Critics on "Gladiator 2": A spectacle worth the wait?
Who was skeptical about reviving "Gladiator" after many years? There was no shortage of such people. And words of admiration are multiplying just before the official premiere in theatres.
Let's recall that when the first information emerged that Ridley Scott was going to film a new installment of "Gladiator," not everyone was pleased. That's how it is when you touch a true pop culture classic. When the first trailer appeared online, there was a phenomenon called review bombing, with negative comments multiplying about the production that no one had seen. All this aimed to discredit the film. Some viewers have already attended the first screenings of "Gladiator 2." Critics are delighted, but that doesn't mean there isn't a bit of criticism.
"Gladiator 2" - what are the critics saying?
The sequel to the Oscar-winning 2000 film Gladiator has already garnered 77% positive reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and an average score of 67 on Metacritic. Although some critics note that the film largely repeats the original patterns, most praise its spectacle and scale, which, let's add, consumed nearly CAD 400 million.
The action of Gladiator 2 takes place a few years after the events of the first film. Lucius Verus, played by Paul Mescal, the son of Maximus once portrayed by Russell Crowe, is forced to fight in the Colosseum after the tyrannical Roman emperors conquer his homeland. General Marcus Acacius, played by Pedro Pascal, besieges Numidia, Lucius's home. Denzel Washington plays Macrinus, a former slave who became a master of gladiators, presenting a rare role as a villain.
David Rooney of The Hollywood Reporter writes that "in terms of brutal spectacle, meticulous period reconstruction, and dynamic scenes demanding complex choreography, the sequel delivers what fans of the Oscar-winning predecessor crave – battles, sword fights, bloodshed, and intrigue of ancient Rome." Caryn James of the BBC praises Paul Mescal's performance, stating that he is "the mesmerizing centre of the movie, holding it with the same strength and magnetism that Russell Crowe brought to the original."
Despite some critical voices, like Alison Willmore of New York Magazine, who notes that "the emotions and action are not as well balanced as in the first part," most reviewers believe Ridley Scott has once again delivered an impressive historical spectacle.
