On the subject of historical inaccuracies in his biopic Napoleon (2023), director Ridley Scott told the Times of London, “When I have issues with historians, I ask: ‘Excuse me, mate were you there? No? Well, shut the f*** up then.’” It’s the kind of thing you get to say if you’re making Gladiator (2000), a truly masterful revenge fantasy draped loosely over some half-remembered facts and figures from ancient Rome. Less so when you’re making Napoleon, a turgid and badly edited live-action Wikipedia entry shot in a color scheme I can only describe as mudscale. 

Scott’s latest, Gladiator II, is somewhere in between the original Gladiator and Napoleon. It’s not so absurd that you can’t charitably suspend a little disbelief — OK, so they never put sharks in the Colosseum (that we know of), but it would have been hella metal if they did. Still, this sequel never rises near the level of greatness that makes you forgive and forget its liberties entirely. When a somber nobleman appears seated in an ancient Roman café (not a thing), reading the daily papers (also not a thing) like some Parisian dandy from the belle epoque, you start to think, Is this really worth the 30 bucks it costs in President Joe Biden’s America to watch sword fights in IMAX?