Gladiator (2000)

Gladiator (2000)

review by Scott Hunt. Visit me at Movie Hunt http://netdirect.net/~hunt/index.html

My rating: A Bulleye. (4 out of 4 stars)

Director: Ridley Scott Cast: Russell Crowe, Richard Harris, Joaquin Phoenix, Connie Nielsen, Oliver Reed, Djimon Hounsou Writers: David Franzoni, John Logan and William Nicholson

`People should know when they are conquered', intones a lieutenant to General Maximus (Crowe), early in the film. It's a statement that serves as a reflection of the indomitable force of human desire. Gladiator is a film about man's ability to overcome near insurmountable odds. Homeric in scale, it is one of those rare films that deserves the title `epic'. Nestled within a grand tale of treachery, political maneuvering and personal loss, it none-the-less takes time to savage the modern day notions of sports and entertainment.

Crowe is General Maximus, pointman for the juggernaut-like Roman military of Emperor Marcus Aurelius (Harris), an expansionist pricked by nettles of guilt over his place in history. Harris effectively conveys the weariness of absolute power checked by self doubt as he wonders if his yearnings to build a strong Rome have smothered his philosophical leanings. He visits Maximus on the battlefield as his army executes it's final sweep in a 100 A.D. version of Manifest Destiny. The battle opens the film. It's filmed in deeply saturated tones of dark yellow and blue, contrasting the muddy, fog covered terrain against the warm flare of archers lofting flaming arrows towards their targets. The whole film is suffused with gorgeous colors, making it a truly beautiful movie. Director Scott uses a frenzy of jumpcuts as the action blinks from combatant to combatant. His pace is so frenetic that it becomes indecipherable who is doing what to whom. It's disconcerting and detracts from comprehension of the fighting. As the battle is won and Aurelius praises Maximus for his leadership, Aurelius' son, Commodus (Phoenix) ,arrives disingenuously asking if he has missed the battle. The contrast between the leather clad, bleeding Maximus and the misplaced looking, bejeweled silk and fur garb of Commodus signals the near palpable difference between the two men.

As the army tends to it's wounds, the ailing Aurelius takes the General aside for a father-surrogate son chat in which he pleads with Maximus that he take control of Rome upon his passing. It is the Ceasar's wish that the power of Rome by given to the senate, and by proxy, the people, dissolving the dictatorship it has been under. It's a request that tears at Maximus. A simple farmer at heart, he longs to return to his wife and son, but can't deny his intrinsic devotion to the Roman empire. Later, as Aurelius explains his decision of succession to Commodus, events quickly take a turn into true Greek tragedy as Commodus kills his father in a opportunistic fit of ambitious rage. The scene plays out better than would be expected as Commodus shows no glee in the killing and appears helpless to fight his naked desire. Phoenix plays Commodus as progressively unbalanced throughout the film, yet manages to project an aura of animal cunning. He is a man seriously flawed, yet brutally dangerous in the wielding of his power upon his father's death.

Revealed around the same time is a former love affair between Aurelius' daughter, Lucilla (Nielsen)and Maximus. Time and again, much is made of the unspoken love between the pair. I found it a bewildering relationship as Lucilla repeatedly betrays Maximus in the name of self preservation. It seems as if Lucilla is supposed to come across as a sympathetic character as she tries to temper Commodus' rage. The implication is that her actions are driven by her maternal protection of her son, but as her transgressions against both Commodus and the General escalated, I found myself thinking her nearly as evil a monster as her brother. When she gives a speech late in the film praising Maximus, it speaks as much of her hypocrisy as it does to Maximus' strength of character.

Not to reveal the entirety of the events that unfold, but in quick succession, Maximus must endure the stripping of his position, the death of his family and being captured into slavehood, where he is forced to become a gladiator.

As each gladiator event unfolds, with the stakes being no less than the lives of the combatants, it cast a none too kind light upon today's modern day gladiators in professional sports and our national fascination with personal tragedy. Whether it was Scott's intention or not, an argument can be made that the gladiator fights are a blistering indictment on our tabloid crazy, insensitivity to the pain of others as we look for entertainment, no matter what it's form.

As Gladiator (Maximus) rises through the ranks, he eventually comes into conflict with his nemesis, Commodus. Commodus comes to represent the duplicity and scheming of politicians, while Gladiator speaks to the force of human desire. As Commodus manipulates events in an attempt to gain a perceptual advantage over Maximus in the populace's eyes, one can't help but see an analogy to modern day spinmeisters and today's national media in relation to the leeming-like whims of the general public.

Crowe's Gladiator is a model of reluctant heroism. For him, fighting is a functionality of survival, nothing more. He eschews flashiness unless it is necessary. This is not a superman. He is a simple man, who is very good at what he does. By downplaying the invincible hero aspect in favor of a protagonist who bleeds, cries and suffers loss, the film ups the meter on Crowe's already infinite watchability. Crowe's oft displayed intensity adds dimension to what could have been a two dimensional role. His yearnings and sense of loss take on a certain tangibility due to his acting skills.

Oliver Reed is an equally strong presence as a gladiator trainer who almost sells his soul as he panders to the masses thirst for entertainment. Djimon Hounsou soulfully essays the role of Gladiator's best friend and confidant.

Gladiator doesn't come across as a dissection of Roman politics, nor does it particularly pander to the blood thirsty voyeurs lurking in its audience looking for cheap thrills. It manages to travel a middle ground of viscerally captivating, solid entertainment.