Not Great, But Good, IN SPITE Of Crowe's Involvement!

Rating: 7/10 (31 May 2007)

Let me begin by saying that I believe this movie deserved the awards it won, but not because of Russell Crowe. Mainly, this was a good movie because of Ridley Scott and Joaquin Phoenix, who had to work AROUND Crowe, and support his performance, in order for his "work" to even be watchable, much less steal an Oscar for the best leading male role. He SO didn't deserve that.
I also have to admit that I did NOT agree that Gladiator was the best movie of 2000. I thought that award should have gone to Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. Now THAT was a film! Other than my misgivings surrounding Crowe's inept performance and the fact that he did not deserve the awards he won, Gladiator is still enjoyable; despite Crowe's involvement, however, NOT because of it.
Joaquin Phoenix is GREAT in this film and makes it well worth watching.
It rates a 6.6/10 from...
the Fiend :.