Readers' Thoughts on ‘Gladiator II'?

As Ridley Scott threatens us with a 4-hour version of his middling “Gladiator II,” the film is now playing in theaters. Scott’s sword and sandals epic earned $16M on Friday — it’s well on its way to a $55M+ weekend.

With that said, audiences aren’t responding to “Gladiator II” as much as the original. That “B” CinemaScore sticks out like a sore thumb; then again its 84% RT user rating is fairly decent, if not exceptional. The PostTrak is also decent (76% approval).

I was disappointed by “Gladiator II.” A large part of my disdain resides in Paul Mescal’s performance as Lucius. He’s miscast, and doesn’t seem to have the charisma or screen presence needed to lead such a big film. Meanwhile, Scott’s sarcastic approach to much of the story feels tonally off.

Here’s an excerpt of my original thoughts on “Gladiator II” (posted on 11.11.24):

Scott’s sequel can best be described as a “hot mess,” with multiple plot strands strenuously put together in its 150 minute runtime. Did we need a sequel to the Oscar-winning 2000 sword and sandals epic? The clear answer, in my eyes at least, is no. Of course, one could technically enjoy “Gladiator II” by seeing it as a campy affair, which it is, a soap opera with weird acting and implausible situations, but we deserved more than this.

I gather many of our readers are planning to watch, or have already seen, “Gladiator II”; What did you think? Critics aren’t that impressed by it (72% RT, 63 MC) Do you agree that Denzel Washington is far and away the highlight of the film? Chime in with your thoughts in the comments section below.