Major insult to history and the viewers' inteligence

Rating: 3/10 (3 November 2001)

I thought they were making a movie about Marcus Aurelius and Commodus,two of the best emperors the Roman empire ever had.But they made a movie about a non-existent General Maximus who is a mixture of Superman and Goofy.Most characters are flat including Maximus.The only redeaming qualities are a great Commodus by Joaquin Phoenix and the battle with the Germans.Commodus was called "the first among the Gladiators" and his twelve years of relatively peaceful reign helped the empire recover from his father wars.Joahin partly saws some of his qualities.But where is his wish for concupines?Where are his interesting religious ideas?And where is his believe of superiority of himself above all others? Is this old man Marcus Aurelius,the warrior-philosopher-emperor?I don't think so.He spend his reign constantly fighting to defend and expand the empire.He never finished fighting actualy.Rome was not out of enemies.The Picts in northern Britain,the Germans in the North,the competitive Parthian Empire in the East and the restless Arab raiders in the South hardly left him any piece.And this movie claims it was all for nothing and that a republic could be better?Absolutely not? Who the hell is Grachus?Pertinax was the next emperor and he was an army officer not a man of the declined Senate. And about gladiators they were not only slaves.Many of them were free man who were searching for glory,fame and most of all money. Why does Hollywood have to ridicule history?And what a false praise to Republics.The Roman Empire survived with its original capital between 27 Bc and 476 AD and continued to survive without it.What Rebublic ever survived 503 years?This movie is a disgrace considering it's plot and it's messages.