Gladiator II is absolutely worth a watch but it is a hollow shell in comparison to its predecessor.
6.5/10 imo, looks great, decent acting but lacks the heart and soul that made Gladiator such a remarkable film.
Colour me shocked
shareWas lucky enough to read an article containing spoilers and found the ending so unsatisfying. If accurate anyway, it sounds like a cop-out of the revenge arc.
shareThe original was only a 6.5/10 for me ... I'm not sure why so many people are acting like Gladiator 2000 was a classic.
shareYes, I think I gave it a 7/10. I enjoyed it first time around but I think I've rewatched it only twice in the years since, and they were at the insistence of someone else.
share[deleted]
For me it’s mostly about how often I’m inclined to rewatch something. In my opinion, the original Gladiator has that, and in spades. I have no problem falling back into the original Gladiator whenever the mood strikes, that being said, while the sequel wasn’t bad, it’s not one of those films I’ll be inclined to rewatch again and again, as I am for Shawshank, or 300, or A New Hope…
Fucking troll piece of shit
shareRoger Ebert didn’t like Gladiator either. That said, it’s a masterpiece compared to this sequel, lol
sharethe jew fuck was bought. he said spiderman 3 was the best movie he ever saw or something like that. he also rated many movies that i found boring. so he's got some weird tastes. maybe he focus too much on being different and circlejerked boring indies.
shareHe wasn’t a Jew tho. But yes, he had some questionable reviews. He actually rated The Perfect Storm higher than Gladiator that year.
sharesadly, i agree. the movie was extremely good for its time but upon rewatch, it was only ok. i'd probably give it a 7. maybe it's better if i didnt know the story. you should give it points for that because when you dont know what will happen, the story is better.
share