Another decent, but horribly overrated movie

Rating: Null/10 (2 December 2000)

What is it with critics? They laud mediocrity, and all too often pan excellence.
This movie is an excellent example. No doubt, it is a somewhat watchable film, for the most part. If you want to know what's good about the movie, read one the multitude of idiotic reviews singing this movie's praises.
First, I realize some people accept that the film was not historically accurate, but some maintain that it largely is true to the period. The latter point is nonsense. For starters, the film opens with a battle of such historical inaccuracy that it is almost literally laughable (at least chuckle-able). This is spoiler, but not for the plot. If you don't want itty bitty spoilers, skip to the next paragraph and just take me at my word. Okay, here we go: Ridley Scott sacrifices historical accuracy to "spice up" this battle, big time. In five hundred years, a Roman Legion never fought so poorly. If one did, it would have retreated and the general been killed. Let me tell you something every Junior High Social Studies grad should know: Roman Legions (like the Greek Phalanx before it) dominated not because of individual skill, but because of regimented formation combat. Individually, the barbarians were by far the better warriors. The bulk of a legion would get into tight formation, and either advance as a unit or await the enemy advance. As the range closed, the legionnaires would throw their pila (remember those spears the Romans were carrying for no reason in the movie?) at the enemy, then draw their gladius swords. They would remain shoulder-to-shoulder, to give them their advantage. They did not use cavalry or artillery in any major way. I have to ask, why couldn't Scott have shown it as it was? It was just as bloody, and would have actually educated a few people.
Ridley Scott is at his worst as a director in this film. It is time he got some psychological help, to conquer his phobia that the audience might actually be able to see what is happening. Must every action scene be either pitch black or featuring a cut every ten frames?
This is yet another Hollywood film destroying historical accuracy, and it is only mediocre (in the worst sense of the word). Believe the hype at your own peril.