First Francis Ford Coppola, now Ridley Scott. This year’s second film set in the Roman era is Gladiator 2, and this is certainly no coincidence. Could it be, as has often been said, that the United States is the 21st-century version of the Roman Empire? Just today, Elon Musk, the prospective Minister of Efficiency of the new U.S. government, reiterated this cliché on his own social media platform. Could these films be telling us the same story in different ways? Let’s take a closer look—starting with the background.
With every sequel or reboot, the question is always the same: will it be as good as the original?
2024 is the year of reboots and sequels: Mad Max, Dune, Joker, Beetlejuice, Mean Girls, The Lion King, Planet of the Apes, Godzilla, King Kong, Deadpool, Transformers, Venom… and now, the much-anticipated Gladiator has joined the list. With every sequel or reboot, the question is always the same: will it be as good as the original? It could be argued that some of this year’s sequels, like Dune 2, Mad Max: Furiosa, or Deadpool & Wolverine, have approached or even surpassed the success of their originals or predecessors. I’m confident we’ll see Dune 2 feature prominently during awards season, claiming accolades wherever it has the chance. Similarly, Mad Max: Furiosa might also find moments to shine. For Gladiator 2, a film perhaps even more iconic than Mad Max in cultural status, the question was no different: could Ridley Scott, after all these years, craft a sequel worthy of the legendary 2000 film, with its unforgettable lines, iconic scenes, and intergenerational legacy?
Excitement only grew as Connie Nielsen returned to the cast alongside Denzel Washington and rising stars Paul Mescal and Pedro Pascal. Yet in recent weeks, the reviews and commentary suggested that the film fell short of expectations. We watched and saw for ourselves. Either I was too captivated by the film’s charm, or the recent critics had a different perspective.
The story takes place 15 years after the deaths of emperors Marcus Aurelius (Richard Harris), his successor Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix), and our immortalized hero Maximus (Russell Crowe) from the first film. This time, the focus shifts to Lucius (Paul Mescal), Maximus’s Roman heir. Caught in the grip of a deeply corrupt Roman Empire, Lucius finds his fate mirroring that of his father, as he is inevitably drawn into the gladiatorial arena. The film excels in many aspects, particularly the war scenes at the beginning and the Colosseum battles, which now even include naval combat. Its production design and set decoration are likely to draw significant attention. Now, back to the plot…
The heir to Rome, Lucius, utterly despises the Empire and its rulers, whose depravity has veered far from the path once envisioned by his grandfather. Naturally, his presence attracts the attention of certain scheming individuals who thrive on manipulation. This is where Macrinus (Denzel Washington) enters the scene—a complex character with shades of an anti-hero, a sort of gladiator trader. While he elevates Lucius’s stature within Rome and the imperial court, he simultaneously plots the downfall of emperors and rivals alike. Washington’s portrayal of Macrinus is compelling, and his career and acting prowess need no introduction. However, it’s no coincidence that he was offered this role, as it closely resembles a character he played just three years ago. In Joel Coen’s 2021 adaptation of Shakespeare’s The Tragedy of Macbeth, Washington portrayed the ambitious and cunning Macbeth. It seems almost certain that Scott cast Washington after watching that performance. In Gladiator 2, as Macrinus, Washington delivers a similar performance as a schemer chasing power with ‘Macbeth-like’ precision.
“Justice is the will of the stronger.”
Macrinus embodies a concrete philosophical school of thought, which he unabashedly voices in the film. His worldview draws from Thrasymachus, the sophist prominently featured in Plato’s Republic, who argued, “Justice is nothing else other than the will of the stronger.” Without explicitly naming Thrasymachus, Macrinus directly articulates this perspective as his manifesto multiple times. Historically, Macrinus could indeed have been aware of Thrasymachus and Plato, considering that Marcus Aurelius himself taken inspiration from Plato. However, the film does not establish this connection. Still, a clear ideological conflict emerges. On one side are the virtuous governance ideals represented by Plato and Marcus Aurelius, rejected outright by Macrinus, and on the other side is Macrinus himself, embodying Thrasymachus’s disdain for virtue and faith in raw power. Observing this ideological framework, it becomes clear that Macrinus is Scott’s intended antagonist.
However, Scott chooses to reveal Macrinus’s schemes and ambitions only toward the film’s final act. Until then, the audience is preoccupied with the decadence and capriciousness of emperors painted as the villains—albeit not very convincingly. This perceived lack of a strong antagonist until the last act might have been a deliberate choice. The film meticulously pays homage to the original without altering or disrespecting any details, and this ambiguity around the antagonists may have been intentional. Furthermore, Gladiator 2 shares a thematic connection with Francis Ford Coppola’s Megalopolis, developed over decades by Coppola.
On one side are Thrasymachus, Macrinus, Commodus, and the lunatic emperors; on the other, Marcus Aurelius, Maximus, Lucius, and their allies.
Megalopolis depicts a future America modeled after the Roman Empire, drawing parallels between Rome’s power struggles, intrigues, and political campaigns, and the current U.S. political system as a form of critique. Set in New York City, the 85-year-old Coppola’s long-gestated film scrutinizes corrupt politics, flawed governance, a decaying society, and a life trajectory gone astray. Ridley Scott, a contemporary of Coppola, tackles the same themes in the same year, albeit from a different perspective but within a similar framework and motifs: a corrupt empire, scheming intrigues, an impoverished people, and a group of idealists resisting them. Thus, the ambiguity surrounding the antagonist seems to support the idea that Scott’s choice was deliberate. He signals that the core problem is not merely the leaders, as is often thought, but a philosophical structure represented by Thrasymachus and his ilk that persists to this day. On one side are Thrasymachus, Macrinus, Commodus, and the lunatic emperors; on the other, Marcus Aurelius, Maximus, Lucius, and their allies. Responsibility in the first film passed from Emperor Marcus Aurelius to his loyal commander Maximus; in this sequel, it shifts from Maximus to his son Lucius. Therefore, like Megalopolis with its more direct approach, Gladiator 2 goes beyond being just an action film, exploring the issues of modern society, politics, governance, and the concept of justice through the power struggles of the Roman Empire.
Gladiator 2 maintains continuity with its predecessor while deepening its arguments in this philosophical context. The film not only retells a story from the past but also, like Coppola’s Megalopolis, opens a debate about the meaning of concepts like power, justice, and virtue in the modern world. A massive-budget production that immerses its audience in the chaotic grandeur of gladiatorial combat, it raises the bar in technical and production aspects, delivering a stellar sequel. It honors and advances the legacy of its iconic predecessor and its central hero, Maximus Decimus Meridius, without tarnishing their memory. If only Hans Zimmer had taken charge of the music again! After all, the original film’s soundtrack still echoes in our ears. But let’s accept it as it is.
Rating: 4/5
External Links:
Engin Ozcan 