MovieChat Forums > Gladiator (2000) Discussion > Unequivocally a Bad Movie

Unequivocally a Bad Movie

posted 2 years ago by mirelurk (884)
7 replies | jump to latest

I have given this movie so many chances. I've probably seen it like 5 times, which is more than it deserves

Russell Crowe did not deserve to win the Oscar for Best Actor and this movie didn't deserve Best Picture. Crowe sleepwalks through the entire movie, it's not even in the top 10 of his best performances

It has such a generic feel. There is no attempt at historical authenticity. Not even a good script

The sole bright spot is Joaquin Phoenix. This is a thoroughly middling commercial movie, but Phoenix brings hammy artistic charm to his role

The sole

[–] brux (14666) 2 years ago

I have to agree with you. Gladiator was pure special effects nonsense. Pretty to look at but pointless.

> There is no attempt at historical authenticity.

True. I preferred I, Clavdivs by far.

> The sole bright spot is Joaquin Phoenix.

Can't stand this guy in anything.

[–] ATG6 (3000) 2 years ago

I watch it whenever it's on. It's a great, timeless movie.

[–] pjl69 (2529) 2 years ago

Ridley Scott's talent is wasted on masses.

[–] Joogle83 (4255) 2 years ago

No it isnt its my favorite Best Picture that deserved it oscars STFU and one the best Revenge Historical Movies

[–] KBiker (814) a year ago

The OP says he's seen this movie 5 times ("like 5 times," whatever that means), yet claims that it is a bad movie. What a glutton for punishment.

[–] Porsche911 (2849) a year ago

It was good 23 years ago! Mission: Impossible II however holds up very well! Releases the same year.

[–] Stratego (29511) 10 months ago

It's not the worst movie ever, but dang, yes. The script is non-existent, Crowe is boring as hell, the CGI is awful and while historical inaccuracy is acceptable to a certain degree it just became too far-fetched at times.