Gladiator review

Maximus: Are you not entertained? Are you not entertained? Is this not why you are here? 

Director: Ridley Scott
(2000)

Its sort of a curse anyone who watches a film after awards season. While many don’t agree or even listen to the academy of motion picture and arts, a film with its awards success plastered all over its DVD box still has grand expectations to live up to.  This very curse may have afflicted me, as Ridley Scott’s gladiator should be considered synonymous with the internet’s favourite word; overrated.

Gladiator kicks off with a rather lackluster battle between the Romans, lead by general Maximus (Russell Crowe) and the native Germans. Once the battle has finished, and Maximus’ close friend and emperor (Richard Harris in a small but excellent role) is dead, Maximus is branded a traitor by the new emperor, Commodus (Joaquin phoenix). He escapes, only to find his family murdered and himself sold as a slave. Anyone who believed gladiator would have a deep and involving plot will be rudely awakened here, as everything consists around this shallow, violent revenge tale. The narrative is driven solely by brutal battle scenes which are, admittedly, the best part of the film. The vicious sword slices, decapitated limbs and feral screams of the combatants thoroughly add to the intensity of these scenes, and the film is better for it.

When we watch events unfold outside of the arena, things are far more mundane. Gladiator is a very unique film due to being rather empty. Events never descent to the status of boring, but none of this content is interesting either. Instead it can be compared to the chewing fat in a fine piece of steak, totally tasteless, but essential for making the steak (in this case the fight scenes) taste good. The only other exception to this is Joaquin phoenix’ emperor Commodus. He's Maximus’ betrayer and the sniveling, slimy villain of the piece. Phoenix is phenomenal in this role, adding the layers and subtle emotions required to make Commodus the dislikable figure that he is. His is the best performance in gladiator; if anyone was deserving of a statuette that year, it’s him. I can’t pay the same compliments to Crowe however, who fills his role with blank expressions and a gruff voice.

For the majority of its long running time, gladiator is emotionally vapid. We don’t attach to Maximus’ family, and despite watching his little boy getting bowled over and trampled by a horse, we don’t care as much as we could. This has serious repercussions for the rest of the film; Maximus is fueled by emotions that we the audience, don’t share. Only at its climax is where the film gains some emotional weight, during a battle between a strong willed hero we love to watch fight, and a villain we’ve been made to hate. Only then are these emotions possible when the focus moves from Maximus’ struggle to the effects he’s had on the lives of others.

With its bloated length, Gladiator isn't a film for the impatient or action hungry. In retrospect, the 2000’s were the start of the end for Ridley Scott, the once brilliant filmmaker who crafted classics such as Blade Runner and has been relegated to making above average films. It’s not that Gladiator is a bad film, but outside of the arena and Joaquin Phoenix, there's little here that’s actually worth enduring its 2 and a half hour running time.

6