The night before I went to see "Gladiator 2," my friend and I watched the original "Gladiator." When it was over, I turned to him and said, "That was probably a mistake." There was no way that the new one would live up to what we had watched. Spoiler for the review: while it had some things to enjoy, it did not come close to its predecessor.

Set 16 years after the first movie, "Gladiator 2" shows Rome still conquering countries. When Rome attacks his (adopted) home and kills his wife, Hanno (Paul Mescal) becomes a gladiator for Macrinus (Denzel Washington). He ends up in Rome, fighting in the Colosseum, where he must face his past and finds himself in the middle of a chaotic plan to overthrow the emperors. 

The past week, I saw an article that boiled sequels down to this: Does it make the events of the original mean something? This one fails at that. When the original ends, we are given the idea that the Roman Senate gains more power and Rome is "given back to the people." In the 16 years since Maximus died, Rome has Looked at it through that lens; he failed to do anything except kill the evil emperor. Luckily, this movie is so forgettable that it doesn’t ruin the original. 

This movie is so enamored with "Gladiator" that the plots are basically the same (a general becomes a slave, becomes a gladiator, and challenges the emperor). It doesn't do anything interesting with it. One of the most memorable scenes in the original was when Maximus fights another gladiator while surrounded by four tigers. They take that concept and have two fight sequences with animals, neither of which is as interesting as the tigers from the first movie. The ghost of Maximus looms large over this movie. Hanno has a connection to him (I won’t spoil that like the trailers did), and Lucila (Connie Nielson), who was in the original, also plays a significant role in this one. I wish this had been entirely separate from “Gladiator,” with brand-new characters and an original story.  That would have made for a much more interesting story and, ultimately, a better movie. 

I will give the movie this: the action sequences are good. At one point, they depict a naval battle in a flooded Colusuium. There is evidence that the Romans actually did this, and it's cool to see that shown on screen. I do wish the battle was longer and more impressive. The initial attack in which Hanno is captured is fantastic. The Roman navy attacked with overwhelming numbers, and it was over as soon as their ships made a landing. This is one of the few sequences where “Gladiator 2” separates itself from the original. The rest of the action scenes are lesser versions of what the first one gave us.  I won't say that "Gladiator 2" is a bad movie. There are some things to enjoy, but it will never become the cultural touchstone that "Gladiator" was.

When I saw that Denzel Washington was in this, I thought, "Well, clearly, there has to be something to this movie if he is in it." Still, I don't think even he could make this movie more than a forgettable sequel to an Academy Award winner. I wanted this to be a good movie. I am a fan of the original and, given his age, this is very possibly the last time director Ridley Scott will be behind the camera. He deserves to go out on a higher note than this. 

6/10

Rated R for strong, bloody violence

2h. 28m.