fascinated by the variety of reaction

Rating: Null/10 (2 June 2000)

Wow. just saw the movie, came home and started reading reviews because I loved the movie, my companion hated it. It's interesting that just as many people say the characters had no depth as say the characters showed wonderful motivation. Russell Crowe was great; Russell Crowe was awful. The fight scenes were artificial; the fight scenes were beautifully choreographed. The plot was trite; it was moving.
I personally liked the movie in spite of the violence. I was moved by the story and fascinated by the history (rather, the way the historical facts were handled-I studied Roman history for years and am familiar enough with the period to notice the liberties taken with the history, but also the things that are faithful to the facts. Marcus Aurelius was indeed a great leader, a philosopher king and wily general. Commodus was a horrible emperor--on the list of Rome's five worst, but he was in power for over ten years, I think, so time is compressed pretty drastically in the movie. He did in fact enjoy performing in the arena, to the embarrassment of his people and his family). Of course, Maximus is an invention. But his situation as a gladiator was realistic, the scenery was wonderful,if not always understandable (How did Maximus get from Spain to Africa and then Rome anyway?), and I was really hooked by the story.
My response to those who say the story's been done a million times before. Well, of course it has, and we like it. We like to see an honest man face incredible odds against the big bad guy and win. That's the hero-quest model that has been part of our storytelling since the Gilgamesh epic to The Odyssey to Beowulf to King Arthur to James Bond to Star Wars to Braveheart, for God's sake. It's very human to want to see decency win out against corruption; it affirms our values and provides vicarious victories against the forces that we can't always control in our world. All movies are the same old story--there are only three or four main stories in the world anyway. So to criticize a movie for that is, well, silly. Also, the formula of the movie is a tribute to the big marvelously overdone movies of the "sword and sandal" sort that I always had a soft spot for. It was particularly cool to see what modern special effects and cinematography could do for the genre, with more natural acting and actually a very moving story of a decent man who is placed in indecent circumstances, and rises to do what he can about it. The historical reality of the politics and arena shows really made me aware of how lucky I am that I will never face life as a slave where dying horribly in front of thousands is a daily possibility.
Besides, it's entertainment. Boy,are some of you picky!