Nach der Eroberung seiner Heimat durch die tyrannischen Kaiser, die nun über Rom herrschen, sieht sich Lucius gezwungen, sich auf seine Vergangenheit zu besinnen, um die Kraft zu finden, Rom... Alles lesenNach der Eroberung seiner Heimat durch die tyrannischen Kaiser, die nun über Rom herrschen, sieht sich Lucius gezwungen, sich auf seine Vergangenheit zu besinnen, um die Kraft zu finden, Rom dem Volk zurückzugeben.Nach der Eroberung seiner Heimat durch die tyrannischen Kaiser, die nun über Rom herrschen, sieht sich Lucius gezwungen, sich auf seine Vergangenheit zu besinnen, um die Kraft zu finden, Rom dem Volk zurückzugeben.
- Für 1 Oscar nominiert
- 9 Gewinne & 110 Nominierungen insgesamt
Zusammenfassung
Reviewers say 'Gladiator II' impresses with visuals and performances, especially Denzel Washington and Pedro Pascal, but falls short in emotional depth and originality. The grand scale, action sequences, and themes of power and redemption are praised, yet the script is criticized for predictability and underdeveloped characters. Paul Mescal's performance is deemed lacking compared to Russell Crowe's, and the film's reliance on CGI and historical inaccuracies is noted.
Empfohlene Bewertungen
The film offers a thrilling experience, the narrative and character development could have been more robust. At times, the storyline feels rushed, and some character arcs lack the depth that made the original "Gladiator" so compelling. This leads to an overall experience that, in my opinion, does not quite reach the heights of the original.
Additionally, Denzel Washington's portrayal is noteworthy, but his American accent felt somewhat out of place within the context of the film. It occasionally detracted from the immersion, making it harder to connect with his character fully.
To sum it up, "Gladiator II" is an entertaining blockbuster that delivers on visual spectacle and excitement. While it struggles with certain aspects of storytelling and character depth, it still manages to provide an enjoyable cinematic experience for fans of the genre.
Additionally, Denzel Washington's portrayal is noteworthy, but his American accent felt somewhat out of place within the context of the film. It occasionally detracted from the immersion, making it harder to connect with his character fully.
To sum it up, "Gladiator II" is an entertaining blockbuster that delivers on visual spectacle and excitement. While it struggles with certain aspects of storytelling and character depth, it still manages to provide an enjoyable cinematic experience for fans of the genre.
There seems to be a trend these days when making follow ups to beloved classics that you need to add more. More characters! More action! But that doesn't always equal better. It's almost like filmmakers these days think we're stupid and want more of everything but all this does is sacrifice quality.
What made the original such a classic was the relatively simple plot, a protagonist you cared about and action that felt earned and impactful.
This one is so overstuffed it feels rushed. The plot feels like a lazy retread of the first but I didn't care about any of the characters. Paul Mescal was so wooden it sounded like he was reading his lines. If this is how he acts, I really don't see what all the fuss is about with him. Am I missing something.
The action, while visually impressive, lacked impact. Some studio exec probably thought 'hmm there was only 1 exotic animal in the first film, we can do better! Let's add way more!'
What made the original such a classic was the relatively simple plot, a protagonist you cared about and action that felt earned and impactful.
This one is so overstuffed it feels rushed. The plot feels like a lazy retread of the first but I didn't care about any of the characters. Paul Mescal was so wooden it sounded like he was reading his lines. If this is how he acts, I really don't see what all the fuss is about with him. Am I missing something.
The action, while visually impressive, lacked impact. Some studio exec probably thought 'hmm there was only 1 exotic animal in the first film, we can do better! Let's add way more!'
My main issue with this film is the total lack of gravitas from Paul Mescal. Russel Crow commanded respect, on screen his presence was immense and it was easy to believe he was a leader of men. Paul Mescal just doesn't have it. He tried to hard in his talisman speeches, but they had to be carried by the music instead of his command of the screen. Even his physical presence is underwhelming, he looked like a boy pretending to be a man. The emperors also lacked a sense of real danger and tyranny. Every time there was a flash back to the original I was reminded of how poor this film was in comparison. If you were hoping for a performance anywhere close to Russel Crowe or a Mel Gibson in Braveheart you will be sorely disappointed. Without the charisma and emotional gravitas of the leading man everything else fails to deliver. Paul Mascals character was very empty, he seemed like the generic man, nothing at all to distinguish him. This movie is a textbook example of how casting will make or break a movie.
The movie has some strongpoints: Denzel's and Quinn's performances, the way the City looks and some of the battles in the Colosseum. Like all Ridley Scott's movies after KoH, the last good one, it adresses an audience who is only there for the nachos and the thrills and knows nothing about history, warfare or common sense.
To be fair, Ridley really can direct huge movies that look good. But the writing, the ending...Scarpa really should find a hobby.
Being such a fan of Gladiator I wanted so much for this one to be decent that I concentrated on the strong points and until the last 30 minutes hit this was a decent effort. The ending is nevertheless an utter mess, it's senseless and unpleasant, an overthetop insult to common sense.
The producer's money would have been better spent elsewhere. Mine too.
The incredibly bad: the monkeys, Caracalla's character, Macrinus 's fate after a good buildup, the sharks, attacking a city's walls by sea with siege towers, the way the roman legion looks, the Praetorians, the last speech, the uninspired use of the score... A word about Paul Mescal: he doesn't shine but really, how could he, with such writing. I think his performance was strong, I felt the emotions, he does good in the arena....really not his fault.
Ridley, you have fooled me for the last time.
The sad thing is: the ending in this one makes Napoleon seem ok 😔
To be fair, Ridley really can direct huge movies that look good. But the writing, the ending...Scarpa really should find a hobby.
Being such a fan of Gladiator I wanted so much for this one to be decent that I concentrated on the strong points and until the last 30 minutes hit this was a decent effort. The ending is nevertheless an utter mess, it's senseless and unpleasant, an overthetop insult to common sense.
The producer's money would have been better spent elsewhere. Mine too.
The incredibly bad: the monkeys, Caracalla's character, Macrinus 's fate after a good buildup, the sharks, attacking a city's walls by sea with siege towers, the way the roman legion looks, the Praetorians, the last speech, the uninspired use of the score... A word about Paul Mescal: he doesn't shine but really, how could he, with such writing. I think his performance was strong, I felt the emotions, he does good in the arena....really not his fault.
Ridley, you have fooled me for the last time.
The sad thing is: the ending in this one makes Napoleon seem ok 😔
Everyone has seen Denzel Washington praising fellow actors Pedro Pascal and Paul Mescal for their acting - but the reality is there is nothing special - they are actors that acted - their performance did not elevate the film to the glory of the original.
Storyline wise the film is a joke - the plot twists are illogical and only work because the characters are forced to change - the first half of the film concentrates on a man's desire for vengence which is overturned by a single line of dialogue.
Hollywood is failing - it clearly looks to have been influenced by accountants and MBA muppets that somehow believe the more twists a film contains the more $$ it attracts.
Side note: if Rome was so great - why was it always falling apart.
Storyline wise the film is a joke - the plot twists are illogical and only work because the characters are forced to change - the first half of the film concentrates on a man's desire for vengence which is overturned by a single line of dialogue.
Hollywood is failing - it clearly looks to have been influenced by accountants and MBA muppets that somehow believe the more twists a film contains the more $$ it attracts.
Side note: if Rome was so great - why was it always falling apart.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesIn an interview with Simon Mayo, Sir Ridley Scott said that he sold the Königreich der Himmel (2005) set to the Moroccan government for $10 because it was cheaper than dismantling it. He then had to hire it from the same government for use in this movie.
- PatzerNaval battles were only staged in the first year after the Colosseum was built. After the construction of the Hypogeum it was no longer possible to flood the arena.
- Alternative VersionenA cut M-rated version was released in cinemas in Australia. At least 3 scenes were trimmed: Cut No. 1 - Lucius (Paul Mescal) beheads his opponent at the first Roman games. The beginning of the scene was trimmed to remove the swords connecting with the head. It cuts into the shot midway to show the stump and a bit of blood spray. Cut No. 2 - Macrinus (Denzel Washington) slashing at the neck of Emperor Geta (Joseph Quinn). The initial long shot of the neck cutting and blood spray is missing. The following close-up shot is zoomed to the left to remove the continued neck slashing and blood spray on the right. Cut No. 3 - Macrinus puts a spike into the ear of Emperor Caracalla (Fred Hechinger). The red blood flowing from his ear is now green/yellow. Despite these cuts, the edited version was later reclassified as MA15+. The initial M rating was given by the studio itself, whereas the MA15+ rating was given by the Australian classification board. It is currently unknown if the uncut version will be released on Australian home video.
- VerbindungenEdited into Gladiator II: Deleted Scenes (2025)
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is Gladiator II?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsländer
- Offizielle Standorte
- Sprachen
- Auch bekannt als
- Gladiator 2
- Drehorte
- Produktionsfirmen
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 250.000.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Bruttoertrag in den USA und Kanada
- 172.438.016 $
- Eröffnungswochenende in den USA und in Kanada
- 55.034.715 $
- 24. Nov. 2024
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 462.180.717 $
- Laufzeit2 Stunden 28 Minuten
- Farbe
- Sound-Mix
- Seitenverhältnis
- 2.39 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen