Historian calls Gladiator 2 film 'total Hollywood bulls**t' and everyone is saying the same thing
Joe Yates
Featured Image Credit: Paramount Pictures
A historian has given a damning review of the new blockbuster film which fans have been waiting decades for.
Later this month, on November 22, Gladiator II will roll out at cinemas across the US and around the world, and critics lucky enough to have watched early screenings have heaped praise on director Ridley Scott's creation.
One of those was journalist Scott Menzel, who claimed 'Gladiator II is Ridley Scott’s best film since The Martian', writing: “A big, bloody and bad ass action spectacle that builds upon the legacy of the original.
Advert
"The film showcases beautiful set pieces and a lot of epic battles. Paul Mescal shines. Denzel Washington chews up the scenery quite a bit here and looks like he is having the time of his life here."
It features a star-studded cast with Normal People’s Paul Mescal, The Last Of Us’ Pedro Pascal and Denzel Washington - 24 years after the original premiered.
The movie is set two decades after the conclusion of Russell Crowe’s Gladiator, and it sees 28-year-old Mescal taking over the role of Connie Nielsen’s son Lucius.
But not everyone was a fan of the Oscar-winning director's take on Roman life, as Dr. Shadi Bartsch, a classics professor at the University of Chicago, labeled it 'total Hollywood bull***t'.
As a historian it may be tedious watching a film and knowing of the historical inaccuracies - and there are a few in 86-year-old Scott's film.
Arguably the most shocking is a scene depicting a Roman drinking a cup of tea at a cafe while reading a newspaper - a newspaper!
The first documented news sheet that circulated is documented to have first been published as early as 1566 in Venice, Italy, some 1,355 years after when Gladiator II is set, in 211 AD.
Speaking to The Hollywood Reporter about it, Bartsch said: "They did have daily news — Acta Diuma — but it was carved and placed at certain locations.
"You had to go to it, you couldn’t hold it at a cafe. Also, they didn’t have cafes!"
Bartsch, who has written several books about ancient Rome, also mentioned the scene in which we saw a shark in the trailer of the blockbuster - slamming the film she said: "I don’t think Romans knew what a shark was!"
Although she conceded that the Romans would have known about rhinos and it is likely they introduced one to the Coliseum before, adding: "Martial wrote a poem in 80 A.D. about a rhinoceros tossing a bull up to the sky."
And everyone on Reddit is saying the same thing as Bartsch - that it is historically inaccurate.
One user wrote: "A non-story. Fictional movies are often not totally historically accurate."
While another joked: "Wait until the historian hears about an island full of dinosaurs that we created from a mosquito’s blood!!"
As for Scott, he told the Hollywood Reporter he isn't too fussed about historical detail (surprise, surprise), adding: "By the time you get to 2024, it’s all speculation."