Jump to content

So Ridley Scott is directing a Gladiator sequel...


Muad'Dib

Recommended Posts

  • 5 weeks later...

Found this on Youtube. I really like what I'm hearing, and I'm hoping it's a return to form for Harry Gregson-Williams. My favorite scores by him are those like Kingdom of Heaven, The Last Duel, Narnia or Prince of Persia, and this seems like it's going to be very much in the same vein as that. And the movie has been receiving some great reviews from what I've read, so perhaps there's a chance of a nomination at the Oscars?

 

Beware of spoilers in the video, as it contains images from the movie!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you dig long and hard to find a negative review, Alex? Because most of the critical response is positive so far. I'll be seeing it myself, tomorrow morning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, A24 said:

This is the first review I'm watching, and she is usually too positive, is she not?

 

I don't know. I haven't seen it, and have no intention to. I just read your sentence below the video and took it to be a negative take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/11/2024 at 9:17 AM, Knight of Ren said:

Found this on Youtube. I really like what I'm hearing, and I'm hoping it's a return to form for Harry Gregson-Williams. My favorite scores by him are those like Kingdom of Heaven, The Last Duel, Narnia or Prince of Persia, and this seems like it's going to be very much in the same vein as that. And the movie has been receiving some great reviews from what I've read, so perhaps there's a chance of a nomination at the Oscars?

 

Beware of spoilers in the video, as it contains images from the movie!

 

 

The first violinist is really into it! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Thor said:

 

I don't know. I haven't seen it, and have no intention to. I just read your sentence below the video and took it to be a negative take.

 

She likes Scott, she even likes Napoleon and she loooooooooooooves Gladiator 1. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am cautiously optimistic about this movie. I think it will have great spectacle and cool battle scenes and good performances but my fear from the trailers is the rehashing of Maximus' lines and other sequel issues. Hearing Strength and honor and other iconic lines delivered by someone else just feels odd. I hope the movie is great though and the same goes for the score which based on the snippets that hav been released could be really good!

 

As a huge fan of the original movie which I saw in the cinema a month ago I don't think this movie will come close but hopefully it's a good time at the movies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GerateWohl said:

That voice hurts my ears. I couldn't listen longer than 10 minutes. 

 

You're just saying because she said Ridley should retire. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Davis said:

According to this review there are

  Reveal hidden contents

 in the Colosseum. 

It'd be nice if HGW quoted

Spoiler

JW's Jaws theme

Speaking of whom, I was listening to his piece:

On 10/11/2024 at 9:17 AM, Knight of Ren said:

Found this on Youtube. I really like what I'm hearing, and I'm hoping it's a return to form for Harry Gregson-Williams. My favorite scores by him are those like Kingdom of Heaven, The Last Duel, Narnia or Prince of Persia, and this seems like it's going to be very much in the same vein as that. And the movie has been receiving some great reviews from what I've read, so perhaps there's a chance of a nomination at the Oscars?

 

Beware of spoilers in the video, as it contains images from the movie!

 

And I wasn't terribly impressioned. The music sounded like it's trying to hard too be grand and epic, but at the same time is boring and doesn't go straight to the point. 

 

And I say this as the biggest Harry Gregson-Williams expert on this board :lol::P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't overly impressed with that suite either - the first couple of minutes just come across as standard 'epic music' with nothing either inspiring or coming across as Roman. Given what we just got for RoP, McCreary's take on this would've been really interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought this was a very good film.

 

You can't compare it to the original, one of the most iconic films in film history, with one of the most iconic scores. If that's your benchmark, it comes up short.

 

But taken on its own, it's far more textural than I had expected. It's certainly digital, but Scott makes the most of it and "grains" it out with smoke, light, objects, as usual. He's never been very good with interpersonal relationships, and with the extra gravitas of overly written dialogue, it sometimes becomes pompous. But so did the original.

 

HGW's score was also good, I thought. The battle and action music didn't do much for me, but there's some really lovely stuff for the more down-tempo/dreamy, or when there are ethnic elements. And the references to Zimmer's music are tastefully used throughout. Its first major appearance, for a flashback scene, was goosebumps all over. 

 

I expect the soundtrack to be very long, and in need of whittling. But we'll see. I saw Richard Harvey credited in the end titles, but it went by so quickly, I didn't notice what he did. Maybe some supervision of the choral material, which he tends to do well. Also additional music by Tom-something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Thor said:

I expect the soundtrack to be very long, and in need of whittling. But we'll see.

 

Be optimistic! HGW usually curates his albums very tightly to the extent that most people are screaming for an expanded edition.

 

Certainly, if it comes across as overly long, it won't be that he hasn't curated it - more likely that he's proud of his score and feels it flows well on album.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Thor said:

You can't compare it to the original, one of the most iconic films in film history, with one of the most iconic scores. If that's your benchmark, it comes up short.

 

Of course you can and should. It's a direct sequel. It's Gladiator II. The original is the only reason people would see this one unless maybe they're in prison and this is all they're showing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Thor said:

You can't compare it to the original, one of the most iconic films in film history, with one of the most iconic scores. If that's your benchmark, it comes up short.

Too bad because they have the same director who had every opportunity to make a film just as good or even better than the first. And people should and are comparing it to the original for the very same reason. And because it’s a sequel to the original.

 

Coppola was able to make a better sequel to The Godfather, although the benchmark was pretty high with the original film.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Davis said:

Too bad because they have the same director who had every opportunity to make a film just as good or even better than the first. And people should and are comparing it to the original for the very same reason. And because it’s a sequel to the original.

 

Coppola was able to make a better sequel to The Godfather, although the benchmark was pretty high with the original film.
 

 

When filmmakers decide to return to an old project about two decades after the fact, it's usually a recipe for dudsaster. KOTCS was a lame disappointment, Independence Day Resurgence was a pile of poo, Ghostbusters Afterlife was completely unnecessary, etc. etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Chen G. said:


Umm, is Gladiator not among the most iconic of all motion pictures?

 

Because it sure is!

 

Nah. It's popular and memorable. People misuse "iconic" to just mean something they like. It's become an annoying buzzword intensifier alongside its equally cringy cousin "literally".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“Iconic” is usually taken to mean memorable. Maximus’ reveal to Commodus, if nothing else, qualifies with flying colours, in the sense that at the mention of the name “Gladiator” the person on the street would recall that scene.

 

And if by “iconic” you take it to mean “outstanding and splendorous” then I would say Gladiator is that too. I’m tempted to throw “sacred” in there, for good measure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they mean "memorable", there's a word for it – "memorable"! You're trying to justify and rationalise the society-wide dilution of words that actually have their own specific meaning, which reserves them for a limited use. Instead nowadays people spew words around with reckless abandon within their sloppy vernacular because they can't help but resort to hyperbole.

 

I'd say the Colosseum is an icon. It's been universally recognised for centuries. But a Hollywood movie that features it? The kids reckon a TikTok video is also "iconic". No freakin' way are these all on the same level of iconography.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Iconic is a perfectly legitimate word to use in this context. The film has long since become a reference point in film and popular culture, whether you like it or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Train Station said:

It's a decent film, a very good one. I would never dare use the word "iconic" to describe a movie. God, no.

 

That's bizarre. Plenty of iconic films throughout history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I prefer to restrict my use of the word to describe things that actually are historical icons or symbols so that it has greater impact and significance when I decide it's appropriate, which isn't often, instead of making it another piece of worthless slang.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do agree about certain terms (like "masterpiece") being overused in today's society, but credit where credit is due. GLADIATOR is a film that fits the iconic bill, just like STAR WARS, PSYCHO, BEN HUR, TITANIC and many others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The Train Station said:

They're memorable and enduring. I like them very much. Iconic? Not in your life.

 

Thankfully, a film's position in history and popular culture is independent of your opinion of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Thor said:

 

Thankfully, a film's position in history and popular culture is independent of your (or anyone else's) opinion of them.

 

I believe my view is more honest and tempered than yours. Movies are really just frivolous and ephemeral entertainment, mostly disposable to normies, who might remember certain highlights – "iconic" that does not make. You're living in a cinephile bubble if you think these flicks qualify for descriptors that heap them a level of praise, reverence or veneration that exceeds what they deserve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gladiator is definitely an iconic film, no idea what Drax is on about

 

I've lost count of the number of references to this shot I've seen in other productions

 

3983e00610bf74607a806f652f74955f27e490c9

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

of course, but it's far from the only reason Gladiator is an iconic movie

 

And I'm talking as someone who saw the movie once in theaters when it came out and have never seen it since and haven't been that compelled to want to either

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a memorable and popular movie. But it's still cinematic kitsch, like all the other flicks Thor mentioned. For something to be truly "iconic", it must be transcendent – a religious symbol of worship. It's too extreme to describe something as trivial as movies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jay said:

Gladiator is definitely an iconic film, no idea what Drax is on about

 

I've lost count of the number of references to this shot I've seen in other productions

 

3983e00610bf74607a806f652f74955f27e490c9

 

A great shot doesn't make a film iconic. 

 

Imho it is a genuine classic historical drama, one of my all-time favorite films, but I wouldn't use the word "iconic", especially not because of a single shot however good it is.

 

Even in its own genre, BRAVEHEART is a much better film with a way better score.

 

Gladiator never needed a sequel btw, Ridley Scott could've made anything, yet he chose to make a sequel to a perfect film with a great ending, that had an actor whose charisma can never be equalled. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.