“Gladiator II” (2024) is set sixteen years after the events in “Gladiator” (2000). To recap, in “Gladiator,” the evil and ambitious Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix) commits patricide on the beloved Emperor Marcus Aurelius (Richard Harris) to ensure that dear old dad does not give the throne to Maximus (Russell Crowe), who just wants to go home to his wife and kid. Commodus orders Maximus executed, but it does not take. Slavers catch Maximus, who becomes a gladiator in Rome and kills Commodus to restore the Republic; thus putting an end to an empire….or did he? Well, it also did not take, and Roman armies are still colonizing thanks to world weary General Marcus Acacius (Pedro Pascal). The latest victim of Roman tyranny is Lucius (Paul Mescal), whom the General captured in battle. He gets sold to Macrinus (Denzel Washington), who promises to grant Lucius’ desire for revenge against the General in exchange for Lucius agreeing to fight and win in the Colosseum, but Lucilla (Connie Nielsen) complicates their plans. Will Lucius choose the right reason to fight?
If moviegoers are honest with themselves, it is not that “Gladiator” was such a good movie, but that Crowe was hot, and the talented actors were as serious as a heart attack in a movie that was uneven at best. It is basically the sibling rivalry of Cecil B. DeMille’s “The Ten Commandments” (1956) meets “Spartacus” (1960), but without as much colorful pageantry, more wooden dialogue and zero theatricality. Director Ridley Scott offered fighting or pedantic, vague speeches about the glories of theoretical Rome, the people and love, but it is unclear what Rome signified in our time other than a general concept of democracy versus dictatorship. Last year’s “Napoleon” (2023) had gorgeous epic fight scenes, but the veering into comedic tone made it an unbearable slog, and Phoenix’s take on a power mad emperor did not work the second time around. Phoenix is losing his touch with that and “Joker: Folie a Deux” (2024), much to the joy of karmic justice owed to Todd Haynes. Fortunately, Scott went full camp, has tossed off the veneer of historical accuracy and dared to make jumping the shark into an entertaining, literal and spectacle filled challenge. If you love it when someone embraces melodramatic ridiculousness and goes over the top, then you will love “Gladiator II.”
Mescal is a talented actor who was brilliant in “Foe” (2023) and “All of Us Strangers” (2023), but he is no Russell Crowe so even though Lucius is the main character, he does not feel like it. He is the anti-Maximus: unmerciful, vengeful and barbaric, which is convenient because that is how his Roman captors see him; however, he does hold some surprises. He seems to know an awful lot about Rome, and even though the trailers reveal why, it is a huge departure from the original movie’s storyline, and a bit (soap) operatic.* Unfortunately after Lucius’ near death scene, which felt as if “Thor: Love and Thunder” (2022) inspired Scott’s vision of afterlife, Mescal is easily forgotten and eclipsed.
The real star of “Gladiator II” is Denzel Washington, who dominates and steals every scene. It is not often that an iconic and beloved actor delivers such a fresh and surprising performance. Macrinus is a fun character. The master manipulator is an ambitious, successful unflappable character who seems delighted with life, calculating and focused. Also Washington finally receives the much deserved, far too delayed regal treatment that John Boyega got in “The Woman King” (2022). Costume designers David Crossman and Janty Yates put in the work with jewelry (a ring for every finger), brocaded tunics and ornate togas. Forget a suit, combined with “Conclave” (2024), “Gladiator II” makes a convincing argument that all men need to wear dresses and miniskirts.
Even though Washington is the MVP of “Gladiator II,” there is not a poor performance in the bunch. Joseph Quinn, who is having a great year considering the success of “A Quiet Place: Day One” (2024), is unrecognizable as a demented sadistic Emperor Geta, the dominant twin, who does not miss a single slight and seems as if he is always on the verge of a massive tantrum. Though Emperor Geta is smarter than his brother, Emperor Caracalla (Fred Hechinger), it also proves as an Achilles heel since he is temperate enough to not be delusional about his chances of staying in power and go full tyrant. Hechlinger may be comparatively understated as a loveable demented dolt, but for fans who also saw “Thelma” (2024), the range is undeniably impressive. Pascal as the forlorn general always gives a stellar, heartfelt performance regardless of the material, and he would give Crowe a run for his money in a noble character dance off, but the heart of the film is Lucilla.
It is unfortunately rare for older women to get the opportunity to reprise their roles, so it is delightful that Nielsen is the bridge between the two films. Lucilla, who was a superior administrator to her brother, Commodus, and a constant schemer to fulfill their father’s dream of restoring Rome, is still up to her old tricks. Lucius is hostile to Romans, and she must convince him #NotAllRomans so he does not just destroy the place out of revenge. Scott creates an image of Rome that is more like a melting pot with people like Ravi (Alexander Karim), a former gladiator turned doctor, and other people of color, but don’t get it twisted. Scott is still British, and like Guy Ritchie, he has a penchant for regression. Scott wants blue bloods with blue collar sensibilities to be in charge, not the social climbers. Rome is a Republic for the people in the hands of the same old people in power. Hurrah. Poor Derek Jacobi is more of an afterthought this time, so the Senator storyline is more abbreviated, but thank God because who watches a movie named after a fighter who kills people for speeches.
While embracing its B movie gimmick, “Gladiator II” is very meta. Scott critiques and revels in bread and circuses. Basically moviegoers are just as mindless and blood thirsty as the Roman spectators, but instead of being like “Joker: Folie a Deux” (2024) by moralizing and wagging his finger at the audience for ever having a good time at the movies, Scott owns it. He is as messed up as we are, and he wants to see what a sequence would look like if “Planet of the Apes” occurred during his interpretation of ancient times. If he makes another sequel, he should try to see if he could find a plausible way to introduce time travel and have them fight aliens because why not. If you can go with it, you will have a great time. If you cannot, you will be appalled, want to stage an intervention and categorize it as an abomination. Let Scott have some fun. It has been such a long time that he made a movie that did not gnash its teeth over the spectre of death threatening to obliterate his genius.
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
Lucius is the love child of Maximus and Lucilla. Spencer Treat Clark played Lucius in the original, and no offense to Alfie Tempest, who plays Young Lucius in the “Gladiator II” flashbacks, but no! Clark could play the kind of kid who is sweet, loving and enthusiastic, but also could kill his parents under the wrong set of circumstances. Because of his status, Lucius was a wild card and could always turn into Commodus without Lucilla’s influence. He admires Maximus, but watching the homicidal games would ruin a kid. Don’t forget that Clark played the son in “Unbreakable” (2000), and it seemed possible that he would shoot his parents. It is what is missing in Mescal’s performance—a real threat that he would kill his mama. Her husband, sure, but her, never. She should be a little afraid of him, but it is obvious that Lucius will come around.
“Gladiator” came out twenty-four years ago. It seems a little arbitrary for the story to take place in less amount of time except to maybe explain why so many characters from the first movie are still alive and looking good. I’m talking to you, Nielsen! So Lucius is supposed to be younger than Clark is now. So I can get sharks and apes, but not an older Lucius! I think that it is really about accents. New Zealander Crowe and Irish Mescal can do an accent that easily can get confused as British, but Clark is American. They are all equally great actors, but Clark has not hit leading man status and is not well known. Mescal can probably attract more investors, and Clark cannot. Life is unfair. He should be getting better roles than a random dude getting turned into a vampire in “Salem’s Lot” (2024).
