‘Gladiator II’ Sequel: How Critics Compare It to the Original Classic

Ridley Scott’s Gladiator II, featuring Paul Mescal, Denzel Washington, Pedro Pascal, and Connie Nielsen, is now playing in theaters, 24 years after the release of its Oscar-winning predecessor. The long-awaited sequel has garnered attention for both its action-packed sequences and its performances, particularly by Washington, but how does it compare to the original? Critics are divided, with some praising the film’s spectacle, while others find it lacking in emotional depth.

The Gladiator franchise began with Scott’s 2000 film, which earned five Academy Awards, including Best Picture and Best Actor for Russell Crowe. The film’s legacy loomed large over the sequel, making expectations high for Gladiator II, a continuation of the epic story set in ancient Rome. The sequel’s plot picks up with Lucius, the son of Lucilla, now grown up and forced into the Colosseum after his homeland is conquered by tyrannical emperors. He must delve into his past for the strength to restore Rome’s glory. The film introduces new characters, such as Macrinus (Washington), a former slave who becomes Lucius’s gladiator mentor, while Nielsen reprises her role as Lucius’s mother, Lucilla. Pascal plays General Marcus Acacius, and other notable cast members include Joseph Quinn as Emperor Geta and Fred Hechinger as Emperor Caracalla.

Gladiator II was released for Thursday previews and opened nationwide on Friday, drawing attention for its action-packed sequences, including bloody gladiatorial combat and dramatic confrontations. As of Thursday, the film holds a 73% “fresh” rating on Rotten Tomatoes, based on 211 reviews. The RT Critics Consensus reads, “Echoing its predecessor while upping the bloodsport and camp, Gladiator II is an action extravaganza that derives much of its strength and honor from Denzel Washington’s scene-stealing performance.” However, the RT Audience Score was unavailable at the time of publication.

In contrast, the original Gladiator earned a higher 80% “fresh” score on Rotten Tomatoes, based on 260 reviews. The consensus for the 2000 film praises Russell Crowe’s star-making performance and Ridley Scott’s opulent recreation of Rome, with some critics noting the film’s emotional depth despite its grim revenge plot. Additionally, Gladiator boasted an impressive 87% “fresh” Audience Score, with over 250,000 user ratings, cementing its place as a beloved classic.

Among the positive reviews, several top critics from major publications have praised Gladiator II for its thrilling action and engaging performances. Boyd Hilton of Empire Magazine calls it “a fun romp,” noting that it avoids being a predictable, ponderous sequel to the much-loved Oscar-winner. Pete Hammond of Deadline Hollywood Daily similarly gave the film a “fresh” rating, asserting that Scott, a master at crafting excitement, proves Gladiator II is a worthy successor to the original. He wrote, “Gladiator is a hard act to follow, but Sir Ridley Scott proves still to be a master working up a Roman orgy of excitement that proves a worthy successor in every way.”

Caryn James of the BBC online also praised the sequel, calling it “by far the best popcorn film of the year,” highlighting the film’s spectacle and the strong performances. For some critics, Gladiator II succeeds in giving audiences exactly what they want—intense action, engaging characters, and impressive battle sequences.

On the other hand, Gladiator II has its detractors, particularly those who felt the film did not live up to the emotional and narrative complexity of the original. Richard Lawson of Vanity Fair gave the film a “rotten” review, stating that the grand emotional sweep that defined Gladiator was completely absent from the sequel. He argued that while Gladiator II is epic in terms of length and spectacle, it lacks the depth and feeling that made its predecessor a modern classic.

Peter Howell of the Toronto Star also criticized the sequel, saying it felt like “mostly violent déjà vu.” He noted that, while the character of Macrinus brought some novelty, much of the film felt repetitive, recycling the same story told nearly 25 years ago. Howell’s review pointed to the film’s reliance on the original formula, rather than advancing the plot or adding fresh layers to the narrative.

Odie Henderson of the Boston Globe echoed similar sentiments, expressing disappointment that Gladiator II failed to live up to expectations. He suggested that the film’s existence was driven by corporate greed, with the result being a rehash of familiar plot points and themes from the original, rather than a bold new direction for the franchise.

Gladiator II faces the difficult task of following in the footsteps of a film that became an iconic part of cinematic history. For many viewers and critics, the original Gladiator remains a landmark achievement in filmmaking, blending action, drama, and historical spectacle in a way that resonated deeply with audiences. The sequel, while delivering intense action sequences and compelling performances—particularly from Denzel Washington—has been met with mixed reactions regarding its emotional weight and originality.

Despite the varied reviews, Gladiator II offers a visually stunning and action-packed experience, with some critics enjoying the film’s larger-than-life gladiatorial combat, while others lament the lack of the emotional resonance that made the original so memorable. As the film continues to play in theaters, it is clear that Gladiator II will spark ongoing debate among fans and critics alike. Whether it can achieve the same lasting impact as its predecessor remains to be seen, but it certainly succeeds in delivering a spectacle that is both thrilling and at times, bittersweet.