The Top 5 Reasons Gladiator II (Harry Potter and the Mad Twin Emperors?) Was So Disappointing

Yesterday was Mark's birthday, so because the weather is crap, I cooked him a pancake breakfast and a spaghetti and meatballs dinner because it's his favorite (homemade sauce), opened gifts, ate cake and ice cream, and spent most of the day watching his choice of movies, which of course included zombies, military stuff, and action movies 😂

That isn't as horrible and macho as it sounds, actually - with the exception of Geostorm, which was highly predictable, highly implausible, and had no one endearing in it except for Andy Garcia as POTUS.

Speaking of no one endearing, as our finale, we watched Gladiator II.

Now before I start counting the many ways in which this film was a disappointment, in my view, remember that there are only 2 things I'm snobby about - film and architecture.

Again, not only because I once aspired to be a screenwriter, but also because if you have THAT kind of money to create either, don't be putting lipsticks on pigs and selling them to us for double the price, please 😂

Plus with Gladiator, you're talking about one of my favorite movies of all time!

In fact, I had held off on watching this one because nothing can top the first one - even IF Pedro Pascal and Denzel Washington are in it!

Although Denzel Washington was the most interesting character in the entire film (but for the wrong reasons - plus his American accent didn't gel well), as were the robes he wore.

Never fully Roman, never fully West/North-African Dashiki, never fully Egyptian, they were a mixture of all of the above, like Macrinus himself; in fact, as I said, they were their own character.

Let's face it/be honest - colorful regal robes and gold jewelry do look better on darker skin.

And nobody rocks a robe and makes robes on men look sexy quite like Denzel!

But he was not endearing - far from it.

In fact, no one was as endearing in this sequel at all, with the exception of Pedro Pascal as General Acacius (because it's Pedro) and Ravi (Alexander Hakim) who almost endeared us, but didn't have enough screen time, as well as returning characters Connie Nielson as Queen Lucilla and Derek Jacobi as Senator Gracchus.

I don't know what has happened to Ridley Scott, but his movies feel rushed, poorly edited and thus incohesive, lacking completely in warmth or warm moments or clever dialog, but long on battles and special effects, like he's Michael Bay instead of Ridley Scott, but most importantly, everything is dumbed down, as if you didn't catch it the first 5 times it was pointed out to you.

Maybe that's just what sells, these days, but ... yeah.

*SPOILER ALERTS*

In other words, here's what was the first film had that the second film lacked/was completely devoid of:

1)        The Gladiator depicted as quiet thinker/strategist, but simultaneously a commanding-presence -  engaging in battle not because he wanted to, but because he had to.

 

Maximus preferred to be a farmer, but was forced, out of military obligation, survival, and/or loyalty to a friend and his country -  or at most, when already forced into these positions, to avenge the rape/murder of his family  - because he was good at it.

He knew when to be tough and when to be tender - when to be relentless and when to show mercy -  which is what endeared him to us (especially the ladies)!

In fact, talking to female friends at the time, we considered the character of Maximus to be the perfect man. 😍

The only character like that in the film was NOT Paul Mescal as Maximus's son, Lucius, but Pedro Pascal as Acacius - but Ridley didn't allow Pedro enough screen time to seal that! 

(Again, see my poor editing point below.)

This is why he was likely chosen for this role and why we ladies love him - his balance of tough and tender/warmth - and had he been 10-15 years younger, he would've made an excellent Lucius.

But instead, we see little of him at all, perhaps not to overshadow Lucius, but this strategy is an epic fail.

(Also Alexander Hakim did a good job of this, in a different way, but more on him below.)

Nothing against Paul Mescal as an actor overall, but I this wasn't his best role. He reminded me of it would've been like if Daniel Radcliffe/Harry Potter played Lucius! 

In fact, sometimes I felt like I was watching a Harry Potter movie - "Harry Potter and the Mad Twin Emperors"😂

Unlike Maximus, he was a bit whiny, a bit too screamy?

He also appeared to enjoy battle and the kill, too much, and even when he was showing mercy, I felt like he didn't mean it. 

At other times, I felt like he was impersonating Russell Crowe rather than channeling him, rather than feeling it?

I just didn't buy it.  Instead of seeing similarity, I saw parody!

Plus when he laughed, it was sinister, almost crazy, or like he was some sort of tweaker/meth-head!

I often wondered if he could've better played one of the crazy-ass twin-brother emperors instead!

Also, I didn't get why the rage and need for revenge over his wife's death surpassed Maximus's rage.

Hanno/Lucius's wife was a military archer in battle and chose to be there.  

Maximus's wife in Spain, raising their son and horses on a farm, far from the battlefield, but his enemies sought them out, and she and her son were both raped and burned, so-?

I mean, I get grief, I get Lucious feeling abandoned by his mother (who sent him off for his own safety), I get his hatred of the Roman Empire as it was by then, but I don't get why his rage and need for revenge actually surpassed his father's, who experienced even greater losses, to include his non-military family, far from the battlefield?

And when he gave a speech to the crowd, he did just that - gave a speech, instead of delivering a speech. 

 He sort of screamed it, like he was angrily shouting at the refs at a basketball game, meant to incite the crowd, instead of delivering a thought-provoking oration for them to mull over before his next move.

But maybe that's the fault of the screenwriters - which brings me to #2.

2)     The dialog.

Most of the time, instead of creating new lines for us to still quote, 25 years later, they kept repeating lines from the first one, and with less flare.

I mean, how many times have I thought or even said out loud "The time for honoring yourself will soon be at an end" when watching something Trump or Elon just said/did?

In fact, even when they said these great lines from the first film, they said them like we, the audience does, to each other, 25 years later.

In fact, I can't think of a single line I'd remember except perhaps Macrinus, repeating Marcus Aurelius's words "The best revenge is to be unlike him who performed your injury."


Unfortunately, a screenwriter didn't write that one, though - Marcus Aurelius really did.

However, Michelle Obama delivered the modern version "When they go low, we go high" 😊

(Speaking of which, where were Lucilla's brief-but-great speeches attempting to stop the madness of warmongering men?)

And though Marcinus lived by it, he missed the point completely - Marcus Aurelius meant not to stoop to the level of your enemy - not become even less merciless, greedy, and power-hungry!

And Lucius is Lucilla and Maximus's son, we get it already, most of us figured that out in the first 10 minutes, so how dumb do you think we are?

Well, half of this country did for Trump and have the attention span of gnats, so never mind.

3)     A linear story with smooth transitions, rather than huge gaps due to poor editing or Ridley feeling these elements weren't important to the story, but they actually were, to help us understand how we got here?

Not to mention, the "downtime" scenes, the behind-the-action scenes between the the characters is what endears the characters to us. There weren't enough of those; thus, we didn't especially care what happened to whom, except the existing characters in the first one, and that was mostly based on pure memory (Lucilla, Grachhus).

4)    Lack of its own composed score, or any composed score at all?

Gladiator had a magnificent composed score, but this had a couple of moments of just piping out the first one for a few moments.

Those are missing today in general, great music scores. We see them with TV shows like Yellowstone, Game of Thrones, Evil, etc, but not in movies anymore.

Great scores/soundtracks were part of the grandeur of "going to the movies" - are they gone?

I hope not!

5) Believable special effects.

I could see the CGI very clearly in this film, done poorly. 

Dang, why didn't you use the CGI-makers for Game of Thrones, since this was a partially British production anyway?

Ancient Rome looked like a drawing - and the baboons, what the ??

I understand not fighting real baboons, but what the hell kinda baboons were these supposed to be?

And they don't look remotely like a real creature, they look like cartoons.

Or more accurately, like cartoon versions of the giant hairless flying monkeys from The Wizard of Oz!

And the sharks in the colosseum, what the BLEEP?

Though the colosseum was flooded with water to re-enact naval battles called naumachia, there were no sharks!

(There may have been some crocodiles at one point, but no sharks.)

Also, these were originally re-enactments of military battle with military soldiers, orchestrated so that the Romans would always win.

Later, the surviving gladiators of the prior events' games were included, but they often refused to participate after surviving, so the emperors would send down centurions to add bloodshed. 

But no - no sharks, CGI or not, no winning Persians or Greeks in these mock battles - sorry.

Now, let's talk about what was good.

Hmm, let's see. 

1)  The twin Emperor brothers, Geta and Caracalla.

Both Joseph Quinn and Fred Herschinger did an excellent job of playing spoiled, hedonistic, sociopathic, crazy asses in ghoulish Greek-tragedy makeup.

(Ya know, think the Trump family.)

This is the shameful truth when you let blood line and a life of privilege continue in power - their  highly educated, military grandfather was probably rolling in his grave over his grandsons, neither highly educated nor military trained themselves, drinking and drugging all day, behaving as if all of this was some sort of game, making decisions based on whimsy rather than informed rationale, strategy, or  even with a basis in reality. 

Doing an especially good job with just how crazy the emperors became was Fred Herschinger as Caracalla, whom ever time on camera, had a goofy, not-so-bright grin on his face: 

Hahaha, so deranged, we almost feel sorry for him.

Okay, so they could've suspended our disbelief far enough to buy the implausible concept of this film - and in fact, many of us wondered what would become of Lucius and whether or not he was actually Maximus's son in the first one - but they didn't. 

2)  As already mentioned, Pedro Pascal as Acacius (though as stated, we could've seen more of him).  

3)  Denzel Washington as the scheming weasel that is Macrinus (minus the American accent) - and his robes! 

4)  Alexander Hakim as Ravi. 

In fact, he was the character with the most soul and compassion, and was actually the best representative of Marcus Aurelius's words - he put down his sword as a forced gladiator and became a doctor, helping to heal men instead of kill them.

Now, Paul Mescal CAN act, he's sold other roles, he just doesn't sell it this film and that was, above all, mandatory.

So who else could've done this? 

Not too many under 40 that could pull this off, but must-haves?

-  An ability to convey quiet intensity and intelligence.

-  Carries some physical attributes that at least remotely remind us of his parents, Maximus and Lucilla. 

-  Attractive, but not a "pretty" boy.

-  A strong build, but not Arnie built.

-  An ability to switch from aggressive to tender at the drop of a hat, particularly towards women and children.

-  Ability to tone down aggression in the heat of battle to show mercy.

So other possible options for this role might have been ... 

Liam Hemsworth?

I mean, he looks like a cross between Russell Crowe and Connie Nielson, he's played both military soldier and tender love interest before, and he even has that Australian accent accidentally creeping through now and then, like Russell? 😂

Austin Butler?

Hell, even Tom Holland could've pulled it off, despite his height?

(If Tom Cruise at the same height of 5'6" can pull of making us believe he was a towering Vampire Lestat, so can Tom Holland, with the same quality.)

Regardless, sorry to say, super disappointed. 

In fact, I'm going to pretend this movie didn't happen, preferring the first one ending the way it did. 

_____________________________

PS - BTW, though there were some historical inaccuracies, one thing they got right was the Roman "hail."

As I said previously, it was more to the side than the front and with relaxed open fingers. 

Though the Nazi salute is based on the Roman hail, it is emphatic, tight-armed, fingers closed, and most often, directly in front, often beating the chest first. 

Sorry, Elon - your little "hail" at Trump's inauguration was thus NOT Roman, it was, in fact, Nazi.

Either way,  it is a hail of a singular dictator rather than a democracy - and that's okay with Trumpers?