gigemags-99 said:

---

The Porkchop Express said:

---

My wife said she wanted to see it because she liked the first one so much, then asked if Russel Crowe and Joaquin Phoenix are in it.

---

Are they in it?

---

Yes. Spoiler Alert: Gladiator II is actually a zombie movie

Same. This is basically how I felt.

My thought process throughout the movie…

First act = "This isn't too bad!"

Two-thirds of the way through = "This is way too long... where is it going... the straight-to-DVD-sequel vibes are little too strong here..."

Final act = "Wow, okay! Ridley's still got it."

For anyone concerned that it looks to be a repeat of the first movie… it is and it isn't. If you can accept the basic conceit, that the main character is yet again concealing his identity as he gains popularity as a gladiator, the rest of the movie is actually pretty different. Don't get me wrong, none of it feels incredibly essential or like it was a follow-up story begging to be told. But it is different enough, and builds on the first movie just enough, to where I would argue that it does feel more original than something like The Force Awakens. There are plenty of good twists and turns, it's not all telegraphed, Denzel adds a fun/interesting layer, etc.

That said, I couldn't stop thinking about a tweet I read a couple days ago that said something to the effect of, "The difference between a movie star and an actor has never been more evident." In other words, as much as I like Paul Mescal, he's definitely no Russell Crowe. Granted, not many actors are, especially when Crowe was at the top of his game, and Mescal's not bad at all in this. But man, he's just so incredibly one-note throughout that you can feel his star wattage dimming as the runtime progresses. He'll be in movies for years to come, but I'm afraid this was his one chance at blockbuster stardom. And while he doesn't blow it by any means, the whole time you can't help but compare to/appreciate Crowe more and more.

Still, the movie is absolutely worth seeing and, for what it's worth, drew a big applause at the end of our sold-out showing. It's a serviceable-to-good movie with a great ending, but one that could have been great from start to finish with a more charismatic lead and - I hate to say it, but much like Juror #2 - a director who isn't in their late '80s/early '90s who otherwise might have tightened things up a bit, sold certain moments just a little better, etc.

I tried to get better pics, but it was way too crowded/hectic. They built this massive setup at the Chinese Theater, though, where the premiere was a couple night ago. Pretty crazy to see in person...

I just want to know, in reference to all of the pre-release hype tweets, is this in fact the greatest movie of all time destined to win every Academy Award from here to eternity?