Rating: 
Summary: Well worth it! A true Oscar winner!
Review: I was reluctant to watch this movie but when my family insisted on the tape they knew my love for classics would draw me to the screen. The movie takes place just before the death of Marcus Aurelius - Caesar who died in 180 AD. Thereafter, the films takes place over a twelve year period during the reign of the Roman Emperor Commodus. While the film takes artistic license with Crowes Character - purely for entertainment purposes (which a movie should be - fun) there are interesting historical refernces to the barbarian tribes to the North/Northeast of the Roman Empire who were defeated (mostly yes by fire) and the sheer ingenuity of the Roman army. The Crowe character finds himself torn between a promise to return Rome to a Republic and the vicious Emperor who of course want's to maintain the rule of the Caesar's. Crowes character is written with heroic proportion and survives years of sufffering and near death episodes before being returned to Rome. Why no one ages in the film especially the Emperor's nephew Lucious is anyone's guess. However, the entertaining fight of good versus evil is well worth the price of the film. It was a real treat to see Derek Jacobi of "I Claudius" in the film, as well as marvelous performances all around.
Rating: 
Summary: Gladiator, are you ready?
Review: Amazing movie. Russell Crowe gets Spartan on these mofos. Fight scenes are amazing. The only reason it gets 4 stars though is because no corny Planet of the Apes dialogue, and Ridley Scott directed it.
Rating: 
Summary: Great music and action but not much else
Review: When I watched the academy awards I had this nagging feeiling that Gladiator, a really big bang film would withought a doubt win best picture. I was right. While Gladiator looks really cool and exciting on the surface, if you look deeper you will see that this is a average movie that dosent really excell in any general area. Now I want to point out that this is not a bad movie, it just dosent excell in any area, the story line is okay, the action is okay, the charachters are okay, everything is pretty much okay. The music is the big part of this movie, although at first glance it just sounds like a women humming and singing although it really helps set the mood. The action sequences for this movie are okay but are really violent and should not be watched by anyone under 15. In conclusion this is just another okay movie that is worth a rental and a purchase of the soundtrack and that is about it.The Good: Great soundtrack, action sequences are good, the ending is pretty good The bad: the characters arnt really developed, nothing really astonishing And the ugly: the action sequences are gory and only for mature audiences.
Rating:
Summary: Expected more
Review: Without the incredible fight scenes, this movie would be nothing. The movie simply took too much time to develop a rather unoriginal story (the entire plot is essentially told in the trailer). The good points; I did find the combat scenes to be nothing less than spectacular, and Russell Crowe does an exceptional acting performance despite a weak supporting cast (the only expection being Joaquin Phoenix, who played the role of Commodus). As the special features go, the making of and historical information have a few cool facts, but have little replay value, and deleted scenes are nothing more than talking. Overall, I would recommend at least watching it. It's not the blockbuster in makes itself out to be.
Rating:
Summary: * * MOST OVER RATED MOVIE OF ALL TIME * *
Review: I can't understand how this movie beat out Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon for best picture? Just goes to show how scandalous and racist the Oscar committee are. This movie will insult your intelligence! If you remember studying western civilization, the movie greatly overexaggerates the actual fighting methods devised by the Romans, Romans fought in legions not in cascading style; and greatly overexaggerates the actual fighting that took place in the colosseum, nobody really got killed-this is a myth propogated by Hollywood. How about how he took 2 horses to race home against the Preatorians who were going to kill his family? Wouldn't both horses get tired? A lot of scenes where cut out which would have explained some lines in the movie better...maybe you can find them. I found a bunch of "why did he say that" type lines through the whole movie, like why Crowe was called "the Spaniard"? The movie never mentioned that he lived in Spain. Too many incomplete things in this movie. Something telling of the weakness of the director. This is another one of those movies who took on a span too much than could be made into a movie. Russell Crowe didn't have a long enough monologue in the entire movie worthy of the praise gratuitiously bestowed upon him by critics. No Gordon Gekko performance here. Crowe had some of the easiest lines in the whole movie. Phoenix on the other hand had some great lines. The fight scenes where thrown together in disarray, scenes which should have been the staple of the movie, stood empty and disappointing. Just because a movie takes on a huge cinematic scale like a Ben Hur doesn't make it great. This movie was very disappointing. Joaquin gave the best performance. Crowe gave a mediocre performance. This movie is not in the same class of some of the greatest like Goodfellas, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, Saving Private Ryan. This is a one time watcher. I could watch Goodfellas, Crouching Tiger and Scarface over and over again. This will stay on my shelf for a while.
Rating:
Summary: Let's cut the [bull], it's a good movie and nothing else
Review: I really think the OSCARS [are bad]. I think there is good acting here, i mean Russell Crowe and Joaquin Phoenix have shown they are good actors, but these are not extraordinary perfomances. Crowe didn't deserve the oscar either the movie. And Phoenix should have been nominated for QUILLS instead of GLADIATOR. There are some really good fight scenes, especially the one that has the tigers, but i can't understand why this movie is considered as a masterpice. THE THIN RED LINE is a masterpice and it didn't get any award. I think i will not watch anymore the Oscars.
Rating:
Summary: excellent acting wonderful action
Review: this movie brings us back to the old time big screen blockbusters like Ben Hur Spartacus and the Robe. Russell Crowe desreved the Acadamy award for this performance each of his films get better and better Joaquin Phoenix outdid himself as the jealous and paranoid leader after his father dies this is a must see movie
Rating: 
Summary: Fodder for Morons
Review: This is undoubtedly one of the worst movies of all time. I am totally shocked that Ridley Scott directed it, since he is one of my favorite directors (e.g., Alien, Bladerunner). ... Some of the moronic things about this horrible movie that drove me up a tree follow. The opening scene shows the Romans using something akin to napalm against their enemies. I thought napalm was invented by Dow Chemical in WWII! The main character rides from Germany to the Mediterranean coast of Spain on a horse - in one day. Did you know that tigers live in Africa? The Roman gladius (the sword they used) could not be used for hacking only for stabbing due to its fragility because of the metallurgy of that day. A Roman emperor entering the Colliseum to fight a gladiator??? Sure. Reed gives a truly horrible and cadaverous (fittingly I guess since he died during production) performance. There are continuous nauseous flashback sequences of Crowe's son that made me ill. There's absolutely no evidence that Marcus Aureleus decided to make anyone other than Comodus emperor! Did I mention that the plot is totally boring and predictable, being a typical Hollywood formula with no surprises? The only good thing in this movie was the historically accurate reproduction of the Colliseum. I admit to being impressed with that. For the rest of the movie: feh! I'd give it no stars were that possible. This loathsome movie could only appeal to morons who have no grasp of history, plot, acting, geography (I still can't get over those tigers in Africa), or metallurgy, and who have taken a dramamine to combat the nauseous flashback scenes.
Rating:
Summary: Gladiator
Review: This movie got 20 stars because it is by far the best movie ever
Rating:
Summary: Not Anything That it is said to be
Review: I first saw this movie in the theatres against my own will because I had heard it was so bad. Two and a half hours later the bad things that I had heard about the movie were confirmed, so I dismissed it as just another Waterworld-like Hollywood flop. But several months later I saw it get nominated for and win the major golden globe. Whatever, the Golden Globes are stupid. Then it beat Traffic at the oscars also. I was wondering if i had seen the same film as everyone else. So I took another look at it, and its flaws were more present than ever. It was just too standard a film. Nothing special about it. There was the typical plot of the protagonist losing everything unfairly and then having to get it all back himself using whatever means necessary. The visuals were very good, but that's about it. Russel Crowe won the Oscar, and it made up for his loss in the previous year, but this was in such a bad film that he won. The golden age of Roman Movies is long gone. We hadn't had one in so long I guess everybody wanted it so bad to suceed and be a good movie. And everybody thought it was a good movie. With the exception of the realists who judge a movie based on its content, not its idea. Because you can have the best idea in the world for a movie, but it's all in the execution.
| 
