equal to a supernova, he displays the difference between a capable actor and a movie star. 

After “Gladiator II” and the aforementioned “Napolean,” it feels like Scott is still making these massive-scope films just to prove a point. Whether it’s to himself or the zeitgeist, I’m not entirely sure, as he constantly oscillates between self-serving and trying to touch upon what will make a theatergoer pop. Like all artists, he is better off serving himself and trusting that his audience shares the same palate as him. 

Critic Score: 6/10

Jack Simon is a mogul coach and writer/director who enjoys eating food he can’t afford, traveling to places out of his budget, and creating art about skiing, eating, and traveling while broke. Check out his website jacksimonmakes.com to see his Jack’s Jitney travelogue series. You can email him at jackdocsimon@gmail.com for inquiries of any type.