Viewed in
2001
Premise
An exiled prince enslaved as a gladiator seeks revenge against the Roman emperor.
Who should watch
Those who want to watch an MTV-styled entertaining gladiator movie.
Thoughts
As a summer movie, this was fun to watch; it had well-done special effects, Russell Crowe and Joaquin Phoenix were good, and a decent, generic story. As an Oscar winner for Best Picture, it was a joke; the basic story was practically identical to 'Ben-Hur' and 'Spartacus'.
Ridley Scott was known for his action scenes, and this movie had plenty of exciting fights. Personally, I can only handle so much from him, because I do not like his chaotic, motion-sickening, hand-held camera style. That style was perfect for 'Black Hawk Down', but not here. I also enjoyed Hans Zimmer's accompanying, grandiose score.
However, the writer in me detested this movie. I once attended an event where the screenwriter, David Franzoni, explained his nightmare of an experience. The original screenplay was actually a social commentary about how self-indulgent and corrupt the Roman Empire was at the eve of its collapse. He intended to show parallels to modern America, for example, comparing gladiator with WWE. This was a warning that America was on the eve of a downhill spiral. Now that sounds more interesting.
Franzoni then explained how the original screenplay was butchered by actors, directors, and studio executives. Fed up, he left as screenwriter, or was he fired? After months of turmoil and numerous failed ghostwriters, the studios asked him back. By that time, there were months into production and were shooting without a script. Franzoni was asked back to whip up a new screenplay just to finish the movie.
The biggest joke of the whole thing was that he ended up winning for best screenplay. His acceptance speech was quite ironic.
What I would change
Made the movie the way the writer originally intended.
