• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Gladiator 2 Trailer

poppabk

poppabk

Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
Looks suitably epic, but hopefully the trailer is slightly deceptive and it doesn't tread the same path as the first movie too closely.
 
winjer

winjer

Member
This looks like trash.
The rap music. The rhino cgi. The gladiator costumes.
The people who made this don't give a flying fuck about their own movie. Especially Ridley.

And ffs, they have ancient Romans calling the Flavian Amphitheater, as the Colosseum.
 
Last edited:
Putonahappyface

Putonahappyface

Member
Y2kzNFG.gif
 
ChuckeRearmed

ChuckeRearmed

Member
Visually looks good but that music. They should have played "Not like us" or something 🤣

ahtlas7 said:
Made by people who don’t understand why the first is still loved? It looks like what they did with 300 (2) Rise of an Empire unfortunately.
Click to expand...
Well I think it was pretty successful? Though I did not even know that there was a continuation of "Leonidas and his gym bros vs the woke crowd".
 
Last edited:
Davesky

Davesky

Member
Now just wait for the overly melodramatic Now We Are Free trailer.

La la da pa da le na da na
Ve va da pa da le na la dumb da
 
Dirk Benedict

Dirk Benedict

Member
The opening scene in Gladiator, the one that takes place in Germania... that by itself shits all over this trailer.
Still, I'll want to give it a watch just to see how inept hollywood has gotten. Gladiator was memorable throughout the whole movie.
It was such a good movie in that, you rooted for multiple characters and despise others.
In retrospect, it really was an engaging experience that isn't easily duplicated. Also, using, Lucius for the MC seems kind of lazy, but again... gonna see it. :messenger_weary:
 
Tal Shiar Agent

Tal Shiar Agent

Banned
winjer said:
And ffs, they have ancient Romans calling the Flavian Amphitheater, as the Colosseum.
Click to expand...
It's almost like the film is in English for a modern audience or something.

Also the name Flavian Amphitheater wasn't used until late antiquity, hundreds of years after the events of these films. It would've just been called the amphitheater at the time.
 
winjer

winjer

Member
Tal Shiar Agent said:
It's almost like the film is in English for a modern audience or something.

Also the name Flavian Amphitheater wasn't used until late antiquity, hundreds of years after the events of these films. It would've just been called the amphitheater at the time.
Click to expand...

We don't really know what the ancient Romans called it. Maybe it was just Amphitheater. Or maybe, they called it Flavian Amphitheater, because of the patronage that originated it. Or even Amphitheatrum Caesareum, as it's referred in some poetry.
But what it wasn't called at the time, is Colosseum.

And let's not pretend that modern audiences are that stupid, that they can't understand that the Flavian Amphitheater is the Colosseum.
 
ChuckeRearmed

ChuckeRearmed

Member
winjer said:
We don't really know what the ancient Romans called it. Maybe it was just Amphitheater. Or maybe, they called it Flavian Amphitheater, because of the patronage that originated it. Or even Amphitheatrum Caesareum, as it's referred in some poetry.
But what it wasn't called at the time, is Colosseum.

And let's not pretend that modern audiences are that stupid, that they can't understand that the Flavian Amphitheater is the Colosseum.
Click to expand...
I don't think anybody cares about historical accuracy really - after all the events of the original movie did not happen.
 
winjer

winjer

Member
ChuckeRearmed said:
I don't think anybody cares about historical accuracy really - after all the events of the original movie did not happen.
Click to expand...

Plenty of people do. Just look at the dislike ratio. It's getting closer to 50-50 slip.
And mind you, I'm talking about small things, that only people with PHDs in Roman History can detect.
This movie was done is such a sloppy way, that there are so many evident mistakes.
The original movie had mistakes, but nothing as bad as this one.
 
violence

violence

Member
The emperor looks a little less goofy than those initial photos. I watch the first movie every year and a sequel can only ruin it’s special status for me. I guess if you’re gonna do another one, may as well do it while theaters still exist.



Rap music in the movie wouldn’t surprise me these days.

aghHNWv.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Tal Shiar Agent

Tal Shiar Agent

Banned
winjer said:
Plenty of people do. Just look at the dislike ratio. It's getting closer to 50-50 slip.
Click to expand...
Let's not pretend that isn't because there are black people in the film.


Anyway, its a sword and sandal. An epic, not a documentary. They are allowed to take liberties, like how the saddles had stirrups in the first film. Thematically it looks right even if not 100% accurate for the first century AD.
 
Last edited:
AJUMP23

AJUMP23

Parody of actual AJUMP23
winjer said:
We don't really know what the ancient Romans called it. Maybe it was just Amphitheater. Or maybe, they called it Flavian Amphitheater, because of the patronage that originated it. Or even Amphitheatrum Caesareum, as it's referred in some poetry.
But what it wasn't called at the time, is Colosseum.

And let's not pretend that modern audiences are that stupid, that they can't understand that the Flavian Amphitheater is the Colosseum.
Click to expand...
They probably called it "We don't want to be reminded of NERO anymore so we tore down his golden palace and built this colosseum in its place"


ChuckeRearmed said:
I don't think anybody cares about historical accuracy really - after all the events of the original movie did not happen.
Click to expand...

I care about an attempt of some historical accuracy.
 
winjer

winjer

Member
Tal Shiar Agent said:
Let's not pretend that isn't because there are black people in the film.

Anyway, its a sword and sandal. An epic, not a documentary. They are allowed to take liberties, like how the saddles had stirrups in the first film. Thematically it looks right even if not 100% accurate for the first century AD.
Click to expand...

I doubt that it's because of black people in the movie. There were black people in major Roman cities.
And Rome being the center of the empire, it was normal to have people from Asia and Africa. Even the Han dynasty tried to send a delegation to Rome.

Being an Epic, does not mean they can't strive for historical accuracy. There isn't even a question of cost.
The reality is that the people making this movie don't care one bit about what they are doing.
We have epic historical movies from the 1950s and 60s, that tried to be historically accurate, despite the limitations of the time.
 
IDKFA

IDKFA

I am Become Bilbo Baggins
ChuckeRearmed said:
I don't think anybody cares about historical accuracy really - after all the events of the original movie did not happen.
Click to expand...

And that's a huge problem, especially if the audience doesn't know the difference.

Making historically inaccurate films or TV shows means people will just believe they're true and accurate. Do you think the majority will do their research afterwards? Lol, no. They'll just believe whatever they see as fact.
 
winjer

winjer

Member
AJUMP23 said:
They probably called it "We don't want to be reminded of NERO anymore so we tore down his golden palace and built this colosseum in its place"
Click to expand...

The curious thing is that Nero, for several decades, was regarded as a good emperor in Rome, as he passed several laws that benefited the people.
For quite a while, several Roman politicians even claimed they were descended from Nero, as to gain the support of the populace.
It was only when the Roman empire turned to Christianism, that his reputation turned bad, as expected, since he did persecute early Roman Christians.

A similar thing happened with Ancient Egypt. Because of Christian beliefs, for close to 2 millennia, Christians despised it.
It was only in the XIX century that this started to shift, as modern archeology started to uncover ancient Egyptian history, igniting an interest in the subject.
And today we love it, despite how bad the Old Testament portrays it.
 
Tieno

Tieno

Member
Who approved this trailer? The music choice is god awful for a sequel to Gladiator, which has one of the best movie scores. Feels like one of those fake trailers.
Such a misfire.
Can't wait for a fan recut of this trailer with gladiator music on it to see if it feels any different.
 
Last edited:
Tal Shiar Agent

Tal Shiar Agent

Banned
winjer said:
I doubt that it's because of black people in the movie. There were black people in major Roman cities.
And Rome being the center of the empire, it was normal to have people from Asia and Africa. Even the Han dynasty tried to send a delegation to Rome.
Click to expand...
Exactly, the Romans didn't really care about skin color to the point they barely recorded it.


Honestly I'm not really seeing anything in the trailer that is egregiously ahistorical.
 
Last edited:
AJUMP23

AJUMP23

Parody of actual AJUMP23
winjer said:
A similar thing happened with Ancient Egypt. Because of Christian beliefs, for close to 2 millennia, Christians despised it.
It was only in the XIX century that this started to shift, as modern archeology started to uncover ancient Egyptian history, igniting an interest in the subject.
And today we love it, despite how bad the Old Testament portrays it.
Click to expand...

As a reader of the old Testament, everyone like the Egyptians until the regime change and enslaving of the Hebrews. When Joseph was there, everyone thought they were cool.
 
clarky

clarky

Gold Member
Surprised its not called Gladiators.

" Colonists on a remote island get orders from from Rome to check out a strange Spanish ship crashed on the coast. When all contact is lost with the conlony, Rome then sends in a elite group of soldiers in to investigate only to find island over run with GLADIATORS.
 
Last edited:
winjer

winjer

Member
Tal Shiar Agent said:
Exactly, the Romans didn't really care about skin color to the point they barely recorded it.

Honestly I'm not really seeing anything in the trailer that is egregiously ahistorical.
Click to expand...

They did care about skin color and they wrote about it. There wasn't discrimination similar to Jim Crow laws. Or slavery that targeted one specific race group.
But there were references to race. And there were cases of open racist and violence.

For example, Pliny the Elder at one point described the characteristics or northern Europeans. South Europeans. And Africans.
He was a bit derisive of northern Europeans. He praised southern Europeans, as one expects, considering he was one. And he was more critical of Africans.

I also remember a situation when a Roman legion was getting ready to march out to battle in a town in North Africa.
At the exit there was a black African man and he started cheering for the Romans.
The Romans looked at this skin at considered it a bad omen, beat him and killed him on the spot.
And this was not some random exception.

Let's also remember that some of the roles in which each gladiator was trained in, was dependent on the race of the individual.

So although Romans didn't have the same concept of racism we have today, they did see skin color and often discriminated against it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ridley Scott's GLADIATOR 2 budget is now at 310 million dollars
2
60
5K
nkarafo replied
Gladiator 2 | Official Trailer (2024)
2
69
4K
EviLore replied
Destiny 2: Revenant - Act III Trailer
0
365
sono replied
Snow White 2025 Official Trailer | Gal Gadot & Rachel Zegler
2 3
132
10K
Rush2112 replied
A super vague, tiny teaser trailer for 28 Years Later [Alex Garland - Danny Boyle]
7
544
Represent. replied
Top Bottom