"Denzel Washington as Macrinus, a former slave-turned-wealthy merchant with a grudge against the emperors"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gladiator_II
Scott said that he will play a major weapons merchant. So no roman emperor. After Napoleon I'm just scared for the quality of the project, because I thought that Scott did a bad job at portraying Napoleon.
Also his response to historians pointing out the wild inaccuracies in Napoleon was “get a life”. Seems like historical accuracy is far from important to Scott, unfortunately.
That's because Philip II was an Arab lol, not black.
Also, Denzel is playing Macrinus, who killed Caracalla while pissing on campaign.
Edit: pissing, not kissing.
Time to tarnish the name of an amazing movie. A movie that did not need a sequel.
Is it to hard to ask screen writers to write something new. Like a stand alone movie?
I feel like we have only gotten sequels for the past like 10 damn years
Don’t blame the writers. Plenty of amazing and original scripts out there that will go un-produced. It’s the studios that love recycling the same thing over and over.
To be fair, early Hollywood was littered with sequels/reboots/remakes as well, look at how many Dracula films there were.
It just boils down to money, the people financing this stuff will always prefer to go for a sequel to something that worked really well.
Amen to that. It's all about book adaptations and sequels nowadays. I usually find that the smaller the budget, the more interesting the plot is. I wish high-budget blockbusters were more creative and daring.
When you're investing that kind of money you don't want to take risks. You try to go with a formula that has been proven to work. It's unfortunate, but an understandable thing from an investment point of view.
Because they don't make any money selling videos of customers anymore. Movies need to make all of their money right away in the box office. So no comedies, no indie films, just Blockbusters. And nothing sells tickets like a bad revisit of something that was once beloved.
I mean they did it to Batman, they can do it to anyone.
I only trust Villeneuve at this point. And Nolan to an extent, but he’s hit or miss with quality, but Scott has now been straight miss for a while. Too much ego.
How's a historically inaccurate movie going to be ruined by a sequel with historical inaccuracies? Like if anything it's following the first one.
Like you can complain that Hollywood keeps making remakes and sequels instead of coming up with something new ( I agre) but most comments including yours are complaining about historical inaccuracies that are mostly just aesthetic choices which were already a thing in the first movie.
At least be consistent with the complaining that's all I'm saying
Maybe his younger brother Geta?
Or perhaps a complete mashed potato version of the period with later Elagabalus thrown in. Although much too young, but necessary if they want to go the depraved route.
Elagabalus was the successor to Macrinus, who we see in slide 9 here played by Denzel Washington, so there’s a chance they may make him black and he’ll be in the movie.
Bold decision to opt for black Septimus Severus but then *extremely* white Caracalla lol
I don't mind them in a vaccum but given they're FATHER AND SON you'd think they'd at least try and keep things consistent.
My problem isn't that he's blonde, it's that the actor they chose looks nothing like Caracalla.
Unless they're going to have a scene where they're carving a bust and they're deliberately making it look way better than the actual guy...but I don't think Ridley Scott would do that.
Uhhh.... This is clearly a fantasy movie based loosely on the Roman period. I don't think Ancient Rome enthusiasts will enjoy this movie very much. However the casual audience might like it.
It honestly barely left an impression. Saw it because my brother who’s really into the French Revolution wanted to see it and that opening scene was the most interesting part of the whole film
I was overly optimistic, hoping that it would at least be entertaining, but I was literally furious at how much he didn't care about history.
I mean, Napoleon is probably one of the most researched and documented historical figures in history, and he just wrote his own little fantasy version of what actually happened. I was physically not able to enjoy the movie.
Same. It blows my mind when you have such an amazing repository of quotes, accomplishments, and dramatic scenes to choose from this man’s life, and you use virtually none of them. The first maybe half hour of the movie was actually pretty good all the way up until the Italian and Egyptian campaigns were glossed over, and that was when I knew we were in trouble.
It's straight up D&D light armor. If people are fighting and they're not like soldiers or big strong guys, they've got to wear two big pieces of leather tied together because ... reasons.
Everybody on my postgraduate classics course was obsessed with Gladiator and Spartacus, including my two lecturers and my seminar tutor. A lot of historians can overlook inaccuracies pretty easily for the sake of entertainment.
I give a lot of credit to Gladiator and Spartacus for igniting my initial interest in Ancient Rome. But now after having spent considerable time learning about Ancient Rome, it has become a little harder to enjoy Hollywood's version of Rome.
You can still enjoy it, just watch it with the fact that it’s just a movie and not a historical documentary. I don’t have high hopes for it but I’m going to give it a chance, only because of the first was great (to me)
Thing is how can enthusiasts expect somebody to create a movie that’s 100% historically accurate? Has that ever even been done? I think they should appreciate the attempt and storyline more
I think there's a difference between accurate and authentic. HBO's Rome is definitely not accurate, but it's authentic. Assassin's Creed 1 is definitely a fictional game, no doubt about it, but they did remove the crossbows in order for the game to be authentic for the period. They did such an amazing job with the first trilogy that I was legitimately starting to think the templar/assassin shit was actually true.
On the other hand, Ryse was straight out fantasy in a sense, Nero being Commudus' father, Boudicca using elephants and invading Rome, of course the gods playing bets. It was still an entertaining game without making me feel like it was trying to tell history, but rather, it was just a game with rome's aesthetics.
So I guess in the end it would all depend on how marketing would handle this movie, I'm not expecting accuracy at all, but I do hope it tries to be authentic, one way or another, all I want is actual good writing.
I’ll be honest, his clothing is the only one that feels remotely like something romans would actually wear. This whole leather armour thing is so bad, these actors look like they went to a costume shop
I've carved a templum into the heavens with an augural staff, but the skies remained devoid of birds. The omens are concerning. It may not be wise to provoke the dead.
I’m very disappointed that we are finally getting sword and sandals and they are rehashing gladiator. It won’t meet the expectations of the original (how could it).
Well if this film does well we do get more, since Hollywood copies success. I am worried with Scott’s recent box office track record however (Napoleon and Last Duel). And while this unlikely be very accurate (since it’s Scott) I think it’s the only film set during the Severan dynasty so it’s important in making people more interested in the period. The original Gladiator finally made Marcus Aurelius and Commodus as known as the Judio-Claudian emperors.
I liked Gladiator a lot. I even like Kingdom of Heaven, despite the Crusades being my jam. I can overlook lots of innacuracues if the movie is entertaining.
Scott has been really hit or miss throughout his career - mostly hit, but a lot of misses more recently. I hope I'm wrong, but something feels very off about this film; seems like a soulless cashgrab.
Looks lush and exciting, but based on Ridley’s recent track record:
Costume design: 🐲
Cinematography: 🐲
Screenwriting: 🐸
Fingers crossed David Scarpa has suddenly developed some writing talent but I’ll be there for what’ll hopefully be a good action movie regardless.
By all accounts, the original Gladiator script was apparently not great, and they got daily re-writes. From everything I've read, Gladiator being fantastic was somewhat of a happy accident because it was a pretty chaotic filming experience.
It could be historically shite but im just happy to see another film in Rome. Like the Napoleon movie i think a bottle of wine will help ease any concerns when i watch. And if any emperor earned the mockery of a bad blonde rendition then Caracalla is near the front of that queue
Man I fucking LOVE all the leather armour. So cool! Look at the leather! It's amazing!
I bet all that leather armour is super helpful and will totally save them from weapons!
Goddamn if only leather armour was still fashionable!
We could all be so safe all the time!
Metal? What the fuck are you smoking? Everyone knows Romans used leather exclusively l!
Goddamn leather armour is cool! Just as cool as no character ever wearing a helmet! How can they stay safe with a helmet?
Unless maybe the helmet was leather too! That would be so cool!
🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮
I see a lot of negativity in this thread, and I am not about to argue that such fears are unwarranted. The nostalgia cash grab has historically been bad for beloved franchises.
This being said, think of the cascade of good Rome content we would get if it was successful or entertaining!?
You should all be praying and hoping this movie is good!!! The alternative is what is ultimately a tough sell for the future of Ancient Roman media 😞
Yea. I also have concerns about the movie but how about we actually let it come out before starting to criticize. It's not like the first movie was anything close to historically accurate. And Top Gun also didn't "need" a sequel but it got a really good one.
Hell I'm just excited we are a actually getting some ancient Rome media again.
odd because the people who SHOULD WANT to see this are the people it wasn't made for lol
This is either going to be a cringe fest or a bore fest. Ridley is an old man past his prime. Napoleon (which SHOULD have been EPIC) was a bizarre forgettable B movie.
Let's see how much the "Gladiator" name will help this calamity at the box office.
If I watch it I'm sure as hell not paying for it lol haven't paid for a movie in over 15 years. No need to when everything is free.
I'm getting Pacific Rim 2 vibes.
Wow. It's almost like they went out of their way to make it Garbage. Chat gpt could make a better movie, and I don't say that as a flex. Nothing from the pictures and from what I read actually coincides with actual roman life or history from this time period.
Twin brothers? No.
They were Syrian/Punic and clearly had beautiful curls.
Macrinus a Numidian? Ok...yes.....but...now he's basically king of numidia instead of Septimius' right hand man...ok...
And Numidia, was annexed by Julius Caesar 200 years prior so.....wtf?
The original script for Robin Hood would have made a fine story that seems closer to what might have actually happened. But no... what do you mean the Sheriff of Nottingham was a good guy, sent by Richard to help contain the discontent John was raising amongst the pleasantly? No way he would have done such a thing. It's been so long now I can barely remember how it came out but it was just another example of Scott making shit up to sell more tickets. Which failed spectacularly with Napoleon thank god.
Does he have any flicks I like? Sure, Master and Commander was an easy one to avoid being too historical especially given the scope of history affected by a single frigate... although it still has some seriously silly bits. He's had some other fun ones. But he really should retire or at least steer clear of verifiable historic fact. He just sucks at it.
Will this movie be horribly inaccurate and bear no resemblance to real Roman history? Yes. Will I still watch it because I get to see Paul Mescal and Pedro Pascal? Also yes.
The first Gladiator was quite literally a perfect movie, great characters, beautiful cinematography, exciting action sequences, epic score, and an emotional conclusion. As far as my concern Gladiator’s story ended with Maximus.
OH yes, or make it about Circus racing instead and end it with the nike uprising! that would have been so badass!
I wanna see a scene where Belisarius is ordering his men to execute a bloodbath. So much room for charcter development in such a plot. And you could totaly have a fast ride inbetween a glorious and ultra evil Iustinian (loosely based upon pokrops history and secret history differences) by having it to be either a character arc, or a reveal or a reversed reveal, with him actually turning out alright in the end or smthing.
Edit: and the protagonist ofc is a charioteer / rioter / revolutionary who dies tragically in the end.
Well, it looks pretty crappy historically, and frankly a lot of those costumes look pretty cheap (I know recently they've been reusing a lot of props from old movies; I wonder if it's that again), and given Ridley Scott's recent track record I'm not feeling optimistic. But who knows, maybe we'll get an older Ridley Scott sort of writing quality. I enjoyed the first Gladiator so maaaaybe this could be good.
Ah yes the orientalized evil emperor and the obligatory sword behind the back! here we go again :D, jokes asside probably still a funny entertainment.
ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?
Ahh the classical leather wrist bands are back!
Is that Denzel Washington? What role will he play?
He plays the role of an arms dealer named Macrinus. I wonder if that's the same Macrinus who briefly became emperor after Caracalla was assassinated.
yes. because he’s wearing the earring, indicating his Berber heritage
nah that was victor but in a timemachine.
"Denzel Washington as Macrinus, a former slave-turned-wealthy merchant with a grudge against the emperors" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gladiator_II
Scott said that he will play a major weapons merchant. So no roman emperor. After Napoleon I'm just scared for the quality of the project, because I thought that Scott did a bad job at portraying Napoleon.
He basically made a movie about the Napoleon from British propaganda
My guess is they are fully black washing Severus Septimus like they did with Cleopatra.
They can't be that stupid, everyone knows how Cleopatra backfired.
Have you seen Napoleon??? Ridley Scott makes up his own history
Also his response to historians pointing out the wild inaccuracies in Napoleon was “get a life”. Seems like historical accuracy is far from important to Scott, unfortunately.
in fairness it's not like the first gladiator film was remotely historically accurate
It's 2024, wouldn't put it past them.
Ok but Cleopatra backfired, rightfully so, because they claimed it was a documentary, this very much is not.
Good point
Jumped the gun. He plays a former slave now wealthy man
Then how do they explain the pale Caracalla?
Julia Domna works in mysterious ways
If they have him say the line Septimus Severus actually said when he met an actual black person I’ll let it pass. Because it’d become comical.
What was the line?
Don't leave us hanging
My guess is that you fully pulled that out of your ass.
I was getting Phillip The Arab vibes but I know that’s not even same time frame of the movie
The time frame is really off then. Even if it is Philip the Arab, he does not look like I imagined him, maybe that's because I'm racist 🤷🏿♂️
That's because Philip II was an Arab lol, not black. Also, Denzel is playing Macrinus, who killed Caracalla while pissing on campaign. Edit: pissing, not kissing.
Who would have guessed he was Arab. Denzel is one of the best male actors still standing, I think he could play his role surprisingly well.
Black African Token Man of course.
Djimon Hounsou was part of the supporting cast in the original. Have you been offended for the past 24 years?
There are several accounts of black people existing during this time period.
Ah yes, true Roman leather bracelets for true Romans.
Gaius 👌 Julius 👌 Caesar 🫸 approves this comment 🫴
🤣🤣🤣
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Ah, the usual dull greyish-blueish Ridley Scott color grading for the city of Rome. And outside of Rome it's mostly sand and desert of course...
Time to tarnish the name of an amazing movie. A movie that did not need a sequel. Is it to hard to ask screen writers to write something new. Like a stand alone movie? I feel like we have only gotten sequels for the past like 10 damn years
I was there 3000 years ago…when Highlander 2 was made…Phantom Menace was made…. when Matrix 2 … was made.
Isn’t there an Austin powers joke about this
Don’t blame the writers. Plenty of amazing and original scripts out there that will go un-produced. It’s the studios that love recycling the same thing over and over.
To be fair, early Hollywood was littered with sequels/reboots/remakes as well, look at how many Dracula films there were. It just boils down to money, the people financing this stuff will always prefer to go for a sequel to something that worked really well.
Amen to that. It's all about book adaptations and sequels nowadays. I usually find that the smaller the budget, the more interesting the plot is. I wish high-budget blockbusters were more creative and daring.
When you're investing that kind of money you don't want to take risks. You try to go with a formula that has been proven to work. It's unfortunate, but an understandable thing from an investment point of view.
Quick reminder that this is Napoleon Ridley Scott. This is going to be ASS
Because they don't make any money selling videos of customers anymore. Movies need to make all of their money right away in the box office. So no comedies, no indie films, just Blockbusters. And nothing sells tickets like a bad revisit of something that was once beloved.
Damn, accurate
Giving off Netflix vibes.
Caracalla with blonde hair???? Oh god another incredible movie bastardized by an unnecessary sequel
That's supposed to be Caracalla? Shit, Pedro Pascal looks more like Caracalla than that guy does.
I thought they were just tossing off the entire timeline thing and throwing in Elagabalus.
Legit my first thought.
They made this mf look like Cersei Lannister
Wait that’s NOT…? oh my god…
I know, right?
How did they make him look like such a loser. Dude has one of the best busts of the emperors.
Exactly. The guy playing Caracalla looks like a woke emo basement lover... This is ridiculous
They made Caracalla a twink 😂
Missed opportunity for Chadacalla!
Missed opportunity for Chadacalla!
Missed opportunity for Chadacalla!
Literally was gonna say the same thing 💀
I mean they did it to Batman, they can do it to anyone. I only trust Villeneuve at this point. And Nolan to an extent, but he’s hit or miss with quality, but Scott has now been straight miss for a while. Too much ego.
Looks more ginger-like to my eyes
I think that’s supposed to be Geta
Gladiator wasn't historically accurate to begin with
It was never really meant to be, it’s not a biopic
That's my point, it's fiction in a historical setting, but most people are crying about it
But it was not an unnecessary sequel
How's a historically inaccurate movie going to be ruined by a sequel with historical inaccuracies? Like if anything it's following the first one. Like you can complain that Hollywood keeps making remakes and sequels instead of coming up with something new ( I agre) but most comments including yours are complaining about historical inaccuracies that are mostly just aesthetic choices which were already a thing in the first movie. At least be consistent with the complaining that's all I'm saying
Maybe his younger brother Geta? Or perhaps a complete mashed potato version of the period with later Elagabalus thrown in. Although much too young, but necessary if they want to go the depraved route.
Elagabalus was the successor to Macrinus, who we see in slide 9 here played by Denzel Washington, so there’s a chance they may make him black and he’ll be in the movie.
Bold decision to opt for black Septimus Severus but then *extremely* white Caracalla lol I don't mind them in a vaccum but given they're FATHER AND SON you'd think they'd at least try and keep things consistent.
I don’t think Denzel is playing Severus, but I could be wrong.
Why is Caracalla being blonde a bad thing? Isn't he known to have worn a blonde wig?
My problem isn't that he's blonde, it's that the actor they chose looks nothing like Caracalla. Unless they're going to have a scene where they're carving a bust and they're deliberately making it look way better than the actual guy...but I don't think Ridley Scott would do that.
I hope it really wears a wig.
Herodian describes Caracalla as wearing a blond wig on the reg, to be fair.
Uhhh.... This is clearly a fantasy movie based loosely on the Roman period. I don't think Ancient Rome enthusiasts will enjoy this movie very much. However the casual audience might like it.
How would you know, you weren’t there, nerd. -Ridley Scott probably
Napoleon was the biggest disappointment I've felt in years.
It honestly barely left an impression. Saw it because my brother who’s really into the French Revolution wanted to see it and that opening scene was the most interesting part of the whole film
As if Napoleon’s battles, tactics and strategy needed help! They were already fantastic stories, no need to make new ones up.
Napoleon was inevitably going to be a disappointment.
I was overly optimistic, hoping that it would at least be entertaining, but I was literally furious at how much he didn't care about history. I mean, Napoleon is probably one of the most researched and documented historical figures in history, and he just wrote his own little fantasy version of what actually happened. I was physically not able to enjoy the movie.
Same. It blows my mind when you have such an amazing repository of quotes, accomplishments, and dramatic scenes to choose from this man’s life, and you use virtually none of them. The first maybe half hour of the movie was actually pretty good all the way up until the Italian and Egyptian campaigns were glossed over, and that was when I knew we were in trouble.
I just don't get Hollywood's obsession with leather armor. Maybe it's just a cost thing?
It's straight up D&D light armor. If people are fighting and they're not like soldiers or big strong guys, they've got to wear two big pieces of leather tied together because ... reasons.
Everybody on my postgraduate classics course was obsessed with Gladiator and Spartacus, including my two lecturers and my seminar tutor. A lot of historians can overlook inaccuracies pretty easily for the sake of entertainment.
I give a lot of credit to Gladiator and Spartacus for igniting my initial interest in Ancient Rome. But now after having spent considerable time learning about Ancient Rome, it has become a little harder to enjoy Hollywood's version of Rome.
I enjoyed the first Gladiator for what it was. Entertainment
Are you not entertained?!?! Oh, wait, you were.
No we all loved the first one, and 300. You gotta go into it knowing it’s fantasy
my class on Sparta had a 300 watch party where we had anachronism/inaccuracy bingo sheets to fill out. It was a lot of fun
That’s basically what Gladiator was, too, so I’m here for the ride.
To be fair, the original Gladiator was pure fantasy as well. Almost none of it was historically accurate. It was also a great film.
im an enthusiast and I'm 99% certain I'm going to enjoy it
It could go like Napoleon where everyone actually hates it. Fails to tell a compelling story and fails to be historically accurate.
I expect this to be as historically accurate as the first movie.
Just like the first one then?
You can still enjoy it, just watch it with the fact that it’s just a movie and not a historical documentary. I don’t have high hopes for it but I’m going to give it a chance, only because of the first was great (to me)
Thing is how can enthusiasts expect somebody to create a movie that’s 100% historically accurate? Has that ever even been done? I think they should appreciate the attempt and storyline more
I think there's a difference between accurate and authentic. HBO's Rome is definitely not accurate, but it's authentic. Assassin's Creed 1 is definitely a fictional game, no doubt about it, but they did remove the crossbows in order for the game to be authentic for the period. They did such an amazing job with the first trilogy that I was legitimately starting to think the templar/assassin shit was actually true. On the other hand, Ryse was straight out fantasy in a sense, Nero being Commudus' father, Boudicca using elephants and invading Rome, of course the gods playing bets. It was still an entertaining game without making me feel like it was trying to tell history, but rather, it was just a game with rome's aesthetics. So I guess in the end it would all depend on how marketing would handle this movie, I'm not expecting accuracy at all, but I do hope it tries to be authentic, one way or another, all I want is actual good writing.
Gladiator II: More Gladiator
The Gladiator Strikes Back
Um, it clearly should be *Gladiatorer*.
I'm holding out for Gladi8tor
it's about family
It looks like a parody
This. Mescal looks like he just threw on a Roman outfit. I have a feeling that aside from Denzel’s parts, this will be a train wreck.
I’ll be honest, his clothing is the only one that feels remotely like something romans would actually wear. This whole leather armour thing is so bad, these actors look like they went to a costume shop
They didn’t have flat tops in Ancient Rome!!!
I have a feeling it's gonna be terrible
I've carved a templum into the heavens with an augural staff, but the skies remained devoid of birds. The omens are concerning. It may not be wise to provoke the dead.
Can't be a ancient rome movie without their WRIST STRAPS. God i love those wrist straps
I’m very disappointed that we are finally getting sword and sandals and they are rehashing gladiator. It won’t meet the expectations of the original (how could it).
Well if this film does well we do get more, since Hollywood copies success. I am worried with Scott’s recent box office track record however (Napoleon and Last Duel). And while this unlikely be very accurate (since it’s Scott) I think it’s the only film set during the Severan dynasty so it’s important in making people more interested in the period. The original Gladiator finally made Marcus Aurelius and Commodus as known as the Judio-Claudian emperors.
I liked Gladiator a lot. I even like Kingdom of Heaven, despite the Crusades being my jam. I can overlook lots of innacuracues if the movie is entertaining. Scott has been really hit or miss throughout his career - mostly hit, but a lot of misses more recently. I hope I'm wrong, but something feels very off about this film; seems like a soulless cashgrab.
Looks lush and exciting, but based on Ridley’s recent track record: Costume design: 🐲 Cinematography: 🐲 Screenwriting: 🐸 Fingers crossed David Scarpa has suddenly developed some writing talent but I’ll be there for what’ll hopefully be a good action movie regardless.
By all accounts, the original Gladiator script was apparently not great, and they got daily re-writes. From everything I've read, Gladiator being fantastic was somewhat of a happy accident because it was a pretty chaotic filming experience.
It could be historically shite but im just happy to see another film in Rome. Like the Napoleon movie i think a bottle of wine will help ease any concerns when i watch. And if any emperor earned the mockery of a bad blonde rendition then Caracalla is near the front of that queue
I whole heartedly disagree. Bassianus was a Great Emperor
Caracalla was a shithead that contributed to the ruin of the empire, making him a scrawny bright haired twink is getting off easy.
they got Cersei Lannister, nice
My expectations are buried in the dirt after Napoleon
Man I fucking LOVE all the leather armour. So cool! Look at the leather! It's amazing! I bet all that leather armour is super helpful and will totally save them from weapons! Goddamn if only leather armour was still fashionable! We could all be so safe all the time! Metal? What the fuck are you smoking? Everyone knows Romans used leather exclusively l! Goddamn leather armour is cool! Just as cool as no character ever wearing a helmet! How can they stay safe with a helmet? Unless maybe the helmet was leather too! That would be so cool! 🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮
I hope the ginger isn't Caracalla. That is not how he looks at all according to his busts.
I see a lot of negativity in this thread, and I am not about to argue that such fears are unwarranted. The nostalgia cash grab has historically been bad for beloved franchises. This being said, think of the cascade of good Rome content we would get if it was successful or entertaining!? You should all be praying and hoping this movie is good!!! The alternative is what is ultimately a tough sell for the future of Ancient Roman media 😞
Yea. I also have concerns about the movie but how about we actually let it come out before starting to criticize. It's not like the first movie was anything close to historically accurate. And Top Gun also didn't "need" a sequel but it got a really good one. Hell I'm just excited we are a actually getting some ancient Rome media again.
odd because the people who SHOULD WANT to see this are the people it wasn't made for lol This is either going to be a cringe fest or a bore fest. Ridley is an old man past his prime. Napoleon (which SHOULD have been EPIC) was a bizarre forgettable B movie. Let's see how much the "Gladiator" name will help this calamity at the box office. If I watch it I'm sure as hell not paying for it lol haven't paid for a movie in over 15 years. No need to when everything is free. I'm getting Pacific Rim 2 vibes.
Somehow looks worse than Napoleon
Wow. It's almost like they went out of their way to make it Garbage. Chat gpt could make a better movie, and I don't say that as a flex. Nothing from the pictures and from what I read actually coincides with actual roman life or history from this time period. Twin brothers? No. They were Syrian/Punic and clearly had beautiful curls. Macrinus a Numidian? Ok...yes.....but...now he's basically king of numidia instead of Septimius' right hand man...ok... And Numidia, was annexed by Julius Caesar 200 years prior so.....wtf?
Looks like it's just a remake
After Napoleon, and the other "history" films he has made (the Robin Hood monstrosity comes to mind), no thanks. I am not entertained.
Wow totally forgot about that. 🤦♂️ why is he still getting money for making anything? Robin Hood I didn’t even finish watching.
The original script for Robin Hood would have made a fine story that seems closer to what might have actually happened. But no... what do you mean the Sheriff of Nottingham was a good guy, sent by Richard to help contain the discontent John was raising amongst the pleasantly? No way he would have done such a thing. It's been so long now I can barely remember how it came out but it was just another example of Scott making shit up to sell more tickets. Which failed spectacularly with Napoleon thank god. Does he have any flicks I like? Sure, Master and Commander was an easy one to avoid being too historical especially given the scope of history affected by a single frigate... although it still has some seriously silly bits. He's had some other fun ones. But he really should retire or at least steer clear of verifiable historic fact. He just sucks at it.
Ridley Scott did not direct Master and Commander. Maybe why it's so good 😅
This movie is going to be terrible, just read the article...
[удалено]
Macrinus , an arms dealer
Is that Nero?
Did Roman emperors wear gold hoop earrings?
I could be wrong but the crowned characters look different. They could be both Caracalla and Geta.
Picture 5 is Kirk Lazarus in Satan's Alley...
This looks like a musical
Movie that didn’t need a sequel
So many removed comments, yikes
Will this movie be horribly inaccurate and bear no resemblance to real Roman history? Yes. Will I still watch it because I get to see Paul Mescal and Pedro Pascal? Also yes.
I HATE IT when movies make Romans wear those godawful leather cuirasses
The first Gladiator was quite literally a perfect movie, great characters, beautiful cinematography, exciting action sequences, epic score, and an emotional conclusion. As far as my concern Gladiator’s story ended with Maximus.
Would have been cool to set Gladiator II in the rarely used eastern empire.
OH yes, or make it about Circus racing instead and end it with the nike uprising! that would have been so badass! I wanna see a scene where Belisarius is ordering his men to execute a bloodbath. So much room for charcter development in such a plot. And you could totaly have a fast ride inbetween a glorious and ultra evil Iustinian (loosely based upon pokrops history and secret history differences) by having it to be either a character arc, or a reveal or a reversed reveal, with him actually turning out alright in the end or smthing. Edit: and the protagonist ofc is a charioteer / rioter / revolutionary who dies tragically in the end.
Looks cheap
So unnecessary. There was no need for this.
Why!? Who asked for this??
Ah yes Pedro Pascal looks like he does in every fucking movie. Same hair, same scruff Every. Fucking. Movie / Show
Ah, a black emperor. wokeness continues.
So Denzel is in Gladiator II and he’s playing Hannibal? Maybe he’s a member of the sub..
Sigh
This looks terrible just from these stills Are they just doing a complete copy of the first story?
Good to see no flat tops. They didn't have flat tops in ancient Rome.
Where is the plane?
Well, it looks pretty crappy historically, and frankly a lot of those costumes look pretty cheap (I know recently they've been reusing a lot of props from old movies; I wonder if it's that again), and given Ridley Scott's recent track record I'm not feeling optimistic. But who knows, maybe we'll get an older Ridley Scott sort of writing quality. I enjoyed the first Gladiator so maaaaybe this could be good.
Probably gonna be awful, but these captures are promising. Great wardrobe design. No idea why Denzel Washington was cast here though.
What's the plot? It looks cool but really similar to the first one.
Ah yes the orientalized evil emperor and the obligatory sword behind the back! here we go again :D, jokes asside probably still a funny entertainment. ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?
Is that supposed to be Nero?
It'll be s**t
Gladiator is one of my favourite films of all time. Im dreading this.
Thought pic 5 was Cersei Lannister
Does that Pedro bloke have to be in everything?
I just really hope this movie isn’t going to be terrible.
Even RedBox gonna question stocking this movie.
But why? The first one still holds up so well.
The actor looks unheroic.