Thank you so much for your insightful thoughts! I appreciate your reviews, because you speak as a real movie-connaisseur with a deep understanding of the history of cinema. I haven‘t seen Gladiator II yet, but I‘m a big Ridley Scott Fan (I loved Napoleon too, esp. the Director‘s Cut - I know, that’s a controversial take) so I‘m very excited. Keep up with the good work and thank you! ❤
Thank you very much! I always try to make my reviews more interesting than just a verdict, so glad that's coming across. People can go to Rotten Tomatoes if they want a binary good/bad dynamic. I didn't like Napoleon, but I haven't seen the director's cut, so maybe that would change my mind. Thanks for the comment!
Could you elaborate on why you loved the Director's Cut of Napoleon? I have only seen the original cut and wasn't impressed. Does the new cut improve the film in a way that it is worth checking it out even if you didn't love the original version?
@ I don‘t think so, sorry. It expands the relationship between Bonaparte and Josephine and dives a bit deeper in the political themes. I really loved the atmosphere, how Scott and his cameras wallow in the opulence of the pictures, how they humanize Bonaparte - a capable général and a pathologic servant of desire (straight against the heroic, iconic image that we have become accustomed to)..a very willfull tightrope walk between admiration and deconstruction. I would compare it to Scott’s (criminally underrated and controversial) 1492 - CoP (one of my all time favourite movies of all time). Not everyone‘s cup of tea, but if you like it, you love it with every fiber of your heart and you want to see more of it. So the Director‘s Cut of Napoleon is right up my alley 🤗
It's pretty amazing. Him, Eastwood, Woody Allen, Coppola, Scorsese. When I was a kid, 60 seemed old, and now you've got all these guys in their 80s and 90s still putting out work. I respect Tarantino's hard-out idea, but I respect still working into your 90s even more.
I don’t agree. Stopped watching when you mentioned that you don’t even like the original gladiator! (A literal classic in my opinion). Makes me question this review on Gladiator II
Gladiator is a classic storytelling ..take the best elements out of gladiator and fill it up with spectacle violence combined with fake cartoonish CGI and you have Gladiator 2..his title "Gladiator II Review • Better Than the Original" is just for clickbait and for views
Firstly, thanks for leaving a comment! When it comes to movie reviews, I wouldn't look at them as a journalist reporting objective fact. This is just my opinion, and I do my best to explain the movie and why I enjoyed it. Then, you can take that information and decide if it's applicable to you. For example, I should be able to give a movie a bad review, you watch the review, and still come away wanting to see the movie, because maybe the reasons I hated it are reasons you'd like it, or vice-versa.
And I love that you love them. Exciting times, as the channel has memberships available as of today. No pressure to subscribe, but take a peek at the tiers if you have the time. You might win the lottery soon and run out of ways to spend the jackpot. I'm planning on doing a weekly live chat, as well, probably starting December 1st.
Nobody was looking for an "enhanced" version of the first movie, though. If that is even an accurate description of Gladiator II. It's certainly a less serious version of the first movie. Whether that's a good thing perhaps depends on your opinion of the first movie. But the problem remains - everyone is treating it like a remake, rather than a sequel. Because it doesn't work as a sequel.
Like I say in the review, it's not the sort of sequel I would have been most interested in seeing. It doesn't take the characters in an entirely new direction like the Nick Cave script or evolve the story into something grander like The Godfather Part II. Both of those would be examples of it "working as a sequel" for me, to use your words. Judging the movie we got-not the one we may have wanted-I found it to work better as a popcorn movie than the original worked as a serious drama. Thanks for leaving a comment!
This movie is a continuation of an epidemic disease. Ridley just made great people small with his new movie. Maximus is a sucker and a cheater. The only noble women in the Gladiator is a disaterous idiot. We have a roman general who don't wont to fight and go on their knees. We have emperors who are like spoiled children, senators who act like old babling fools. The only people who are great are uneducated foreigners who have ridicules haircuts. This is an incarnation of a Star Wars Stormtrooper dilemma. Everybody says they are great and you see them continuaslly being taken out and not able to hit anything. So in this movie Rome is not great. There is no tactics, nobody is giving orders, nobody is in charge apparently as you just bow your head an things just happends and everytime time by sheer luck. It is a terrible directed movie made by good people who were given no direction. The main character is like a generic hero from a video game with prerecorded scenes. He loves his wife so much that he sends her away, to shoot arrows at romans and is surprised they shot back. In the ending scene a crocodile could emerge from a ditch and just eat everybody, it wouldn't surprise me that's how invested I was in this movie. But the biggest castration is the ending. Again it wouldn't surprise me if everybody in the movie would just get depressed and just lie down and die. That's how a Homeric epic looks like in the eyes of a 80 years old millionaire then all CGI was already used. Even the music here is like im the mourning after Gladiator 1. A spectacle of pure acrobatics with no resonation and meaning signifying cheers of an idiot.
Thank you so much for your insightful thoughts! I appreciate your reviews, because you speak as a real movie-connaisseur with a deep understanding of the history of cinema.
I haven‘t seen Gladiator II yet, but I‘m a big Ridley Scott Fan (I loved Napoleon too, esp. the Director‘s Cut - I know, that’s a controversial take) so I‘m very excited.
Keep up with the good work and thank you! ❤
Thank you very much! I always try to make my reviews more interesting than just a verdict, so glad that's coming across. People can go to Rotten Tomatoes if they want a binary good/bad dynamic. I didn't like Napoleon, but I haven't seen the director's cut, so maybe that would change my mind. Thanks for the comment!
Could you elaborate on why you loved the Director's Cut of Napoleon? I have only seen the original cut and wasn't impressed. Does the new cut improve the film in a way that it is worth checking it out even if you didn't love the original version?
@ I don‘t think so, sorry. It expands the relationship between Bonaparte and Josephine and dives a bit deeper in the political themes. I really loved the atmosphere, how Scott and his cameras wallow in the opulence of the pictures, how they humanize Bonaparte - a capable général and a pathologic servant of desire (straight against the heroic, iconic image that we have become accustomed to)..a very willfull tightrope walk between admiration and deconstruction. I would compare it to Scott’s (criminally underrated and controversial) 1492 - CoP (one of my all time favourite movies of all time). Not everyone‘s cup of tea, but if you like it, you love it with every fiber of your heart and you want to see more of it. So the Director‘s Cut of Napoleon is right up my alley 🤗
I’m gonna be that guy. Do you have a letterboxd? Love the videos man.
Yup, sure do: letterboxd.com/HunterLanier/ You can find other social media stuff in the description. Thanks for watching and for the kind words!
Thanks for your review! I'll have to check this out.
And thank you for watching! If you don't like the movie, I give you full permission to come back here and yell at me.
This is good to hear. I hope I'm 10% as productive and creative as Ridley Scott when I'm in my mid-80s!
It's pretty amazing. Him, Eastwood, Woody Allen, Coppola, Scorsese. When I was a kid, 60 seemed old, and now you've got all these guys in their 80s and 90s still putting out work. I respect Tarantino's hard-out idea, but I respect still working into your 90s even more.
I don’t agree. Stopped watching when you mentioned that you don’t even like the original gladiator! (A literal classic in my opinion). Makes me question this review on Gladiator II
Gladiator is a classic storytelling ..take the best elements out of gladiator and fill it up with spectacle violence combined with fake cartoonish CGI and you have Gladiator 2..his title "Gladiator II Review • Better Than the Original" is just for clickbait and for views
So him not liking the most overrated movie ever somehow makes his opinion not valid?
@@charliebrouun6510 if this is your opinion....why even bother ..watch what you want... you are own critic
Firstly, thanks for leaving a comment! When it comes to movie reviews, I wouldn't look at them as a journalist reporting objective fact. This is just my opinion, and I do my best to explain the movie and why I enjoyed it. Then, you can take that information and decide if it's applicable to you. For example, I should be able to give a movie a bad review, you watch the review, and still come away wanting to see the movie, because maybe the reasons I hated it are reasons you'd like it, or vice-versa.
@@Ionisus I would not describe the headline as clickbait, since it is my opinion on the movie.
I love your reviews
And I love that you love them. Exciting times, as the channel has memberships available as of today. No pressure to subscribe, but take a peek at the tiers if you have the time. You might win the lottery soon and run out of ways to spend the jackpot. I'm planning on doing a weekly live chat, as well, probably starting December 1st.
Nobody was looking for an "enhanced" version of the first movie, though. If that is even an accurate description of Gladiator II.
It's certainly a less serious version of the first movie. Whether that's a good thing perhaps depends on your opinion of the first movie.
But the problem remains - everyone is treating it like a remake, rather than a sequel. Because it doesn't work as a sequel.
Like I say in the review, it's not the sort of sequel I would have been most interested in seeing. It doesn't take the characters in an entirely new direction like the Nick Cave script or evolve the story into something grander like The Godfather Part II. Both of those would be examples of it "working as a sequel" for me, to use your words.
Judging the movie we got-not the one we may have wanted-I found it to work better as a popcorn movie than the original worked as a serious drama. Thanks for leaving a comment!
I don't agree
What are your thoughts? Too derivative and focused on spectacle?
@FeatureUnderground yes
This movie is a continuation of an epidemic disease. Ridley just made great people small with his new movie. Maximus is a sucker and a cheater. The only noble women in the Gladiator is a disaterous idiot. We have a roman general who don't wont to fight and go on their knees. We have emperors who are like spoiled children, senators who act like old babling fools. The only people who are great are uneducated foreigners who have ridicules haircuts. This is an incarnation of a Star Wars Stormtrooper dilemma. Everybody says they are great and you see them continuaslly being taken out and not able to hit anything. So in this movie Rome is not great. There is no tactics, nobody is giving orders, nobody is in charge apparently as you just bow your head an things just happends and everytime time by sheer luck. It is a terrible directed movie made by good people who were given no direction.
The main character is like a generic hero from a video game with prerecorded scenes. He loves his wife so much that he sends her away, to shoot arrows at romans and is surprised they shot back. In the ending scene a crocodile could emerge from a ditch and just eat everybody, it wouldn't surprise me that's how invested I was in this movie. But the biggest castration is the ending. Again it wouldn't surprise me if everybody in the movie would just get depressed and just lie down and die. That's how a Homeric epic looks like in the eyes of a 80 years old millionaire then all CGI was already used. Even the music here is like im the mourning after Gladiator 1.
A spectacle of pure acrobatics with no resonation and meaning signifying cheers of an idiot.
Maybe reading the rejected Nick Cave script can mend your wounded soul: davidgerard.co.uk/gladiator-2-nick-cave.pdf