Gladiator is a film which contrives to be something more than just another 'no-brain actioner' but unfortunately the film tries too hard to be unique and simply wallows in its own pretensions and clichéd dialogue, delivered by unconvincing cardboard cut outs of characters.
The plot,in short, revolves around Maximus(Russell Crowe) a talented Roman general who, after winning a huge battle at Germania,is privately chosen by the Emperor(Richard Harris) to be the next ruler of Rome. Commodus, the Emporer's son is informed of this and does not take the news well and swiftly reasserts his right to the throne by .....well I think the rest is already covered quite sufficiently in the 'Plot Summary' section, so I'll begin criticizing this bloated piece of historical nonsense.
Ridley Scott is famed for his distinctive visual flair, and Gladiator is another impressive piece of style over substance, as Scott lavishly recreates imperial Rome with the aid of some imppressive computer graphics and superbly choreographs the elaborate battle sequences with brutal attention to detail. However once you get past these superficial details you discover the glaring faults that prevent the film from being as good as it should have been. Crowe's maximus is a fairly 2-dimensional character and his facial expressions seem to be limited to either scowling, suppressing rage, or just generally moody, whilst his dialogue consists of 'uber-hero' clichés all delivered in a typically macho, gruff voice lacking any inflection or emotion. Crowe can be a very good and versatile actor but he flounders in this role, remaining in dull monotone for most of the picture.
The Film is partially redeemed by solid performances from Connie Nielsen as the tragic, but strong-willed, heroine and Joaqiun Phoenix completely camps it up as the vile Commodus to great effect and Derek Jacobi is impressive in a small role as a member of the Roman Senate.
Many people love this film but I don't consider it to be particulairly special (maybe I'm too demanding) so I reccomend you check it out for yourself, but the fact this film won the 'best picture' oscar proves very little and only demeans the academy's already waning credibility.
For now I'll give the film a mediocre score of 6 out of 10
The plot,in short, revolves around Maximus(Russell Crowe) a talented Roman general who, after winning a huge battle at Germania,is privately chosen by the Emperor(Richard Harris) to be the next ruler of Rome. Commodus, the Emporer's son is informed of this and does not take the news well and swiftly reasserts his right to the throne by .....well I think the rest is already covered quite sufficiently in the 'Plot Summary' section, so I'll begin criticizing this bloated piece of historical nonsense.
Ridley Scott is famed for his distinctive visual flair, and Gladiator is another impressive piece of style over substance, as Scott lavishly recreates imperial Rome with the aid of some imppressive computer graphics and superbly choreographs the elaborate battle sequences with brutal attention to detail. However once you get past these superficial details you discover the glaring faults that prevent the film from being as good as it should have been. Crowe's maximus is a fairly 2-dimensional character and his facial expressions seem to be limited to either scowling, suppressing rage, or just generally moody, whilst his dialogue consists of 'uber-hero' clichés all delivered in a typically macho, gruff voice lacking any inflection or emotion. Crowe can be a very good and versatile actor but he flounders in this role, remaining in dull monotone for most of the picture.
The Film is partially redeemed by solid performances from Connie Nielsen as the tragic, but strong-willed, heroine and Joaqiun Phoenix completely camps it up as the vile Commodus to great effect and Derek Jacobi is impressive in a small role as a member of the Roman Senate.
Many people love this film but I don't consider it to be particulairly special (maybe I'm too demanding) so I reccomend you check it out for yourself, but the fact this film won the 'best picture' oscar proves very little and only demeans the academy's already waning credibility.
For now I'll give the film a mediocre score of 6 out of 10