how a movie like this has a high rating?

Rating: 8/10 (20 January 2003)

i don't understand how a movie so crappy like this one ever got this high rating. first i must say that ridley scott is considered by me an awfull director. alien was the only good movie he ever directed. blade runner is totally overrated, black rain shouldn't be considered a movie, 1492 is completely ridiculous, black hawk down is one of the worse war movies i have ever seen and hannibal is only an ok film.
the plot is ludicrous. a gladiator, former army man, that begins a personal vendetta against the emperor and finally gets away with it? i don't think so. there is also this kind of love story between him and lucilla that is totally out of place.
cast is awful. russel crowe is dull as maximus and he certainly doesn't look as a gladiator. he had better performances in "a beautiful mind" and in "l. a confidential". joaquin pheonix is absurd as usual, let's face it, this man can't act, a few tears doesn't prove him a good actor, pitty river phoenix is dead (that was trully a good actor). richard harris is poor as marcus aurelius and oliver reed is surprisingly bad as some sort of gladiator manager.
still, the movie has some good points: drek jacobi is very good as a senator and the first battle scene is a real joy. but this two things doesn't save the rest of the movie.
i almost forgot: it's very overlong, seems like it will never finish. 2/10.