Action-Adventure Gladiator Sequel | Paramount


I don’t see it coming to fruition, though.
 
Last edited:
New trailer's out:



Looks like my worries were right:

They ARE retconning Lucius into being Maximus' son. Even though there was no hint of that in the first movie! Damn you, Ridley Scott!


Absolute nasty work they spoiled May Calamawy's death scene in the trailer.

First trailer was better.
 
New trailer's out:



Looks like my worries were right:

They ARE retconning Lucius into being Maximus' son. Even though there was no hint of that in the first movie! Damn you, Ridley Scott!

The trailer is much better than the first but yeah, don’t like that retcon.

Neither did Russell Crowe apparently.

But a couple of the things I’ve heard, I’m like, ‘No, no, no, that’s not in the moral journey of that particular character.’ But I can’t say anything, it’s not my place, I’m six foot under.

 
I'm going to see this for sure but yeah, y'all are right; the ties to the first movie should have been few and far. This would have worked fine without the connections.
 
New trailer's out:



Looks like my worries were right:

They ARE retconning Lucius into being Maximus' son. Even though there was no hint of that in the first movie! Damn you, Ridley Scott!


The trailer is much better than the first but yeah, don’t like that retcon.

Neither did Russell Crowe apparently.



It's not really a retcon:
There were quite a few folks over the years who speculated that Lucius was actually Maximus' son based at the backstory and subtext hinted in their first film.

The first film made it very clear that Maximus and Lucilla were previously lovers and that their relationship ended under strained circumstances. It could be that it was ended because they were both married and Maximus had a child on the way.

Lucilla made very impassioned pleas to Maximus to protect Lucius that can have been read as subtext that she was importing him to save "their" son.
In short, it is not a retcon because it does not contradict any of the text of the first film and is in fact consistent with subtext and audience speculation. You may not like the narrative choice and that is totally cool, but it is not some sort of out of left field retcon.
 
It's not really a retcon:
There were quite a few folks over the years who speculated that Lucius was actually Maximus' son based at the backstory and subtext hinted in their first film.

The first film made it very clear that Maximus and Lucilla were previously lovers and that their relationship ended under strained circumstances and that it was ended because they were both married and Maximus had a child on the way.

Lucilla made very impassioned pleas to Maximus to protect Lucius that can have been read as subtext that she was importing him to save "their" son.
In short, it is not a retcon because it does not contradict any of the text of the first film and is in fact consistent with subtext and audience speculation. You may not like the narrative choice and that is totally cool, but it is not some sort of out of left field retcon.

Well, it can’t be just me if even Russell Crowe thinks it somewhat betrays the character.

I guess to be more technical, the retcon is in Maximus’s character. That he would
cheat on his wife when it was established his wife and child were the most important people to him in the world.

Maximus and Lucilla having a previous relationship is established, yes. How it ended is NOT established and definitely not cause they were fooling around when both married.

Now, from a story perspective for a sequel, sure it makes a lot of sense. And of course makes emotional sense for an audience. But it does change how we see Maximus when you go back to the first movie. That’s the character retcon.
 
Well, it can’t be just me if even Russell Crowe thinks it somewhat betrays the character.

I guess to be more technical, the retcon is in Maximus’s character. That he would
cheat on his wife when it was established his wife and child were the most important people to him in the world.

Maximus and Lucilla having a previous relationship is established, yes. How it ended is NOT established and definitely not cause they were fooling around when both married.

Now, from a story perspective for a sequel, sure it makes a lot of sense. And of course makes emotional sense for an audience. But it does change how we see Maximus when you go back to the first movie. That’s the character retcon.
There is nothing in the interview providing any evidence that Crowe's discomfort is related to the "retcon". He doesn't even say with which character's moral journey he thinks the new film is inconsistent. He probably means Maximus given that is where his investment was with the previous project, but you never know.

We also don't know if
Maximus even cheated. It could be that Lucilla broke off their relationship as soon as she realized she was pregnant and married Varus. Maximus, feeling scorned, married someone else back home.
Crowe could be making assumptions and may not know the story details since he isn't involved with the project.
 
It's not really a retcon:
There were quite a few folks over the years who speculated that Lucius was actually Maximus' son based at the backstory and subtext hinted in their first film.

The first film made it very clear that Maximus and Lucilla were previously lovers and that their relationship ended under strained circumstances and that it was ended because they were both married and Maximus had a child on the way.

Lucilla made very impassioned pleas to Maximus to protect Lucius that can have been read as subtext that she was importing him to save "their" son.
In short, it is not a retcon because it does not contradict any of the text of the first film and is in fact consistent with subtext and audience speculation. You may not like the narrative choice and that is totally cool, but it is not some sort of out of left field retcon.
Really? I don't recall that in the first movie. So, ok, they had it set up in the first movie and it could have been a long-standing fan theory that Scott's using. That's fine and way better than trying to turn Alien into Jurassic Park because he was obsessed with David.
 
Really? I don't recall that in the first movie. So, ok, they had it set up in the first movie and it could have been a long-standing fan theory that Scott's using. That's fine and way better than trying to turn Alien into Jurassic Park because he was obsessed with David.
To be fair, the first film could also be interpreted the other way, but there are definitely seeds in the first story this can be built off of. I should also correct a typo in my previous post.
There is nothing in the previous film stating that Maximus and Lucilla's relationship was when they were married or that they broke it off because Maximus had a kid on the way. My post should have read "and it could be that it ended badly because..."
 
To be fair, the first film could also be interpreted the other way, but there are definitely seeds in the first story this can be built off of. I should also correct a typo in my previous post.
There is nothing in the previous film stating that Maximus and Lucilla's relationship was when they were married or that they broke it off because Maximus had a kid on the way. My post should have read "and it could be that it ended badly because..."
That's fair.
 
It's not really a retcon:
There were quite a few folks over the years who speculated that Lucius was actually Maximus' son based at the backstory and subtext hinted in their first film.

The first film made it very clear that Maximus and Lucilla were previously lovers and that their relationship ended under strained circumstances. It could be that it was ended because they were both married and Maximus had a child on the way.

Lucilla made very impassioned pleas to Maximus to protect Lucius that can have been read as subtext that she was importing him to save "their" son.
In short, it is not a retcon because it does not contradict any of the text of the first film and is in fact consistent with subtext and audience speculation. You may not like the narrative choice and that is totally cool, but it is not some sort of out of left field retcon.
I have assumed my entire life that this was the movie's intention. I'd probably prefer if it wasn't the case but I didn't even know it was controversial!
 
460232.9135ee9d.5000x5000o.892f47c49231.gif
 
Looking up gladiator costumes for when I go watch this movie. I'll also be wearing it to the Renaissance Festival, which should be a few hours earlier that same day on Nov 23rd.
 
I dont see the big deal in making him the son of Maximus, honestly. There is enough in the 1st movie that hints at it. I just ultimately think based on trailers that it just looks like the same movie. That's more my issue as of now
 
Lucius never came across as Maximus' son to me in the first movie. Not a fan of this retcon myself.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"