I am going to start right off by stating that I’ve always been a fan of this film. I saw it in the theater when it first came out and I was a big fan of it then, and I’ve continued to like this movie very much over the years. Gladiator is a terrific blend of outstanding action, very good acting, strong thematic elements, and an intricately woven story. The action sequences in the Colosseum and other arenas are tense and bloody without being gratuitous. They actually showed the brutality that passed as entertainment in those days, and we see that these were actual human beings that were forced in to the carnage.

The acting is also great in this film, if somewhat over the top. Russell Crowe is the hero and does a great job of combining Maximus’ military integrity and intensity with the dry  wit of someone who has seen it all. But there are also some very good performances from Joaquin Phoenix as the usurper of the throne, Commodus; Connie Nielsen as Lucilla, Commodus’ sister and a former lover of Maximus; Oliver Reed (Sikes from Oliver!) as Proximo, the former gladiator and now slave trader who serves as Maximus’ Mentor in the arena; and finally Richard Harris played Marcus Aurelius, the emperor who would not willingly pass  the crown to his son. All of these performances, as well as those of the more minor roles, displayed characters with depth, emotion and real human frailty.

Actually, and perhaps ironically, my biggest criticism with Gladiator is in the characters of General Maximus Decimus Meridius, as well as Commodus. I was taught, and I’ve written in this space, that when composing your heroes and villains that it’s important to give them depth. You always want to give your hero some flaw, especially an inner flaw that he or she needs to overcome in order to achieve real growth as a character. Barring that, at least some sort of personality flaw that allows them to remain relatable to the average movie-going audience member. You want your main character to be a hero, but not necessarily a superhero. On the opposite side of that coin is the villain, who should be a carbon reflection of your hero. Everything that your hero is, your villain is not. Likewise, everything that your villain is, is what you’re hero could become if he makes the wrong choices. But the main thing is that you want to give your villain some sort of quality that makes him feel human. Ultimately your villain needs to be a human being who feels like he’s the hero of his own story, but he has to have something, be it wit or charm or humor or intelligence that makes him more than merely a monster. They were really close with Commodus. He clearly feels like he’s the hero of his own story, but I never get the sense that he feels what he’s doing is best for Rome. He’s selfish and spoiled and vain and wants to have sex with his sister. Yes, he is kind to his young nephew, Lucius, but that kindness is merely a veil for him to disguise his true intentions. There are two things that director Ridley Scott and Screenwriters David Franzoni, William Nicholson and John Logan failed to do. One of those things was to give Commodus some sort of human quality that kept him from being merely a monster.

The other thing they failed to do was to give Maximus any kind of character flaw. Even his name, for crying out loud, is MAXIMUS! For the most part, Maximus is a great character. He’s likable, he’s admired by his men, and he’s a natural leader. Even his fellow gladiators quickly fall in line because he earns their respect and admiration in the arena. He plans their battles so that they can survive, so naturally they’d follow him anywhere, including the climactic battle against Roman Centurions. Rather than giving him a character flaw, per se, Scott, Franzoni, Nicholson, and Logan humanized Maximus by making him grieve for his wife and child who were murdered at the hands of Commodus. While that is certainly something that anyone could relate to, it’s kind of an easy way to do it. Killing off a close family member is how any amateur storyteller can  get an emotional response from an audience, and it’s as cliche as any storytelling motif that there is. It’s not a great way to add character depth. Avenging their deaths is Maximus’ main motivating factor, and we can argue over the virtues of that, but I personally do not consider that to be a negative character trait. In fact, one of the most powerful moments in the film is when Maximus first reveals himself in the arena to Commodus, and after stating his real name and position, he says, “Father to a murdered son. Husband to a murdered wife. And I will have my vengeance, in this life or the next.” He comes off there as nothing but heroic and defiant towards an evil man and he forces that evil man to spare him in order to maintain his power. So even in attempting vengeance, Maximus appears heroic, just like in pretty much every other point in the film. He’s a likable character, and I enjoyed going on this journey with him, but I wish that he had been given more depth by the filmmakers.

The signature of this film is obviously the action sequences. Gladiator joined the ranks of Braveheart, Patton, Ben-Hur and Bridge on the River Kwai as action epics that won Best Picture. Ridley Scott, known previously for such films as Alien, Thelma and Louise and Blade Runner, and was certainly not afraid to use graphic violence graphic violence to tell his story, took the graphic nature that we had seen in Braveheart up a notch for Gladiator. This is a graphically violent film, but not at all in a gratuitous way. This is a film about a violent time in human history and the people who had to live through a particularly violent period in it. It’s also worth noting that this violent lifestyle was forced upon them by the whims of others. Whether Maximus is an honored general fighting at the behest of Emperor Marcus Aurelius for the glory of Rome, or an enslaved gladiator fighting to save his own life for the entertainment of Commodus and the Roman citizenry, he is still fighting and killing other men at the pleasure of his superior/masters. That made the violence necessary in order to tell the story, and showing the violent and graphic manner in which these people died exposed the irony in “the glory of Rome”, which was one of the central themes of the film. Rome was the center of the known world in those days and represented the height of technology, education and governance. And yet, 50,000 people would crowd into the Coliseum to watch men slaughter each other for sport.

Aside from the violent nature of the action, the choreography of it and its cinematography are spectacular. They also did an excellent job of increasing the intensity of each action sequence, as well as the suspense as they progress throughout the film. The first action sequence is the final battle of the Roman campaign in Germania. While the action is intense,  there isn’t a lot of suspense, as the Romans are seasoned and battle-hardened soldiers going up against what are essentially barbarians. The next big action sequences involve the arena in Zucchabar, a desolate Roman province in the North of Africa where Maximus is first exposed to the brutality of the arena. The fighting is frenetic and brutal, but Maximus’ training allows him and his new compatriots to survive. Maximus, now known as The Spaniard, becomes a famous gladiator, and he and the other gladiators that Proximo owns are taken to Rome where Commodus is staging 150 days of games in the Colosseum. This is like the Major Leagues, and Maximus and the others have to step up their games in order to survive. These battles are more choreographed, involving more professional gladiators, chariots, riders on horseback, and even chained tigers. These action sequences are intense and dramatic, and each one of them in their own way help to drive the story. Gladiator is one of those rare action films where the action is in the film as a means to telling the story, rather than the story just being the bridge between action sequences.

For example, Maximus’ penultimate battle in the arena is against a retired gladiator who was unbeaten before gaining his freedom. This battle is set up by Commodus as a means to kill Maximus without him having to do it since Maximus has grown to such popularity. Commodus also rigs the game with chained tigers, making it nearly impossible for either gladiator to survive. Yet, Maximus emerges from the hand to hand combat victorious, standing with sword in hand over his vanquished foe with 50,000 Romans chanting, “Kill! Kill! Kill!” Commodus give the thumbs-down signal, ordering Maximus to kill the gladiator, but Maximus throws down his sword and walks away in open defiance of the emperor. Someone from the crowd exclaims, “Maximus the merciful!”, thus making Commodus’ hold on the crown that much more tenuous. There is a clear set up to this action sequence and there are clear consequences due to its outcome. That makes the sequence an integral part of the story as well as a vehicle for the story’s progression.

That leads me to the story itself, and it’s a very good one. Gladiator is a story that is told in four acts. Act I, which is Maximus’ Ordinary World takes place on the battlefield. Maximus is a general who longs to be done fighting so that he can tend his farm, be a husband to his wife and a father to his son. However he is very talented on the battlefield, both at leading his troops and killing his enemies. In fact he is a master motivator, and it’s clear that his soldiers would go to the ends of the earth for him. He is also in the good graces of Caesar Marcus Aurelius, who views him almost as an adopted son and provides Maximus with his Call to Adventure. Marcus asks Maximus to serve as the Steward of Rome until the Senate can take over and Rome can become a Republic again. Maximus initially Refuses the Call, but remains loyal to Marcus and seems as though he’ll ultimately acquiesce to Marcus’ wishes. However Marcus’ decision is not acceptable to his actual son Commodus, who murders his father in a fit of passionate rage. Assuming the title of Caesar, Commodus then orders Maximus and his family to be killed.

Maximus Crosses the First Threshold into Act II and the Special World of the Adventure by killing his would-be assassins and then racing home only to discover that he’s too late, and his wife and son have been crucified and burned alive. Despondent and wounded from fighting, Maximus loses consciousness and is picked up by slave traders who take him to Zucchabar and sell him to Proximo so that he can be trained as a gladiator. In Zucchabar Maximus, again known only as The Spaniard) excels in the arena, and he and his allies are sent to Rome to compete in the Colosseum. It is here that Proximo turns into a Mentor to Maximus. Proximo tells Maximus that he’s a good gladiator, but that he could be great, and that greatness could ultimately buy him his freedom. He also tells him that he’ll get an opportunity to perform before the emperor, and that truly does get Maximus’ attention.

The third act of Gladiator has Maximus and the others arriving in Rome, and Maximus reveals himself to Commodus, as well as Lucilla who eventually tries to reach out to Maximus telling him that his defiance of Commodus could eventually lead to Commodus’ downfall. Maximus continues to prove his worth in the arena, defeating all comers and gaining popularity and notoriety that starts to exceed even that of Commodus. He also continues to gain the trust of his comrades and the attention of the Senate. In fact, Lucilla tries to arrange a meeting between Maximus and Senator Gracchus, but Maximus doesn’t see how it can help, and he again refuses the call. Then Maximus sees his old servant Cicero, who tells him that his armies will follow his command if he can somehow return them, and that sparks in Maximus an idea.

The Fourth Act begins the conspiracy. Cicero finds Lucilla and tells her that Maximus will meet with the Senator. Lucilla arranges the meeting and Maximus tells the Senator of Marcus’ final wish, and that he will bring his army into Rome, and kill Commodus and then leave Rome under the control of the Senate. The plan never gets put into place, however, as Commodus finds out about it from Lucilla’s unwitting son. Senator Gracchus is arrested, Proximo is killed, as is Cicero, and Maximus is captured. The climax of the film pits Commodus fighting Maximus in the Colosseum after mortally wounding him when no one was looking. You’ll have to watch the movie to find out how it ends.

That’s the story in four acts. One other thing I would like to mention is the depth of this story. Scott, Franzoni, Logan, and Nicholson did an excellent job of creating a dramatic story, especially in the fourth act. We see what Maximus and the rest have to gain, and conversely what they have to lose. That is the lifeblood of drama, and if you’re an aspiring screenwriter or filmmaker, that is what you should be searching for in your own stories. That is where drama is born and nurtured. This story is also strong thematically. The Glory of Rome is always the backdrop, and yet we’re constantly shown the contradiction in that belief. The glory of Rome is an idea that either never existed or had been forgotten about, so that all that was left was some archaic belief. It was that type of depth in the story and in its ideas that ultimately won Gladiator Best Picture.

Did the Academy Get it Right?

I believe they did. Chocolat was a nice movie, but not really one that should have been nominated for Best Picture. I’m still puzzled how it was nominated over a movie like Cast Away. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon was a Chinese martial arts film that used some great acrobatics and camera work that hadn’t been seen before. The fight scenes were very entertaining, but I found the film to be too long and much of it tedious. The strongest competition probably came from Erin Brockovich and Traffic, the former being a David and Goliath story about a woman taking on giant chemical companies on behalf of the reluctant lawyer for whom she works and the latter being about the drug trafficking between Mexico and the United States. Both movies had excellent casts and terrific stories, but I’d probably give a slight edge to Erin Brockovich as the best of the non-winners for the year 2000. However none of them were as good as Gladiator, which was clearly the Best Picture of the year.