My only issue is that I think it's been done to death. Nick having his take would be beating a dead horse. However, I think he would feel better if he reviewed "The Longest Day". 😁😁
So basically there are one of 2 incredibly negative things going on here, either Ridley has gone full "Hollywood Dumb" or he is motivated by the perception that the grand majority of American movie fans are uninterested in anything which is not full on "Hollywood dumb" ? If there is a third less negative possibility please articulate it.
In the movie, they made Caracalla and Geta into cooperative and even loving brothers. In real life, they absolutely HATED each other. They divided the palace in half, refused to allow their servants into the other side, never were in the same room together, and eventually Caracalla had Geta murdered in their mother's arms. Macrinus should have spent the entire movie playing the two against each other, not just killing them both himself in the span of 15 minutes.
Also, Joseph Quinn or even Pedro Pascal look closer to what the sculptures of Caracalla are like. In fact, when the casting was announced, I thought they were good options for that role but when I saw the trailer I didn't understand why they were portrayed like that.
The casting is also strange as their family was from North Africa and they probably looked like modern Sicilians, and the depictions of them show them looking like boxers, not effete redheads lol. Though I guess the same could be said for the original, as Commodus is universally depicted and described as handsome, tall, muscular, with light brown/dirty blond hair and a full beard.
Caracalla killed Geta only a year into their reign, and he himself ruled for several years afterwards, so not sure about Macrinus manipulating them both for the whole movie- if we're being historically accurate, he didn't manipulate Caracalla, he just had him murdered out of fear for his own life and a sincere belief that he could run the Empire better (only to be killed by Elagabalus a year later....and I'd bet good money that Elagabalus is the bad guy of Gladiator 3).
The one moment that stood out to me was the Roman Senator reading a modern day newspaper... 1220 years before the printing press was invented, and roughly 1400 years before the first printed newspapers were made
The newspaper props in Napoleon were just as bad... satirical drawings were sold by themselves in print shops or in collected albums, newspapers were only print by that time.
There *was* a kind of news-sheet, the _Acta Diurna_ - it was a sort of daily government gazette, containing an officially authorized narrative of noteworthy events at Rome; partly official (court news, decrees of the emperor, Roman Senate, & Roman magistrates), & partly private (notices of births, marriages, & deaths), so it had some similarities with a modern newspaper; carved on stone or metal, &/ or written out, & presented in message boards in public places such as the Forum - they were drawn up from day to day, & exposed in a public place on a whitened board called an _Album_ . After remaining there for a reasonable time, they were taken down & preserved with other public documents, so that they might be available for purposes of research - scribes would make out hand-copies of the info & send them to governors, as a kind of State update. It was begun in 59 BC (possibly by Caesar) & continued until AD 222- within the timeline of the characters, so- ironically, in some ways, it was one of the more accurate parts of the movie...
Roman newspaper is the most stupidly anachronistic thing I've heard of. At least the other anachronisms arguably make the movie more entertaining. Newspaper is just immersion breaking.
@@KTempestBradfordit’s also a reference to the phrase “jumped the shark,” it references some tv show that had this happen. It means that the story has completely lost its origins and has just gone insane
Ridley is 3600 years old by now. When people point out the inaccuracies, he snakily tells them to "get a life". His former long-time cinematographer just blasted him in an interview, stating that Ridley doesn't put in any effort anymore, works with multiple cameras to avoid shooting scenes multiple times, tells the visual artists to remove microphones and then effs off, calling it a day.
I don't get why people like him do this. He's 86 years old, has tons of money, and is a highly respected director. Why keep doing this if you don't want to put in the effort? There is literally no reason to keep doing it at his age if it isn't for the love and passion of film making.
It's also shitty how he snidely asks, 'Were _you_ there?' - I swear, the person he said this to was a lot more polite than I would have been - 'No, I wasn't - but there *were* people who were, & they *WROTE THINGS DOWN* - & _the least_ you could have done, with your multi-hundred million dollar budget, is *_put some bloody effort into the RESEARCH, & NOT expect the audience to gratefully lap up whatever slop you deign to put in front of them_* !'
I remember how catty/spiteful he was with Dan Snow over Napoleon. Dan Snow wasn't even being aggressive, he's a historian, he obv just wanted to 'discuss' Scott's choices, but Ridley Scott just wheeled out his repertoire of petty excuses and quite unpleasant responses.
Few things I loved: -ramming city walls with ships. Their invasion looked more complex to pull off than D day… -kids in Egypt playing football -guys sitting down in the famous Roman cafes reading the newspaper
As someone who did jury duty and have aunts who are nurses and my mom being a nurse , and my Uncle being in the FBI It's a fun day to roast cop, hospital and lawyers sitcoms and point out the inaccuracies and literal crimes committed by the "Heros"
"We need some pasty-white effeminate bad guys who despise proper Roman soldiers. I know just the right emperors - the Severan dynasty!" This man directed The Duelists. What happened?
I had a discussion some years ago when people began talking about a Gladiator II. I considered Caracalla to be the best potential villain well adaptable for a fictional story. The protagonist could be a faithful servant of Rome whose family perishes in the Massacre of Alexandria, which he barely survives, spends some years seeking vengeance. Flip the Gladiator story, ending it on the battlefield instead of at the Colosseum. Expand the gladiator story beyond the arena. Caracalla loved living as a soldier, he was a rough bully. So much in a gladiator film could be done with him. His arrogance in doing his own dirty work could be used to create a “Rocky 4” type plot, with the protagonist fighting him and losing, facing humiliation, then spending the movie becoming stronger then facing Caracalla again for a showdown and winning. An epic redemptive hero’s arch, featuring struggle and humiliation to come full circle.
What I would have loved was a clash between the generals soldiers and the pretorian guard inside the arena instead of what happens now. That would have taken the civil war element to its tipping point while keeping the arena theme. They could also have shown how the general handle the protection the intruding germanic tribes that was pushing the northern borders at the time (I belive) and that they have overrun, taken and raised the main antagonist whom the general took back as a war prisoner.
"... with the protagonist fighting him and losing, facing humiliation, then spending the movie becoming stronger..." Pretty sure you're thinking of Rocky 3, not 4.
I love the part when the doctor rides to the military camp and pushes away the guards to report to the general, the guard was like okay and walks away. I was laughing at the security for the general like how easy would the assassin go into camp to assassinate 😂
Maybe because I don't know much Roman history, but if I did I would be fuming at every scene like Napoleon. But since I didn't I just got bored out of my mind, so I was looking at my phone reading cultured materials with way better love stories than all the historical romances Ridley Scott is fixated on!
I'm so sorry you lost your money too mate. I immediately came to youtube to see if anyone else had disliked it and thank God they did. This was a week ago
The Spanish dub did the same. I did appreciate the lambdas painted on the shields, everyone remembers the heroic and decisive role of the Spartan Navy in Salamis.
The lambdas on shields can be excused to make it feel more spectacular to the roman audience. Calling the persians "trojans" however is ridiculous, as imperial propaganda claimed decending from Troy (Aeneus). They wouldn't mix their eastern enemy with them.
It was cemented in my mind it was going to be meh when I saw it was getting a winter release. These kind of things tend to be summer blockbusters... unless they suck, then they get pushed back to the end of the year.
@@mauricioleyzaola7380 I'm sure it will. By all accounts from those I've spoken to who've seen it, it's a fun watch. Just maybe not if you understand and/or particualrly care about the period of history it's supposed to be depicting. On a somewhat related note I think the idea of judging a movie by its box office performance is entirely redundant and obsolete now anyway given realtively few people go to the cinema, they just wait for it to come on the streaming services and more and more get same day or close to same day release in both theatre and on streaming.
2:44 This is a common misconception. While _some_ sharks do need to keep moving in order to breathe, there are many other species of shark that can breathe just fine while remaining stationary (nurse shark, whitetip reef shark, Caribbean reef shark, wobbegong, and lemon shark just to name a few).
The sharks shown in the movie are unmistakably not nurse sharks, whitetip reef sharks or wobblegongs. And unless the Ridley's romans predated Columbus' crossing of the Atlantic and Vasco de Gama's trip around Africa - they can't have Carribbean Reef Sharks or Lemon Sharks either. But who knows - maybe Ridley's romans are a different variant from the multiverse. That explains the trebuchet and all the other dumbass inaccuracies as well.
Remleiz? what are you doing here spreading shark lore? Taking in to account what you said does this mean this mean tyberos and the carcharodons need to keep walking in order to breathe or not?
I mean it is a sequel to a movie where Commodus is killed by a gladiator in the middle of the Colosseum, I was never expecting historical accuracy, Gladiator to me has always been historical fiction But then again I also wasn’t expecting a gladiator riding a rhino or sharks in the Colosseum
Yeah -- the first Gladiator movie wasn't exactly historically accurate, but it was a great movie and the things they changed served the plot. This was just a dumpster fire both in terms of story and historical accuracy. They could have introduced a T-Rex to the coliseum and I wouldn't have been surprised -- it was just that stupid.
Honestly, I was hoping for killer pandas in the coliseum. They don’t get my box office money without killer pandas, because a rhino and sharks just don’t cut it.
It may have not been that historically accurate, but at least it did not go overboard to the point of feeling more like a comic book movie then a historical action drama.
History Buffs cut the original movie a lot of slack for that reason, it can be considered alt history, so stuff like how the fictional characters change Roman history is fine and isn't criticised in this video- Aspects of history that aren't related to the alt history elements though are fair game. I'm really surprised HB didn't mention the newspaper
What a Happy Thanksgiving Day in the U.S. it is indeed! Turkey, family, and a video from one of my favorite history RUclipsrs roasting terribly written movies. And praising and explaining why the good ones work. Thank you, Nick!
Salve, Brother! From one historian to another... THANK YOU! Oh my goodness I come out of this both laughing AND with a Migraine. The continuity errorsx10 of the attack on "Free Numidia" *SMH* were bad enough... the sharks (what, no frikken laser beams on their heads? WHY NOT?)... but... the coffee and newspaper scene... near-aneurysm time. I cannot WAIT for your in-depth evisceration of this mov... this strip of celluloid with moving images on it. No, the original was NOT perfect, but it was just... AWESOME... and the inaccuracies could be overlooked. This... *heavy sigh* *grasps bottle of Slivovic* Be strong, dear friend... we survived it!
There was a show on Amazon recently called "Those who are about to die" which about gladiators during the Vespasian dynasty... it wasn't a great show but they did flood the Colosseum and fillied it with crocodiles or alligators so I guess it's better than Gladiator 2.
"The rules are more like guidelines than actual rules" - Barbosa, Pirates of the Caribbean "History is more like a guideline, than actual history." -Ridley Scott EDIT: PRAISE THE SAINTS, the next review is HBO's Chernobyl! Everyone get your dosimeters, and make sure the reading can go past 3.6 roentgens!
Not to mention, at least the first movie had with an emperor that arguably started the downfall of the Roman Empire - but these two emperors? One was murdered because he didn’t want to share and the other had quite a mediocre role in Roman history that other historians’ consensus about the guy is he was, at best, an emperor no one really cared about, and at worst, a psychopathic murderer that had his brother’s supporters executed.
The Gladiator franchise lost me before it even began when the costume designers delightedly announced that they made sure the costumes were historically accurate by studying Alma-Tadema paintings. If they had said, “We’re doing a bunch of fun BS like the most Technicolor-y CinemaScope-y 1950s sword & sandals movie ever that has nothing to do with real history,” I might have been able to have fun. They should’ve just owned it.
My favorite minor historical inaccuracy was when Macrinus tells Lucius that he served with his grandfather Marcus Aurelius during his African campaigns and enjoyed reading his famous Meditations. I always thought that the Marcomanni were accustomed to colder climates than North Africa and that the Meditations was more of a daily affermational journal for Marcus not meant for wide circulation much less publication. Color me shocked!
Shit like this where the Historical tidbits are used for such cheap attempts at "Character building" while making zero sense are when these "historical films" become straight up bad. Because at least with shit like 300 they are ridiculous enough that you can tell they are not meant to be seen as too serious, but films like this that are trying to be "serious and realistic" only to have both terrible accuracy and stupid unrealistic fight scenes show complete contempt for the time period along with being up their own ass.
I don't have a problem with Historical inaccuracies, unless the movie is trying to tell a real historical event. Movies like Gladiator are intended to be, well, movies. They know they're getting things wrong, but they're supposed to be fun. But as I said, Biopics or films based on real historical events need to get things right, otherwise THEN it's a problem.
On a film level its average. It copies the first one a lot and the characters are a mixed bag. Ranging from boring to just plan over the top crazy. In short its a mixed bag.
There are inaccuracies, then there are straight up fantasy. Gladiator 1 had accuracies, because it was a movie inspired by real history, but everything that happened are believable. Gladiator 2 is not only inaccurate, but straight up made up a bunch of events that never did or would happen in real life.
I know he only takes requests from Patriot, but I really think he should give a go to some old BBC miniseries; I, Claudius, Fall of Eagles, and aEdward the Seventh.
As a longtime HB viewer, the minute I saw the first trailer, I knew Nick was going to hate it. Given Ridley’s comments on Napoleon who can be surprised that he doesn’t give a shit about history? He’s after spectacle only. Can’t wait to see the next episode! Bring on Chernobyl.
Hey, Nick - I've seen plenty of people review this, but I've definitely been waiting for yours!😃 I went to see this on the 19th (on 'Cheap Tuesday', here in Australia - no way was I paying premiere prices, after *_that_* trailer) - & you articulate my bewilderment & anger excellently. You & a couple of others (like Metatron) have made the point of the fact that there was no such thing as a 'Free Numidia' at this point in history- that it had been Roman territory since before the Empire, & I certainly don't dispute that - however, I think I know what _might_ have inspired the opening; when Septimius Severus first took power, in the wake of the Year of the 5 Emperors- it was in the aftermath of Commodus' rule, too- as the guy didn't give 2 💩about the Empire, the provinces were essentially left to fend for themselves - after Severus' reasonable campaign against the Parthians, he had his attention drawn to Africa. The _legatus_ of _Legio III Augusta_ , Quintus Anicius Faustus, had been fighting against the Garamantes (a large semi-nomadic desert tribe) for about 5 years by this point. The new emperor brought his force to bear in a swift campaign of 2 years or thereabouts, & captured several settlements- including their capital. He enlarged the province of Numidia, by returning some settlements, but annexing 5 others, creating a refortified buffer zone- essentially ending raids into the region's interior. I was so disappointed & underwhelmed by 'Gladiator 2: Copy & Paste', in fact- that I've decided that I'm going to do 3 hours' worth of basic research into the era, & write a script over the next 3 days (it felt like it only had three days' worth of effort go into the writing of it, tbh)- with a simple AI tool. I'm not a script-writer - nor am I a published author (though I do write for my own personal enjoyment- & I *love* history, & **good** historical movies)- but I figure it can't be any worse than this... I'll upload it to fanfiction.com when I'm done 😉
Denzel Washington was definitely the best part of the movie, but Gladiator 2 seemed even less interested in exploring its villain than the first movie was. IMO his talents were sadly underutilised
Nick, short videos like this of DO NOT watch or DO watch prior to your larger reviews are useful and also entertaining Your main videos that you put your heart and soul into are amazing and i love them, but a few shorts as and when something comes out like a small quick review of your first opinion of something is nice to see too.
Ridley Scott would say "get a life" but I say "well fucking done, mate" because this was such a delicious morsel of a video. I don't understand why Hollywood likes to make historical movies while not following the history. Why call them Macrinus, Caracalla, and Getta if they aren't actually those people from history?? Why say that it's 200 C.E. when it isn't!?!?
The only thing I can appreciate of the movie is that most of the costumes were quite accurate and not some cheap knockoffs, like for example, the roman helmet still looked accurate to either the gallic or itallic model of helmets, the armour was nicer, the greek armour like helmets and the linothorax also looked nice.
I'll be honest...I'm a huge history buff but I'm also an actor and Gladiator is my fave film despite it being inaccurate itself. I would have forgiven the inaccuracies in this one if it was at least acted well and had as good a story as the original. Sadly, not even close
From a classics major and former aquarium employee- sharks can actually breathe if they don't move, all species of sharks have the necessary structures to breathe while motionless, they only keep moving in order to breathe because it's just more energy efficient, so if you were to keep a shark still it probably wouldn't die. Other than that though, the Romans definitely would have no way of building or transporting a tank to carry sharks in, and even if they did the sharks would've probably died from stress or salinity and temperature changes
I am a history professor. It was a historical mess! Still enjoyed the movie. I made a short review as well touching on some other points that they did not get correct.
I saw this movie with my teenage cousin. We had fun, but I explained to him afterwards that it was historical nonsense. Still, he said he was interested in learning more about Roman history, and I'm thinking of giving him a history book for Christmas.
And Emperor Antoninus was hailed as Caracalla. That is insult! Almost same as is addressing Emperor Gaius and call him Caligula. That would make you end in the arena indeed...
@@rorschach1985ify All the time. I think even in the Games inauguration speech he was named Caracalla, and general Acacius addressed him directly using his nickname. Can't wait History Buff full review, he rips this movie into pieces...
Ridley Scott would now ask you: Were you there? Did you see it? Then you can't deny it. Yeah, right >_> It's a shame because Napoleon and G2 had so many resources available :(
My personal favorite historical mix up from this movie is the fact that Caracalla and Geta are standing within ten feet of each other and seem to tolerate each other's presence.
Really Scott simply doesn't care about all the history peccadillos. He's just trying to make an entertaining film. Obviously as a history buff I do care about historical accuracy, but I'm not looking to get that from big budget cinema all the time. It's also fun to just look at Rome being rendered with modern technology, and the coliseum, and the naval warfare. Have we ever seen naval combat in the arena actually rendered on screen before? As always, love the content, love how much you hate Ridley it's kind of cute. When I see your videos posted I can't click fast enough! Keep up the good work.
Nick Hodges gave a positive review to the original Gladiator because that was actually a good movie with an inspiring story. This was just an unnecessary sequel stuffed with unoriginal CGI Hollywood schlock. If you want to see a good sea battle in a Roman movie, watch the 1955 version of Ben-Hur starring Charleton Heston. It's a bit dated, but has a story with far more substance than whatever this was supposed to be.
I have a soft spot for Scott's "historical" work, even though it's all bananas fan fiction (and yes I am a historian). Yes even the ones that are actually good to great movies. Gladiator is like someone got really drunk and wrote down their half delirious recollection of Cassius Dio, Kingdom of Heaven is just nonsense, even a tertiary reading of Crusades history will tell you that. I like Gladiator 2 even though it's stupid, I love Denzel's first class performance, I like most of the action (apart from the CG slop animals, none of em look good or even convincing at a glance) and I just like it because these Ridley Scott films are the only thing we get at all wrt historical epics with any sort of budget these days. Not helped by every historian immediately dogpiling it for clicks... Can we just not accept stupid stuff like Braveheart anymore? Come on guys have a little fun! Oh and btw there's a fun error in the first establising shot: Hanno grows pumpkins (and what looks to be beans) next to his "humble farm boy origin story" shack, a new world crop! Literally a historical error in the opening shot! Unless they believe the Levantine peoples (of whom the Carthaginians were a part) made it to North America, like those weird cultists in Utah believe? (at least Troy passes the 15 minute mark before letting a llama blunder onto set) Oh Ridley... you silly goose.
Dear Nick; Thank you for this precursor. It confirmed most of my suspicions, and warns me of much worse. I will not be watching this even as free streaming, because I am done wasting time watching a bad movie just to digest and be able to explain how bad it was - an old habit that I will leave to professional, dedicated reviews like you). First: thank you again for the insightful, high-quality reviews you put together. They demonstrate your masterful understanding of history, the film industry, editing, and good old common sense. For most people with even a tiny respect for history (or historical fiction), this precursor review should be enough to describe the high budget catastrophe that is this film. So if you don't make the time for a full review of this blunder, no hard feelings. If you do, however, one can only hope that it will motivate some viewers to have some regard for historical accuracy, or at least see the harm of reckless historical mischaracterizations in film, which is unfortunately where most United Statesians receive the bulk of their "education" about historical events. One must wonder why Ridley Scott has chosen to fall to Mel Gibson-ish depths of historical mischaracterization. It is a sad commentary on...well, many things. Anyway, thanks again for all you do, and I look forward to your continued work.
Even as a huge history nerd myself. I wouldn’t care about inaccuracies as long as it sat in the realm of believability and correct settings. It’s why gladiator I worked. Maximus was fictional and so were a few other instances but at least it got the setting right. Is it young people who are designing these sets that don’t know a clue about history beyond what they imagine in their heads or? Why do they have to go such lengths to deconstruct a historical period for the sake of telling a half baked story and spectacle? I just don’t get it
The only thing I can forgive is the Rhino riding, sure it's never been said to happen in history but we do have accounts of Vikings having Bears of all things as house pets surprisingly, and Egyptians using Hyenas as hunting dogs, along with armies in the past using Bull Elephants for cavalry mounts which are even more wild and aggressive than Rhinos in most cases not to mention the intelligence factor. But that Shark part is unforgiveable, only way I can think of that happening is if the Arena was linked to the Sea somehow via tunnels and the Sharks were basically baited and locked inside...
@@MBM1117727 Bears and Hyeans are herd animals????? What planet are you living on sir? Sounds like you're the one with the problem because you have NO idea what you're talking about.
I'll upvote and comment but there's no way in hell I'm watching anything related to this film haha. I applaud your integrity & commitment to review even the worst of films
My biggest fear is that teachers will use movies like this to teach classrooms of students. Ridley Scott needs have accountability for his lack of respect for history.
Gladiator is my favorite movie of all time. Not for its historical accuracy, but its commitment to portraying the Roman world and culture. Its acting. And its story telling. I don't imagine Gladiator so much as a historical accurate movie, but a well told story that might have been circulated during the times of the Roman Empire. Because of this, I just can't see the 2nd one.
THANK YOU Nick! I'm SO glad you're as anxious as I to see you rip this movie to shreds. Make Ridley Scott cry, please. Let he never again get his dirty paws on a historical movie. I NEED this video! For you, for me, for all of us! Please, redeem historical content. When they said "persians and TROJANS" at the sea battle, I almost lost my shit!
Thanks for mentioning the cowardly shanking after mercy. His character was broken beyond repair at that point. This isn't a hero to root for. Then he has the audacity to "you will only find death in the arena" after he is the one making sure one of them died when they could have both walked out of the arena.
You can’t escape Napoleon, Nick. It’s waiting for you.
Oh he would murder it.
We need that video!
Sooner or later might as well get it over with
I wonder if he was waiting for the second cut that came to Apple.. or if he's just pretending the entire film never happened.
My only issue is that I think it's been done to death. Nick having his take would be beating a dead horse.
However, I think he would feel better if he reviewed "The Longest Day". 😁😁
"Why not use crocodiles, Mr. Scott?"
"I WANT SHARKS WITH FRIKIN LASER BEAMS, ONTOP OF THEIR HEADS!"
I understood that reference
Best I can do are mutated sea bass. And yes, they are ill-tempered.
I WAS going to say and Lazer beams wow so thay went there
G@@arielhamm-flores6893
So basically there are one of 2 incredibly negative things going on here, either Ridley has gone full "Hollywood Dumb" or he is motivated by the perception that the grand majority of American movie fans are uninterested in anything which is not full on "Hollywood dumb" ? If there is a third less negative possibility please articulate it.
In the movie, they made Caracalla and Geta into cooperative and even loving brothers. In real life, they absolutely HATED each other. They divided the palace in half, refused to allow their servants into the other side, never were in the same room together, and eventually Caracalla had Geta murdered in their mother's arms. Macrinus should have spent the entire movie playing the two against each other, not just killing them both himself in the span of 15 minutes.
Oh boy, gone with Caracalla's expantion of Roman empire in that case.
Also, Joseph Quinn or even Pedro Pascal look closer to what the sculptures of Caracalla are like. In fact, when the casting was announced, I thought they were good options for that role but when I saw the trailer I didn't understand why they were portrayed like that.
And Caracalla was not little insane brat, as depicted in movie, but cruel and strong soldier-emperor.
The casting is also strange as their family was from North Africa and they probably looked like modern Sicilians, and the depictions of them show them looking like boxers, not effete redheads lol. Though I guess the same could be said for the original, as Commodus is universally depicted and described as handsome, tall, muscular, with light brown/dirty blond hair and a full beard.
Caracalla killed Geta only a year into their reign, and he himself ruled for several years afterwards, so not sure about Macrinus manipulating them both for the whole movie- if we're being historically accurate, he didn't manipulate Caracalla, he just had him murdered out of fear for his own life and a sincere belief that he could run the Empire better (only to be killed by Elagabalus a year later....and I'd bet good money that Elagabalus is the bad guy of Gladiator 3).
The one moment that stood out to me was the Roman Senator reading a modern day newspaper... 1220 years before the printing press was invented, and roughly 1400 years before the first printed newspapers were made
The newspaper props in Napoleon were just as bad... satirical drawings were sold by themselves in print shops or in collected albums, newspapers were only print by that time.
There *was* a kind of news-sheet, the _Acta Diurna_ - it was a sort of daily government gazette, containing an officially authorized narrative of noteworthy events at Rome; partly official (court news, decrees of the emperor, Roman Senate, & Roman magistrates), & partly private (notices of births, marriages, & deaths), so it had some similarities with a modern newspaper; carved on stone or metal, &/ or written out, & presented in message boards in public places such as the Forum - they were drawn up from day to day, & exposed in a public place on a whitened board called an _Album_ . After remaining there for a reasonable time, they were taken down & preserved with other public documents, so that they might be available for purposes of research - scribes would make out hand-copies of the info & send them to governors, as a kind of State update.
It was begun in 59 BC (possibly by Caesar) & continued until AD 222- within the timeline of the characters, so- ironically, in some ways, it was one of the more accurate parts of the movie...
Roman newspaper is the most stupidly anachronistic thing I've heard of. At least the other anachronisms arguably make the movie more entertaining. Newspaper is just immersion breaking.
Rome the HBO series had the newsreader dude, and that worked exceptionally well. Why go with something less cinematic and far less historical?
WTF? Might as well have a Roman scrolling on a smartphone.
I loved the part where Pedro Pascal is water skiing and he jumps over the sharks.
The fact that I can't tell if you're joking or not says a lot about how terrible this movie is.
@@KTempestBradfordit’s also a reference to the phrase “jumped the shark,” it references some tv show that had this happen. It means that the story has completely lost its origins and has just gone insane
I loved how every time Pedro Pascal wasn't in a scene, the other characters said 'where's Pedro?'
raised by wolves started pretty interesting, to bad Scott ran it off the rails and it didn't go anywhere like WestWorld.
Ridley is 3600 years old by now. When people point out the inaccuracies, he snakily tells them to "get a life". His former long-time cinematographer just blasted him in an interview, stating that Ridley doesn't put in any effort anymore, works with multiple cameras to avoid shooting scenes multiple times, tells the visual artists to remove microphones and then effs off, calling it a day.
I don't get why people like him do this. He's 86 years old, has tons of money, and is a highly respected director. Why keep doing this if you don't want to put in the effort? There is literally no reason to keep doing it at his age if it isn't for the love and passion of film making.
It's also shitty how he snidely asks, 'Were _you_ there?' - I swear, the person he said this to was a lot more polite than I would have been - 'No, I wasn't - but there *were* people who were, & they *WROTE THINGS DOWN* - & _the least_ you could have done, with your multi-hundred million dollar budget, is *_put some bloody effort into the RESEARCH, & NOT expect the audience to gratefully lap up whatever slop you deign to put in front of them_* !'
Ridley Scott is director, he didn't write the screenplay. He might have had a part in choosing the screenplay, but certainly it's not his story.
I remember how catty/spiteful he was with Dan Snow over Napoleon. Dan Snow wasn't even being aggressive, he's a historian, he obv just wanted to 'discuss' Scott's choices, but Ridley Scott just wheeled out his repertoire of petty excuses and quite unpleasant responses.
@@Morbos1000 hubris
Few things I loved:
-ramming city walls with ships. Their invasion looked more complex to pull off than D day…
-kids in Egypt playing football
-guys sitting down in the famous Roman cafes reading the newspaper
Cafe owner Soyus Latteus and his Stellaaries Coffee chain.
The protagonist was not very happy, they should have called it Sadiator.
God I forgot the kids playing, the more it passes the more f ups I see
@@Taistelukalkkuna I thought that was Socius Justicius Wario
- Guy calls himself "Prince" of Rome
It's okay, Nick. Take your time. We'll be here when you're ready.
Add-On: Holy shit! Are you doing Chernobyl?! If so, HELL YES!!!!
Same, I'm excited for Tschernobyl :D
Chernobyl let's goooooooooo
Wait what?
@@musstakrakish Watch through to the end.
@@DarthAnurian dont use the russian pronunciation use the Ukrainian
"Wait until it is free on stream, then get drunk with friends to roast it"
Great advice mr. Hodges, an advice I shall follow.
As someone who did jury duty and have aunts who are nurses and my mom being a nurse , and my Uncle being in the FBI
It's a fun day to roast cop, hospital and lawyers sitcoms and point out the inaccuracies and literal crimes committed by the "Heros"
They clearly transported the sharks using very, very long tubes that flowed water from the sea to the coliseum.
So, a very distant Jaws prequel?
@@Lonovavir Jaws 3/3D was in a water park if I recall correctly.
@@Lonovavir Jaws 5: This time it's historical
So that's the REAL reason they built the aquaducts?
@@bigbrowntau they called it "squaloducts" indeed, "road for sharks"
Well, that’s disappointing, I guess I’ll-HE’S DOING CHERNOBYL!!
my exact thoughts
That was a good show
I’m so excited
Not great. Not terrible.
You didn’t see Chernobyl… YOU DIDN’TTTT!!!
That thumbnail tells a story in of itself, lol.
I saw it and I can't say I blame him.
"We need some pasty-white effeminate bad guys who despise proper Roman soldiers. I know just the right emperors - the Severan dynasty!"
This man directed The Duelists. What happened?
"Keep soldiers happy. Despise the rest."
- Septimus Severus -
He's old and senile, thats what happened.
Dictatorship?
Twinktatorship!
Napoleon…..you can’t escape it Nick
I had a discussion some years ago when people began talking about a Gladiator II.
I considered Caracalla to be the best potential villain well adaptable for a fictional story.
The protagonist could be a faithful servant of Rome whose family perishes in the Massacre of Alexandria, which he barely survives, spends some years seeking vengeance.
Flip the Gladiator story, ending it on the battlefield instead of at the Colosseum.
Expand the gladiator story beyond the arena.
Caracalla loved living as a soldier, he was a rough bully.
So much in a gladiator film could be done with him. His arrogance in doing his own dirty work could be used to create a “Rocky 4” type plot, with the protagonist fighting him and losing, facing humiliation, then spending the movie becoming stronger then facing Caracalla again for a showdown and winning.
An epic redemptive hero’s arch, featuring struggle and humiliation to come full circle.
What I would have loved was a clash between the generals soldiers and the pretorian guard inside the arena instead of what happens now. That would have taken the civil war element to its tipping point while keeping the arena theme. They could also have shown how the general handle the protection the intruding germanic tribes that was pushing the northern borders at the time (I belive) and that they have overrun, taken and raised the main antagonist whom the general took back as a war prisoner.
"... with the protagonist fighting him and losing, facing humiliation, then spending the movie becoming stronger..."
Pretty sure you're thinking of Rocky 3, not 4.
I love the part when the doctor rides to the military camp and pushes away the guards to report to the general, the guard was like okay and walks away. I was laughing at the security for the general like how easy would the assassin go into camp to assassinate 😂
😂 was thinking same
For goodness sake he is the doctor !!!!
The thumbnail perfectly encapsulates my feelings leaving the theater last night.
The final act was just listless! It's like they gave up filming by the time the climax sequence begins....sigh! 😔
Maybe because I don't know much Roman history, but if I did I would be fuming at every scene like Napoleon. But since I didn't I just got bored out of my mind, so I was looking at my phone reading cultured materials with way better love stories than all the historical romances Ridley Scott is fixated on!
Me after watching Napoleon.
I'm so sorry you lost your money too mate. I immediately came to youtube to see if anyone else had disliked it and thank God they did. This was a week ago
I don’t really understand why everyone is so upset. Unlike Napoleon, this movie isn’t trying to be historically accurate, it’s historical fiction.
dude, in the german dubbing, they called it the battle of salamis between the greeks and trojans... its contagious
The Spanish dub did the same. I did appreciate the lambdas painted on the shields, everyone remembers the heroic and decisive role of the Spartan Navy in Salamis.
The lambdas on shields can be excused to make it feel more spectacular to the roman audience. Calling the persians "trojans" however is ridiculous, as imperial propaganda claimed decending from Troy (Aeneus). They wouldn't mix their eastern enemy with them.
Damn not it is stuck in my head to the Disney tune "We're the Salamis if you please"😂
I watched this in Germany and even in the English version I distinctly remember them saying Greeks v Trojans, unbearably stupid
The bar of soap in the towel at 4:10 is freaking hilarious hahaha
Gladiator 2 reminds you how lucky we are...that we can go back and watch the first one
Besides them showing Julius Caesar being killed by one man and not 8 people, it was more accurate than gladiator two
@@Chuck_EL Julius Caesar??? In Gladiator? The emperor was Marcus Aurelius (200 years after Caesar), 'caesar' is the title....
Oh my gosh! I can't wait for your next episode! The Chernobyl mini-series review is going to be good!
Going to be epic
I loved the series despite a few glaring innacuracies and dramatic liberties taken. I'm very interested in Nick's take!
@@MiikeJone There are a LOT more than a few.
As soon as gladiator 2 got announced I was waiting for this 😂
It was cemented in my mind it was going to be meh when I saw it was getting a winter release. These kind of things tend to be summer blockbusters... unless they suck, then they get pushed back to the end of the year.
@ I still think is gonna make a good chunk of money at the box office, definitely more than the last 2 or 3 films of his
@@mauricioleyzaola7380 I'm sure it will. By all accounts from those I've spoken to who've seen it, it's a fun watch. Just maybe not if you understand and/or particualrly care about the period of history it's supposed to be depicting.
On a somewhat related note I think the idea of judging a movie by its box office performance is entirely redundant and obsolete now anyway given realtively few people go to the cinema, they just wait for it to come on the streaming services and more and more get same day or close to same day release in both theatre and on streaming.
Trailer: *Exists*
Me: TEAR IT DOWN, HB! TEAR IT DOWWWWWWWWN!!!!!
2:44 This is a common misconception. While _some_ sharks do need to keep moving in order to breathe, there are many other species of shark that can breathe just fine while remaining stationary (nurse shark, whitetip reef shark, Caribbean reef shark, wobbegong, and lemon shark just to name a few).
But those sharks don't eat people, mostly small fish or crustaceans. I can't see a nurse shark trying to eat a man 😂
@@foodforthought9079 My point was against the generalisation lol
@@foodforthought9079a reek shark will remove part of your body no problem.
The sharks shown in the movie are unmistakably not nurse sharks, whitetip reef sharks or wobblegongs.
And unless the Ridley's romans predated Columbus' crossing of the Atlantic and Vasco de Gama's trip around Africa - they can't have Carribbean Reef Sharks or Lemon Sharks either.
But who knows - maybe Ridley's romans are a different variant from the multiverse. That explains the trebuchet and all the other dumbass inaccuracies as well.
Remleiz? what are you doing here spreading shark lore?
Taking in to account what you said does this mean this mean tyberos and the carcharodons need to keep walking in order to breathe or not?
History teacher. Used a complimentary ticket....my eyes were rolling.
🤓
I mean it is a sequel to a movie where Commodus is killed by a gladiator in the middle of the Colosseum, I was never expecting historical accuracy, Gladiator to me has always been historical fiction
But then again I also wasn’t expecting a gladiator riding a rhino or sharks in the Colosseum
Yeah -- the first Gladiator movie wasn't exactly historically accurate, but it was a great movie and the things they changed served the plot. This was just a dumpster fire both in terms of story and historical accuracy. They could have introduced a T-Rex to the coliseum and I wouldn't have been surprised -- it was just that stupid.
Honestly, I was hoping for killer pandas in the coliseum. They don’t get my box office money without killer pandas, because a rhino and sharks just don’t cut it.
It may have not been that historically accurate, but at least it did not go overboard to the point of feeling more like a comic book movie then a historical action drama.
History Buffs cut the original movie a lot of slack for that reason, it can be considered alt history, so stuff like how the fictional characters change Roman history is fine and isn't criticised in this video- Aspects of history that aren't related to the alt history elements though are fair game. I'm really surprised HB didn't mention the newspaper
My suspension of disbelief failed completely with the rhino. It was all downhill after that.
What a Happy Thanksgiving Day in the U.S. it is indeed! Turkey, family, and a video from one of my favorite history RUclipsrs roasting terribly written movies. And praising and explaining why the good ones work. Thank you, Nick!
Me: * sees the thumbnail *
Me: Yeah that’s about right. This is gonna be good!
Me: * sees that little teaser at the end *
Me: *LET’S FUCKING GO!*
I can't wait for that review.I'm probably gonna play stalker 2 and Listen to it and watch it which is going to be awesome
ГОЙДААААААА
I already wasn't planning on seeing it in theaters, thank you for the sacrifice you made to justify my choice.
Came here from Metatron's reaction video, liked and subscribed :)
The brainrot is real if modern audiences see backstabbing after losing, after mercy, as being a heroic act.
I’m blaming Martin Luther.
Napoleon looks like Ridley Scott time traveled to that era and filmed the actual events compared to GladIIator
Nah thats's Waterloo, Napoleon looks so devoid of color and life
@gilgamesh8334 definitely, and to some extent the Russian version of War and Peace, i was just referencing recent Riddley Scott historical movies
@@gilgamesh8334God Waterloo is so good, those battle scenes are insane.
Of course Waterloo is the better film, but it lacks something that Napoleon does have: a place that actually looks like a field in Belgium.
@@ThierryVerhoeven what?
Salve, Brother! From one historian to another... THANK YOU! Oh my goodness I come out of this both laughing AND with a Migraine. The continuity errorsx10 of the attack on "Free Numidia" *SMH* were bad enough... the sharks (what, no frikken laser beams on their heads? WHY NOT?)... but... the coffee and newspaper scene... near-aneurysm time. I cannot WAIT for your in-depth evisceration of this mov... this strip of celluloid with moving images on it. No, the original was NOT perfect, but it was just... AWESOME... and the inaccuracies could be overlooked. This... *heavy sigh* *grasps bottle of Slivovic* Be strong, dear friend... we survived it!
There was a show on Amazon recently called "Those who are about to die" which about gladiators during the Vespasian dynasty... it wasn't a great show but they did flood the Colosseum and fillied it with crocodiles or alligators so I guess it's better than Gladiator 2.
Omg a History Buffs video that's only 5 minutes long 😱
"The rules are more like guidelines than actual rules" - Barbosa, Pirates of the Caribbean
"History is more like a guideline, than actual history." -Ridley Scott
EDIT: PRAISE THE SAINTS, the next review is HBO's Chernobyl! Everyone get your dosimeters, and make sure the reading can go past 3.6 roentgens!
it's not 3.6, it's 15,000!!
Highlight of the video - you teasing Chernobyl as your next video! Can't wait!
Not to mention, at least the first movie had with an emperor that arguably started the downfall of the Roman Empire - but these two emperors?
One was murdered because he didn’t want to share and the other had quite a mediocre role in Roman history that other historians’ consensus about the guy is he was, at best, an emperor no one really cared about, and at worst, a psychopathic murderer that had his brother’s supporters executed.
Thanks for the warning... I was to see it but now I shall avoid sullying the wonderful memory of Gladiator 1 with whatever this is
The Gladiator franchise lost me before it even began when the costume designers delightedly announced that they made sure the costumes were historically accurate by studying Alma-Tadema paintings. If they had said, “We’re doing a bunch of fun BS like the most Technicolor-y CinemaScope-y 1950s sword & sandals movie ever that has nothing to do with real history,” I might have been able to have fun. They should’ve just owned it.
They could have just said it was set in the Xena Warrior Princess universe.
My favorite minor historical inaccuracy was when Macrinus tells Lucius that he served with his grandfather Marcus Aurelius during his African campaigns and enjoyed reading his famous Meditations. I always thought that the Marcomanni were accustomed to colder climates than North Africa and that the Meditations was more of a daily affermational journal for Marcus not meant for wide circulation much less publication. Color me shocked!
Yeah, the meditations were not discovered much less published for YEARS after Aurelius died.
Shit like this where the Historical tidbits are used for such cheap attempts at "Character building" while making zero sense are when these "historical films" become straight up bad. Because at least with shit like 300 they are ridiculous enough that you can tell they are not meant to be seen as too serious, but films like this that are trying to be "serious and realistic" only to have both terrible accuracy and stupid unrealistic fight scenes show complete contempt for the time period along with being up their own ass.
I don't have a problem with Historical inaccuracies, unless the movie is trying to tell a real historical event. Movies like Gladiator are intended to be, well, movies. They know they're getting things wrong, but they're supposed to be fun. But as I said, Biopics or films based on real historical events need to get things right, otherwise THEN it's a problem.
On a film level its average. It copies the first one a lot and the characters are a mixed bag. Ranging from boring to just plan over the top crazy. In short its a mixed bag.
There are inaccuracies, then there are straight up fantasy. Gladiator 1 had accuracies, because it was a movie inspired by real history, but everything that happened are believable. Gladiator 2 is not only inaccurate, but straight up made up a bunch of events that never did or would happen in real life.
@@athras8822 Then look at like a fantasy movie.
@@P5kr It is not a fantasy movie though. By your logic, Ridley Scott could have just put aliens in the movie.
@@RDV333 But then it would be sci fi, and it wouldn't be a Gladiator movie.
BRO he’s doing Chernobyl miniseries next! That’s excellent!
I know he only takes requests from Patriot, but I really think he should give a go to some old BBC miniseries; I, Claudius, Fall of Eagles, and aEdward the Seventh.
I went to see Napoleon, that was the last movie of Ridley Scott I paid for ...
I appreciate Gladiator 2 as historical fiction. Like Steampunk set in Victorian England
Rule of cool is what was mainly used and I happy for it lol
Socrates and Confucius helping Motzart create Replicants for the Tyrell Corporation in 1250 B.C.
Except it's not even good historical fiction. It's filled with boring characters and overreliance on crappy CGI looking battle scenes.
@ nah they looked pretty good, way better than the for those who die, Napoleon, or many other movies who over rely on cgi
@@kaydenmetropoulos5551 Hardly. Shit still looks like watching a ps3 cutscene.
This was exactly the vibe I was getting just from the trailers. Thanks making this short video and saving us our time and money.
As a longtime HB viewer, the minute I saw the first trailer, I knew Nick was going to hate it. Given Ridley’s comments on Napoleon who can be surprised that he doesn’t give a shit about history? He’s after spectacle only.
Can’t wait to see the next episode! Bring on Chernobyl.
0:46 but sir I pirated it
Same 😬
Hey, Nick - I've seen plenty of people review this, but I've definitely been waiting for yours!😃
I went to see this on the 19th (on 'Cheap Tuesday', here in Australia - no way was I paying premiere prices, after *_that_* trailer) - & you articulate my bewilderment & anger excellently.
You & a couple of others (like Metatron) have made the point of the fact that there was no such thing as a 'Free Numidia' at this point in history- that it had been Roman territory since before the Empire, & I certainly don't dispute that - however, I think I know what _might_ have inspired the opening; when Septimius Severus first took power, in the wake of the Year of the 5 Emperors- it was in the aftermath of Commodus' rule, too- as the guy didn't give 2 💩about the Empire, the provinces were essentially left to fend for themselves - after Severus' reasonable campaign against the Parthians, he had his attention drawn to Africa. The _legatus_ of _Legio III Augusta_ , Quintus Anicius Faustus, had been fighting against the Garamantes (a large semi-nomadic desert tribe) for about 5 years by this point. The new emperor brought his force to bear in a swift campaign of 2 years or thereabouts, & captured several settlements- including their capital. He enlarged the province of Numidia, by returning some settlements, but annexing 5 others, creating a refortified buffer zone- essentially ending raids into the region's interior.
I was so disappointed & underwhelmed by 'Gladiator 2: Copy & Paste', in fact- that I've decided that I'm going to do 3 hours' worth of basic research into the era, & write a script over the next 3 days (it felt like it only had three days' worth of effort go into the writing of it, tbh)- with a simple AI tool.
I'm not a script-writer - nor am I a published author (though I do write for my own personal enjoyment- & I *love* history, & **good** historical movies)- but I figure it can't be any worse than this...
I'll upload it to fanfiction.com when I'm done 😉
Sounds like a movie they assumed padro pascal would carry so it made money.
My only counter point, as i agree wholeheartedly. Washington was great fun to watch in this!
Denzel Washington was definitely the best part of the movie, but Gladiator 2 seemed even less interested in exploring its villain than the first movie was. IMO his talents were sadly underutilised
Nick, short videos like this of DO NOT watch or DO watch prior to your larger reviews are useful and also entertaining
Your main videos that you put your heart and soul into are amazing and i love them, but a few shorts as and when something comes out like a small quick review of your first opinion of something is nice to see too.
Ridley Scott would say "get a life" but I say "well fucking done, mate" because this was such a delicious morsel of a video. I don't understand why Hollywood likes to make historical movies while not following the history. Why call them Macrinus, Caracalla, and Getta if they aren't actually those people from history?? Why say that it's 200 C.E. when it isn't!?!?
The only thing I can appreciate of the movie is that most of the costumes were quite accurate and not some cheap knockoffs, like for example, the roman helmet still looked accurate to either the gallic or itallic model of helmets, the armour was nicer, the greek armour like helmets and the linothorax also looked nice.
More quick thoughts videos Nick, this was awesome!
Suffering and pain, that's all there is in the cinemas
I'll be honest...I'm a huge history buff but I'm also an actor and Gladiator is my fave film despite it being inaccurate itself. I would have forgiven the inaccuracies in this one if it was at least acted well and had as good a story as the original. Sadly, not even close
I love it too but it’s hard to even watch the first ten minutes of Gladiator without throwing up in my mouth
When I saw this movie, everyone in the theater was looking at me because I was laughing my ass off😂😂😂
At 4:45, that is not from the show Chernobyl but Nick as he comes out of the cinema after watching Gladiator 2.
Please do Black Hawk Down
Yes! Chernobyl!! My dad and I saw it! I can’t wait Nick!
Glad you enjoyed it as much as I did
xD
The still photo of "cartoon you" with your head laying on the desk was all I needed to see. Hilarious!
Joyeux Noel 2005 for Christmas? It’s weird that you haven’t talked about the greatest cease fire in history.
Oh my poor sweet history nerd. I hope he's going to be okay
Ridley has lived long enough to become the villain in his story- almost like the second half of his life is trying to remake the first.
Nick's line about "I dont think Ridley could sink any lower"
Ridley will take that as a personal challenge
@ He’s definitely a victim of his own hubris
Have you seen what he has done to the Alien Franchise?
@@bulldogsbob he forgot he was brought in at the last second into Alien. 99% of everything was already done before he even knew H.R. Geiger existed.
He is doing some good movies like The Martian and The Last Duel, and he has done some stinkers early in his career like Legend and 1492.
I am excited for the Chernobyl review.
“ Watch it drunk with your friends “ I love this guy. He makes history so interesting and human. Thanks Nick 🫡
The Aqueduct is how the sharks got there
From a classics major and former aquarium employee- sharks can actually breathe if they don't move, all species of sharks have the necessary structures to breathe while motionless, they only keep moving in order to breathe because it's just more energy efficient, so if you were to keep a shark still it probably wouldn't die. Other than that though, the Romans definitely would have no way of building or transporting a tank to carry sharks in, and even if they did the sharks would've probably died from stress or salinity and temperature changes
I am a history professor. It was a historical mess! Still enjoyed the movie. I made a short review as well touching on some other points that they did not get correct.
I saw this movie with my teenage cousin. We had fun, but I explained to him afterwards that it was historical nonsense. Still, he said he was interested in learning more about Roman history, and I'm thinking of giving him a history book for Christmas.
For every cousin curious about history....there's a thousand clueless normies getting their culture through Hollywood.
And Emperor Antoninus was hailed as Caracalla. That is insult! Almost same as is addressing Emperor Gaius and call him Caligula. That would make you end in the arena indeed...
They what? Did they seriously use Carcalla itself as a title? What the fuck is wrong with Scott?
@@rorschach1985ify All the time. I think even in the Games inauguration speech he was named Caracalla, and general Acacius addressed him directly using his nickname. Can't wait History Buff full review, he rips this movie into pieces...
Have you thought about doing Cromwell?
Your 5 minutes video just saved me from a trip to the movie theater, a bunch of cash and a 2h+ headache :P
I await your full review 👍🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾
Ridley Scott would now ask you: Were you there? Did you see it? Then you can't deny it.
Yeah, right >_>
It's a shame because Napoleon and G2 had so many resources available :(
Suffered through the movie. Had to go and get wine two times to ease the pain.
My personal favorite historical mix up from this movie is the fact that Caracalla and Geta are standing within ten feet of each other and seem to tolerate each other's presence.
I heard Ridley Scott wanted a xenomorph in there instead of sharks.
Really Scott simply doesn't care about all the history peccadillos. He's just trying to make an entertaining film.
Obviously as a history buff I do care about historical accuracy, but I'm not looking to get that from big budget cinema all the time.
It's also fun to just look at Rome being rendered with modern technology, and the coliseum, and the naval warfare. Have we ever seen naval combat in the arena actually rendered on screen before?
As always, love the content, love how much you hate Ridley it's kind of cute. When I see your videos posted I can't click fast enough! Keep up the good work.
Nick Hodges gave a positive review to the original Gladiator because that was actually a good movie with an inspiring story. This was just an unnecessary sequel stuffed with unoriginal CGI Hollywood schlock. If you want to see a good sea battle in a Roman movie, watch the 1955 version of Ben-Hur starring Charleton Heston. It's a bit dated, but has a story with far more substance than whatever this was supposed to be.
"Those about to die" on Amazon had a flooded arena with deaths on ships, not exactly a battle larp. Nice crocodiles though.
A disgrace not just to the legacy of Ridley but to Rome herself
This video was brought to you by the Guild of Millers! The Guild of millers use only the finest Grain ! True Roman bread for True Romans !
I have a soft spot for Scott's "historical" work, even though it's all bananas fan fiction (and yes I am a historian). Yes even the ones that are actually good to great movies. Gladiator is like someone got really drunk and wrote down their half delirious recollection of Cassius Dio, Kingdom of Heaven is just nonsense, even a tertiary reading of Crusades history will tell you that. I like Gladiator 2 even though it's stupid, I love Denzel's first class performance, I like most of the action (apart from the CG slop animals, none of em look good or even convincing at a glance) and I just like it because these Ridley Scott films are the only thing we get at all wrt historical epics with any sort of budget these days. Not helped by every historian immediately dogpiling it for clicks... Can we just not accept stupid stuff like Braveheart anymore? Come on guys have a little fun!
Oh and btw there's a fun error in the first establising shot: Hanno grows pumpkins (and what looks to be beans) next to his "humble farm boy origin story" shack, a new world crop! Literally a historical error in the opening shot! Unless they believe the Levantine peoples (of whom the Carthaginians were a part) made it to North America, like those weird cultists in Utah believe? (at least Troy passes the 15 minute mark before letting a llama blunder onto set) Oh Ridley... you silly goose.
I doubt if I will ever watch it but if I do I will channel my Xena Warrior Princess fandom into it.
@pattheplanter that's the spirit!
Dear Nick;
Thank you for this precursor. It confirmed most of my suspicions, and warns me of much worse. I will not be watching this even as free streaming, because I am done wasting time watching a bad movie just to digest and be able to explain how bad it was - an old habit that I will leave to professional, dedicated reviews like you).
First: thank you again for the insightful, high-quality reviews you put together. They demonstrate your masterful understanding of history, the film industry, editing, and good old common sense.
For most people with even a tiny respect for history (or historical fiction), this precursor review should be enough to describe the high budget catastrophe that is this film. So if you don't make the time for a full review of this blunder, no hard feelings. If you do, however, one can only hope that it will motivate some viewers to have some regard for historical accuracy, or at least see the harm of reckless historical mischaracterizations in film, which is unfortunately where most United Statesians receive the bulk of their "education" about historical events. One must wonder why Ridley Scott has chosen to fall to Mel Gibson-ish depths of historical mischaracterization. It is a sad commentary on...well, many things.
Anyway, thanks again for all you do, and I look forward to your continued work.
I’m pretty sure Ridley Scott hasn’t made a movie of actual substance in decades.
Even as a huge history nerd myself. I wouldn’t care about inaccuracies as long as it sat in the realm of believability and correct settings. It’s why gladiator I worked. Maximus was fictional and so were a few other instances but at least it got the setting right. Is it young people who are designing these sets that don’t know a clue about history beyond what they imagine in their heads or? Why do they have to go such lengths to deconstruct a historical period for the sake of telling a half baked story and spectacle? I just don’t get it
The only thing I can forgive is the Rhino riding, sure it's never been said to happen in history but we do have accounts of Vikings having Bears of all things as house pets surprisingly, and Egyptians using Hyenas as hunting dogs, along with armies in the past using Bull Elephants for cavalry mounts which are even more wild and aggressive than Rhinos in most cases not to mention the intelligence factor. But that Shark part is unforgiveable, only way I can think of that happening is if the Arena was linked to the Sea somehow via tunnels and the Sharks were basically baited and locked inside...
The problem is all those animals you mentioned are herd animals. As said in the video the Rhino is not. It's not a social animal.
@@MBM1117727 Bears and Hyeans are herd animals????? What planet are you living on sir? Sounds like you're the one with the problem because you have NO idea what you're talking about.
@@MBM1117727 On what planet Bears and Hyenas are herd animals??? That's the real problem here.
@The-Black-Death were have you seen someone riding a hyena??
@@MBM1117727 When did I talk about riding Hyenas???
I'll upvote and comment but there's no way in hell I'm watching anything related to this film haha. I applaud your integrity & commitment to review even the worst of films
Thank you. Heard and seen enough, really appreciate this !
My biggest fear is that teachers will use movies like this to teach classrooms of students. Ridley Scott needs have accountability for his lack of respect for history.
0:13 Gladiator II was one of the most historically inaccurate films you've ever seen? Gladiator II you say?
Yes.
Gladiator is my favorite movie of all time. Not for its historical accuracy, but its commitment to portraying the Roman world and culture. Its acting. And its story telling. I don't imagine Gladiator so much as a historical accurate movie, but a well told story that might have been circulated during the times of the Roman Empire. Because of this, I just can't see the 2nd one.
glad to see your passion Nick
Ah shit, I did get this impression from the trailer and have been putting it off until I got a historical review, thanks for saving me the time, Nick!
THANK YOU Nick! I'm SO glad you're as anxious as I to see you rip this movie to shreds. Make Ridley Scott cry, please. Let he never again get his dirty paws on a historical movie. I NEED this video! For you, for me, for all of us! Please, redeem historical content.
When they said "persians and TROJANS" at the sea battle, I almost lost my shit!
Listening to your frustration... so sorry to hear it. I appreciate the work you put in on the reviews.
The opening scene with pumpkins growing in a Numidian village should have told you what you were in for.
🤓
Thanks for mentioning the cowardly shanking after mercy. His character was broken beyond repair at that point. This isn't a hero to root for. Then he has the audacity to "you will only find death in the arena" after he is the one making sure one of them died when they could have both walked out of the arena.
The frustration in your voice was hilarious ❤