Review by John Larkin
Warning: spoilers ahead from both Gladiator films
"Lucius is safe." whispers Maximus Decimus Meridius right before taking his last breath at the end of GLADIATOR (2000). Well, apparently Lucius was far from it. As it's revealed midway through the much anticipated sequel via flashback, Lucius, the child of Maximus (Russel Crowe) and Lucilla (Connie Nielsen), was secretly whisked away to some unknown location only seconds after Maximus's body is carried out of the colosseum. Lucilla, now free of her deranged brother Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix) hands him off to Centurion guards and tells her son - the one she loves most in the world that she has to.. "stay behind." This plot contrivance was hard for me to accept. While I like the choice of having Lucius be the one to continue and fulfill Marcus Aurelius's "dream of Rome" and continue the legacy of Maximus - as Maximus chided Proximo in the original GLADIATOR, "This is not it. This is NOT IT!"
I find it hard to accept that Lucilla, who cared for Lucius with the full depth of motherly love, would abandon her son and claim it was the safer option than having him stay by her side in Rome. If Lucilla did feel he was in danger, wouldn't she be in danger as well? They could have at least fled together and looked after each other. The optics become comically bad for Lucilla when Lucius returns to Rome and finds his mother living a lavish lifestyle with Rome's next most eligible bachelor general.
Maximus' arc of slave turned hero and freeing Rome of the corrupt Emperor Commodus, thus making life safe again for Lucilla and young Lucius is completely undone by this unconvincing explanation of what transpired after the events of GLADIATOR.
Going into the film, I knew Paul Mescal was portraying the older Lucius (played by Spencer Treat Clark in the first film), so I was surprised the film designs that detail as a dramatic slow reveal. It packed little emotional punch watching other characters discover something most of the audience already knows or senses strongly, and compounding that with the flawed reasoning for his disappearance created a complete film logic nightmare.
I can't help but wonder what actor Spencer Treat Clark is feeling having been the original Lucius and seeing that character now have his own starring role in a massive big budget sequel. There has been some outcry about it, with Ridley Scott defending his decision to cast Mescal because he was much younger than Clark, who is now 8 years older than he should be during the events of the film. It's not hard to guess the real truth - that they needed a much bigger name to lead the production, and bringing in Clark would not have had the same draw as Mescal. Though I would have loved to see it for authenticity sake.
GLADIATOR II tries hard to echo the spirit and conflicts of the first film, and while it does achieve something enjoyable as a whole, It's hard not to see its many flaws and start comparing it to what made the original film great. Ridley Scott's process for shooting films now is extremely quick, using 11 digital cameras simultaneously to capture the action from all angles. While it may be a more efficient way to get the coverage, it's a detriment to the quality of the production. The brilliant cinematographer John Mathieson returned to lens the sequel, but most of GLADIATOR II looks just...fine. Not stunning and indelible like the imagery from the original. I can't help but think it's because of the speedy production - the entire shoot only took 50 days!
The film is a fun action-packed, old school sword and sandals epic non-the-less, and I think most audience goers may not feel too deeply about the gripes I've expressed, but for the uber GLADIATOR fans that hold the first film sacredly within their heart, I think they'll feel underwhelmed and somewhat conflicted with what's in store for them.
Comments