Sunday, March 23, 2008

Brad's All-Time Fave Films: #5


Gladiator (2000)

It's hard to make a strong argument about this being one of the deepest or most moving films of our time, but it is what it is and it is good at what it is. That it won 5 Oscars, including Best Picture, I guess shouldn't go without mentioning, so I guess I'm not the only one that liked it.

Gladiator came out about a month before I graduated (indeed, I cut school with Mike Failor to see it the day it came out) and caught me at a time when I was still relishing the opportunity to finally see rated 'R' movies after my parents' "no R movies till you're 17" curfew was finally outgrown. The plot is not why I went, to say the least. And Gladiator delivered what I wanted in spades. Epic violence on a historical scale, with some awesome views into the Rome we learn about in European History class. Those stunning views of Rome have been even more enhanced upon by the HBO series Rome, but I digress.

I'm not going to sit here and say that Russell Crowe gave a memorable performance or it kept me thinking for days after I saw it, but that's not why I saw it. I know that there are plot holes and historical anachronisms, and that if they were trying to make it real, the characters would have spoken Latin and we could have read subtitles. But so what? At the end of the day, as with most movies I watch, I wanted to be entertained. In fact, Maximus didn't even need to ask "am I not entertained?" Indeed I still am, sir.

12 Comments:

Blogger steven said...

Oh sigh...Gladiator? Give me a camera, a cat, and a Komodo dragon, and I'll entertain you for 2 hours.

1:10 AM  
Blogger Brad said...

I can get the camera and the Komodo dragon, can you find a cat?

If you can, you'll get a five-star review too!

1:16 AM  
Blogger steven said...

Oh...I guess I COULD dress them up like gladiators...but I might go over budget.

8:28 AM  
Blogger Brad said...

don't do it then if you can't go all the way.

9:46 AM  
Blogger steven said...

you know i always go all the way.

8:38 PM  
Blogger Brad said...

of course I do sillybuns!

9:57 AM  
Blogger Chris said...

C'mon Brad, you know Master and Commander was a better Russell Crowe movie than Gladiator.

By the way, am I the only one that wonders how in the world Gladiator won Best Picture at the Oscars in 2000? I know, I know, that wasn't the best year for movies, but I think Crouching Tiger was hands down better (and more innovative) than Gladiator.

Sorry Brad, but you disappointed me with this one.

5:35 PM  
Blogger Brad said...

I'm sure you could get Steve to agree with you that "Gladiator" didn't deserve Best Picture, but I didn't even like "Crouching Tiger", so I'm glad the decision went the way it did.

9:42 AM  
Blogger steven said...

I liked Master and Commander...if we're comparing Russell Crowe movies.

11:35 AM  
Blogger Brad said...

oh so did I, very much so, but I liked them for different reasons. And if you sat me down on my couch right now and made me watch one of the two, I'd probably pick "Gladiator" more times than I'd pick "Master and Commander".

1:44 AM  
Blogger Chris said...

But the quality of a movie isn't necessarily determined solely by how many times you're willing to watch it, right?

5:58 PM  
Blogger Brad said...

right, I just find "Gladiator" to be very entertaining and that was worth a #5 spot.

10:09 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home