Rating: 
Summary: Reason I got DVD
Review: I got my DVD player just to get this film. A smart move I must say. I write this 4 days after the Oscar nominations. Great film, the box office hit Russell needed. Just did not like the story between the brother & sister characters. Could have done without that. Excellant extras!!
Rating: 
Summary: If I could I would give it -5 stars
Review: This movie is absolute tripe -- total garbage. I absolutely cringed in embarassment listening to the eighth-grade level middle school acting of this film... to think that a person could spend three hours sitting at home and reading Marcus Aurelius or see this. There are so many pathetic things about this movie, that I will only focus on one. I was at one time an enormous Ridley Scott fan. I believed he was just the mac-daddy of film composition. No longer. When I watch his films now, but especially GLADIATOR, I remember Pauline Kael's quote about Paul Schrader's films from the early 80's looking like a collection of cheap album covers. I think similarly, watching Gladiator is like watching some half-witted art director indulge in his most sordid fantasies -- some of this film is so trashily designed it looks like a reject Stevie Nicks video. Totally anachronistic. As far as graphic design is concerned, a person need look no further than the opening credit sequence from Spartacus to see what a disaster Gladiator is. I think Spartacus is Kubrick's worst film (next to Eyes Wide Shut) but it absolutely snuffs this thing. The sad thing is that I actually liked 1492 when it came out-- sure it had a tin ear for dialogue-- but it also had some truly stunning photography, an amazing score, and vastly superior actors. I was also a lot younger then. Yet no one ever mentions this film. I know I am just jumping all over the place here but I am sooooo disappointed. Extremely depressing to watch.
Rating:
Summary: A Stunning and Powerful Epic, but Not for the Highly Cynical
Review: Don't be distracted by the nanny school of movie critics; this movie will take your breath away. Gladiator has it all (well, not quite--there's no sex): a truly powerful--and appealing--lead performance by Russell Crowe, stunning cinematography, the superbly paced direction that made Ridley Scott famous, and a moving soundtrack. Crowe's brute magnetism powers Maximus, a heroic figure that Crowe manages to make entirely believable. The supporting actors are strong as well, particularly Connie Nielson (although she does hit one slightly off note at the end of the movie). Folks, this movie is BIG; it's ambitious, and it succeeds. Gladiator isn't quite perfect: the special visual effects are a mixed bag, some fabulous, a few slightly hokey, and the performances from Oliver Reed and Joachin Phoenix, though generally impressive, are just a bit over the top. The necessities of keeping the movie a reasonable length (it ended up at about 2:20) meant the deletion of some scenes whose absence hurt the plot line. (You can see many of the deleted scenes on Disc II of the DVD set, and I think most of us would have elected to keep most of them in, even if it meant a 3 hour movie.) But the movie's strengths dwarf its few weakness, and the overall effect is undeniably powerful. Most movie critics are cynics, which predisposes them to dislike heroic epics. Gladiator is not cynical; Crowe's Maximus, like the real-life Maximus described by Marcus Aurelius in "The Meditations," is an example of strength, courage, and honor. Still, the propulsive force of Gladiator is so potent, it managed to win over a substantial body of critics. Note to parents: while I strongly recommend this movie to those mature enough for it (and it includes neither sex nor profanity, for those who care about such things), its violence will frighten young children.
Rating:
Summary: Boring, boring, boring
Review: The only thing this movie inspired in me was sleep. It was like watching a movie while being high on novacaine, a truly mind numbing experience. The whole experience was a terrific letdown after seeing the previews on television. I went to the theater thinking I was going to see an epic, and came home deadened and thanking God that there are other good movies to see. If all movies were this horrible, I'd never set foot in a theater again.
Rating:
Summary: GLADIATOR
Review: This movie is simply... PERFECT. Russell Crowe and Joaquin Phoenix are oscar winners. This is rhe kind of movies you must see more than once. The more I see it the more I like it. The movie makes sense since the VERY BEGINNING till the end. The music is superbly heartfelt.This movie must be categorized as the best 21st Century Classic.
Rating:
Summary: Best Picture 2000 and surefire Oscar contender!
Review: I saw Gladiator the day it opened in theaters, and the second I came out of the theater I knew that it was the Best Picture of 2000, and it's certainly proved itself to be. Since that first viewing, I have seen it about 200 more times, and it only gets better with age. If you don't see it for the plot, direction, or Crowe's fantastic acting, see it for Joacquim Phoenix's brilliant breakout portrayal of the scheming Commodus. GLADIATOR IS THE BEST FILM OF 2000!
Rating:
Summary: muy bien
Review: I think some people get too hung up on the little details. I felt the overall feel of ancient Rome was conveyed well, and the "give me a break" type things people complain about don't effect the quality of the story. Making a period film probably isn't easy, and little slip ups (though i don't think they should even be called that) are hard to avoid. Gladiator isn't supposed to be a special on the Discovery channel. It's a MOVIE. Just enjoy the acting, stroryline, and try to appreciate the great sets instead of obsessing over stupid little things. Not to mention the musical score was well done, and the entire other DVD with the special features was a nice bonus.
Rating:
Summary: Good from beginning to end.
Review: Great acting, great direction from Ridley Scott (my favorite director) and very accurate battle scenes (Roman phalanx attacks, use of shields, armor and other equipment.) make this one a winner in my book.
Rating:
Summary: Stupendous!!!
Review: The year 2000 was one of the worst year for movies. Thankfully this is not one of those dissapointment. This movie is all about a general who becomes a Gladiator and want's revenge on what happens to him ( i wont tell you what happens). The action is stupendous as well as the story line. This movie will surely please you. This movie is nominated for 12 Osars!!!!!!
Rating:
Summary: Ignore the backlash - enjoy this film for what it is
Review: There's such a bitter, aggressive backlash against this movie throughout the internet, especially since it received its dozen Oscar nominations. The fact that Gladiator was such a box office smash seems to inspire many to question its "legitimacy," leading such wannabe critics to dissect nearly every frame of the film and throw in plenty of hostile descriptions, such as "weak," "cliched," etc. Eventually, you must trust your own judgment and appreciate Gladiator for what it is: a bold, rousing adventure film. It succeeded brilliantly at what it set out to be: exciting summer escapism. Its filmmakers never intended it to be War and Peace. It takes the best aspects of the old "sword and sandal" genre and reintroduces them in a broader, fresher and more contemporary style. What a wonderful summer it was in 2000, enjoying repeat viewings of Gladiator and its protagonist, Maximus, a (refreshingly) noble soldier (instead of the more 80s-style wild, out-of-control action hero) - played by the commanding Russell Crowe, the finest actor to emerge since Anthony Hopkins and Robert DeNiro. As for the Oscar question: how about putting this all in perspective? If Gladiator is as "seriously flawed" as its detractors claim it to be, how do we measure Titanic or other epics that have won Best Picture? How about Braveheart? The Unforgiven? Dances With Wolves? Reds? What about some of that dialogue in Spartacus that made director Kubrick remove his name from the credits? Plenty of imperfections among all those titles, isn't there? Is Gladiator perfect? Definitely not, but then, what film is? Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon? Almost Famous? They're a long ways from that in my book. Does Gladiator measure up to, or exceed, the quality of most Best Picture winners? ABSOLUTELY. Yes, 2000 probably WAS, overall, the "worst year in movie history," and the prospect of an action/adventure film winning Best Picture -- a movie that never set out to preach or enlighten -- seems inappropriate and unfair. But instead of being angry about that, I'm going to sit back and be grateful for the sheer joy and escapism that Gladiator brought me this past year. Thank you Ridley Scott, Russell Crowe, Dreamworks, Universal and a wonderful cast and crew for giving me a summer I'll never forget.
| 
