Action-Adventure Gladiator Sequel | Paramount

[Webfoot Hero]

Not sure anyone was asking for this but I guess Ridley Scott can do whatever he likes.

 

[Marvolo]

Love Gladiator. In no way needs a sequel.

Who wants to watch a whole movie about Lucius?

Russell Crowe and Joaquin Phoenix were the movie.

Me. I love books and movies and shows about ancient rome, and the Roman emperors were an interesting group of people who were surrounded by political intrigue, scheming, and murder.

 

[Iceman]

So which of the Chrises is going to play Lucius? My money's on Hemsworth.

Haha. That said Hemsworth would probably look really good as a gladiator type character. Plus he has experience in the arena lol.

 

[Iceman]

Me. I love books and movies and shows about ancient rome, and the Roman emperors were an interesting group of people who were surrounded by political intrigue, scheming, and murder.

Same here.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Someone lamented the loss of truly epic historical dramas/fantasy movies in the last few years in another forum about a month back and I agree with him.

There's a big possibility that Sir Ridley screws this thing up and makes an inferior sequel. But I'll take that chance. I would much rather have him try and do something if he has an idea.

 

[Prettyricky]

Would it be anout maximis still or another gladiator? Kind of weird

 

[samsnee]

The actor who played the son was recently on Agents of Shield as Strucker's son but I doubt they will bring him back for this.

Not a really a fan of this idea. I'd much rather follow Djimon Hounsou's character if we're going to revisit a character from the original.

 

[Spider-Fan]

No mystery as to why this never saw the light of day, that is without doubt the worst sequel idea for any film in relation to it's first film, that I have ever heard.

Part of me wishes it happened so I could laugh at its insanity. That would have been a movie Riiftrax would have existed for

 

[harlequinade]

Someone needs to save Ridley Scott from himself/

 

[Blitzkrieg]

SHH

Sir Ridley Scott

 

[BrollySupersj]

No no no no no, stop this madness.

 

[Iceman]

A gladiator movie with gladiators? Confusing!

Technically a movie called Gladiator should have only one gladiator right?

 

[samsnee]

 

[Sithborg]

Sir Ridley, no. Please stop.

 

[Abudefduf]

Yes! Just like millions of other people, I've been waiting for a Gladiator sequel focusing on *checks notes* Commodus' sister's kid my entire life. Sir Ridley Scott knows what the majority wants.

 

[Iceman]

Will he be repeating the immortal line:

“There, there, there, there, there, there, there..and I got you.”

If so, hopefully in a less annoying voice.

 

[Abudefduf]

Of course he will. You can't make a Lucius movie and not have him say his most iconic line.

 

[Loden Greatstorm]

Yes! Just like millions of other people, I've been waiting for a Gladiator sequel focusing on *checks notes* Commodus' sister's kid my entire life. Sir Ridley Scott knows what the majority wants.

 

[Maximus 36]

Really have no interest in this at all. I also remember the insane sequel idea as well as the idea for a prequel they kept talking about.

Gladiator is perfect as it is...leave this one alone please!

(It was also my 1st DVD and Blu-ray as well!)

 

[Marvolo]

Honestly I bet this is only a sequel because it adds built in marketing potential. Ridley probably just wants to do another film set in ancient rome and this time make it about an Emoeror. And here he has Gladiator with a fanbase and established marketing power. So he makes Lucius the main character and tells the studio they can market this as a sequel to Gladiator. That makes the studio happy and Ridley gets the greenlight to make another film about Ancient Rome.

 

[godisawesome]

The first movie was not even remotely historically accurate. Scott took weaponry, armor, tactics, people, architecture etc from different eras and combined them to create the best looking battles, moments, and story that he could.

They can really do whatever they want to with Lucius and other characters. Make up battles, and move dates, people, and events around. Only history fans or sticklers for anachronism will notice or care. General audiences will go along with it and enjoy it as long as it's an enjoyable film.

Considering how the historical Commodus's death was followed by something called "The Year of the Five Emperors," there's definetly some potential for doing crazy major pseudo-history storytelling. The biggest actual issue I can see with making a sequel to Gladiator right out is that Galdiator tries to end with a "Then Rome became a Republic again!" Ending... But that was also a ton of horse**** as a historical story anyhow, as was much of the film. So maybe they just play with the actual fall of the Western empire for their story, and just generalize how that happened as a kind of karmic justice for Maximus's final requests being failed.

I say, they should just go ahead and fully embrace the ahistorical nature of Gladiator and just continue to make a kind of "amalgamated Roman Empire" they can tell the story in. Maybe have Commdodus's death followed up by a Civil War based off the numerous ones that followed Commodus's death: not just the Year of the Five Emperors, but maybe even go full Crisis of the Third Century, with General's being proclaimed emperor left and right, whole provinces splitting off and going independent, Germanic tribes invading, and a generally anarchic mess that Lucius has to try and survive.

 

[Doctor Jones]

If you have to make it, I'd take Cave's concept over something like this. Just totally go for it because otherwise it's never gonna match up. Because why the **** not? It's Gladiator 2. Go insane. I'd rather it go in a completely separate direction that offsets any pre conceived expectations than a more typical sequel that will just only be compared to the original.

 

[Iceman]

Honestly I bet this is only a sequel because it adds built in marketing potential. Ridley probably just wants to do another film set in ancient rome and this time make it about an Emoeror. And here he has Gladiator with a fanbase and established marketing power. So he makes Lucius the main character and tells the studio they can market this as a sequel to Gladiator. That makes the studio happy and Ridley gets the greenlight to make another film about Ancient Rome.

As long as it's good I can live with that.

 

[godisawesome]

As long as it's good I can live with that.

The only thing I'd be anxious and worried about is the script. Scott's a great director... But he has shown that he works at his best when the script is inspired and exciting, and that he's not necessarily the best at evaluating between a serviceable but unexciting script and one truly worthy of his skills.

My hope is that whoever writes the script is someone who's aware of what elements of Roman history post-Commodus could be exploited for great stories, but most especially, someone who has a plan for how to make Lucius an engaging and worthy lead character. Robin Hood has some decent understanding of the interesting historical elements of the setting... But alos probably the blandest version of the legendary outlaw we've ever seen.

I'd love it if Lucius's story arc were one of a Roman patriot like Maximus was slowly becoming embittered, pessimistic, and eventually disgusted with the decay of the Empire. Imagine a story where a guy who worships Maximus as a hero, and who desperately wants to believe that the Empire will become a republic again, strives through much of the film to try and help end a deeply schismatic and violent period of civil war between numerous Generals and would be emperors, only to be betrayed by whoever he's fighting under... And then he ends up hooking up with those Germanic tribes that are entering the empire with some others who were betrayed, exiled, or deserted.

There's a wealth of historical elements that could be employed or reinterpreted for a film that wants to tell a story set in a pseudo-historical Rome.

You want a violent warlord of an Emperor for the villain? Maybe base them off Caracalla, who seemed psychotic but competent, and who murdered his own brother rather than share power, or Maximinius Thaex, who was the first major "barracks emperor," a *giant* of a man who despised the Senate and the city in favor of the legions, or if you want someone more clever and morally complicated, maybe make a version for Diocletian, who mixed his classic Roman virtues and long term ambitions for the greater empire with a violently reactionary stance against Christianity and an absurd inability to see how his plans for the Tetrarchy wound up leading to another civil war when he allowed his second to screw things up with different personnel.

You want heroic Emperors or Generals for the story? Aurelian was the man who managed to reunite the Empire in his four years as Emperor, generally while also being merciful and controlled, Constantius was a loyal servant of Diocletian who never seemed to be overreaching or grasping and combined traditional Roman values with a tolerance of Christians and barbarians, or if you want a morally complicated grey character in opposition to the complicated Diocletian from above, how about Constantius's son, who both killed his son and wife and also failed to secure peace after his reign, but still gets called St. Constantine for ending the civil war of the Tetrarchy, building Constantinople, and ushering in Christianity. If you want to go whole hog into the later empires "puppet emperor" period, maybe have Flavius Aetius or Syagrius as the "Last of the Romans" Generals holding things together.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

If I was doing a Gladiator sequel I would indeed do a Year of Five Emperors story with Septimius Severus as the main character. I think that's more than interesting enough for a feature film.