Good film, but not so real

Rating: 8/10 (7 September 2000)

"The Gladiator" is really a great film. You can see the fantastic way of filming of Ridley Scott, the sceneries are marvellous and also actors are really good. The plot is very simple, but effective. There are all the main elements to make this film a "Kolossal". It reminds me many films about the Ancient Rome, especially "Spartacus" by Stanley Kubrick. But the main difference between these two films is that "The Gladiator" is very approximate in its historical elements while "Spartacus" (as also other films about Rome and,generally, historical arguments)is very accurate. For this reason, I think that Gladiator is a good film, but not a good historical film. There are too many wrong elements. I can give some examples: in the initial battle we see many crossbows which did not exist yet at the time, or the (marvellous, anyway) scene of the Colosseo with all the flags at its top (it was more similar to Wembley Stadium rather than the real monument!!!) and other little things. Oh yeah....another important mistake: the film shows us Rome as a big city,with streets, with many people and around the central city......NOTHING, no streets, no little cities, only some isolated houses somewhere.....that's not true! Maybe, I'm a little bit meticolous, maybe because I love history....but I think it is to pointed out these little mistakes. Anyway, the film is really good and I gave it an 8!