Skip to main content

Empire Magazine (2008) Greatest Movies List - #151: Gladiator

The words “a Ridley Scott film” can mean a lot of things: a science-fiction film, a thriller, or a straight-up drama. One genre in which he seems to be quite at ease is the swords and sandals epic, and his most successful entry in that genre has been his Oscar-winning Gladiator (2000) with his frequent collaborator Russell Crowe. The story is filled with representations of corruption in politics, how entertainment can be used to distract or win the masses, but mostly it is remembered for the fights on the sand of the arena. This is best encompassed by the hero’s signature scream to the audience: “Are you not entertained?”

Most people watching this movie for the first time might probably link it to other similar epics, but the first thing that popped into my mind and the mind of my parents and brother when we first watched it was, “this sounds an awful lot like the French comic book Astérix.” The opening describes how at this point in history the Roman Empire has vanquished all of its enemies except for a rebellious Germanic tribe. If you have read Astérix, you would understand why we half expected a short moustachioed warrior and his big buddy Obélix to defeat the entire Roman army with their fists. That would have been fun, but it is not quite the tone Scott was going for.

Instead we get Russell Crowe as General Maximus Meridius successfully defeating the Germanic tribe thanks to skills, organizations, and a lot of arrows in a bloody and muddy battlefield. Despite the exhaustive battle, Maximus has the respect and loyalty of his soldiers, while Maximus gives his loyalty to the emperor Marcus Aurelius (the late great Richard Harris). The emperor loves his general like a son, which is a major slap in the face of his actual son Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix) who of course has his eyes on the throne. The battlefield is one thing, but politics is twice as dangerous because there your enemies hide in the shadows

In a true Shakespearean twist, Commodus decides to murder his father after he learns he has offered Maximus the job of emperor in order to reign in the corruption in Rome. The film is remembered for Russell Crowe’s performance, but Joaquin Phoenix is equally great as Commodus and gives a much more nuanced performance. In the scene when the emperor tells him he is not to inherit the throne he seems genuinely hurt and sad, even when he proceeds to choke the life out of his father. Connie Nielsen, who plays Commodus’ sister Lucilla, also has a meaty role since from the moment of her father’s death she is stuck in a life or death situation. She embraces her brother knowing full well what he is what he has done, but only because she also knows what he would do to her son should she get out of line.

Before all the political backstabbing and plotting in Rome takes place, we get to see Maximus go from respected general to slave after Commodus orders his death and that of his family. Captured and sold to Proximo (Oliver Reed, who died during production) a gladiator trainer, Maximus has lost his faith in his gods and his will to live. That is until he learns a gladiator can win his freedom through fame and by being the last man standing in the glorious coliseum in Rome, where the emperor would meet him in person. Freedom sounds nice, but stabbing Commodus on the sands of the arena sounds even better. Maximus’ advantage over the other gladiators is his army training, which allows his to defeat the largest of opponents while rich people are watching him over food and drinks. Now that’s entertainment.


Like many historical films, Gladiator has been criticised for its inaccuracy, and I remember reading somewhere it holds some sort of record for having the most movie mistakes, such as actors still wearing their watches during production. That may be, but once when I see Russell Crowe charging into battle while Hans Zimmer’s heroic theme is playing I am not really thinking about history, I am just thinking this is pretty badass. I will look for historical accuracy in the history books, in the movies I just want to be entertained.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Empire Magazine (2008) Greatest Movies List - #85: Blue Velvet

Exactly how do you describe a David Lynch movie? He is one of the few directors whose style is so distinctive that his last name has become an adjective. According to Urban Dictionary, the definition of Lynchian is: “having the same balance between the macabre and the mundane found in the works of filmmaker David Lynch.” To see a prime example of that adjective film lovers need look no further than Lynch’s Blue Velvet (1986), which does indeed begin in the mundane before slowly sinking in macabre violence.
My first introduction to the world of David Lynch was through his ground breaking, but unfortunately interrupted, early 1990s TV series Twin Peaks. This was one of the first television shows to grab viewers with a series-long mystery: who killed Laura Palmer? A mix of soap opera, police procedural, and the supernatural, it is a unique show that showed the darkness hidden in suburbia and remains influential to this day. Featuring Kyle MacLachlan as an FBI investigator with a love for …

Empire Magazine (2008) Greatest Movies List - #90: When Harry Met Sally...

There is an age-old question regarding whether single men and women can be just friends. In real life the answer is obviously “yes,” but in movies and TV the answer always has to be that at some point two single characters will get attracted to each other and move beyond friendship. On TV I find this to be contrived and overused, but some movies can have a lot of fun with the concept, most notably Rob Reiner’s comedy classic When Harry Met Sally…(1989). It may not change your view on love and friendship, but it forever changed the meaning of the phrase “I’ll have what she’s having.”
On paper this film’s premise sounds like another rom-com, but seen by oneself during an evening of Netflix binging it does make you think about deep stuff like the long-term impact of your decisions on your life. A person you meet during a tense trip might turn up again sometime later down the road in the most unexpected ways. If there is one thing I believe in it is infinite possibilities, and Nora Ephron…

Empire Magazine (2008) Greatest Movies List - #83: Brazil

Dystopian movies from the 1980s are a funny thing since we now live in the future of those movies and if you look at the news for more than five minutes it will feel as though we are one bad day away from being into a dystopia. On the plus side, if it ends up looking like the dystopia portrayed in Terry Gilliam’s Brazil (1985) at least we will have lovely architecture to look at while the government is busy telling us how to think. This might not be a movie that will cheer you up, but the production design is amazing, the performances are great throughout, and you get to see Robert DeNiro play a maintenance man/freedom fighter.
I first saw Brazil as a Terry Gilliam double feature at the Université de Sherbrooke’s movie club paired along with 12 Monkeys around ten years ago. Those two films are similar in that they both feature a rather dour future and, as with most Gilliam movies, incredibly intricate sets. However the dystopian future in Brazil is somewhat scarier than the disease-ra…