DreamWorks Distribution | Release Date: May 5, 2000
8.9
USER SCORE
Universal acclaim based on 719 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
665
Mixed:
39
Negative:
15
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
3
RickJ.G.May 17, 2003
When I saw first saw this movie three years ago, I remember a couple who were heroin addicts in the building I was living in at the time were enthralled with this movie, and saw it on multiple occasions. I have to wonder if the millions of When I saw first saw this movie three years ago, I remember a couple who were heroin addicts in the building I was living in at the time were enthralled with this movie, and saw it on multiple occasions. I have to wonder if the millions of other people in the U.S. who joined me in throwing away $187 million at the box office, and walked away liking this movie, weren't on heroin as well. I can't understand why this movie turned out to be as popular as it did. It looks terrible (I believe it was digitally recorded and it really shows). Its action scenes are a poorly shot. It takes far too many liberties with the history of the era. Finally, what an epic sit this bore of a movie was. My rear end deserved a big thumbs up from the Coliseum crowd for enduring two-and-a-half hours of schlock like this. I gave this movie a second try to see if I had missed something the first time around and I disliked it even more. I couldn't wait for it to get over the second time. An even worse pick for Best Picture than Titanic. At least the makers of Titanic produced a movie with crisp, clear images and brilliant special effects. Expand
1 of 7 users found this helpful
3
DaveCharltonJun 23, 2004
After seeing this film again, I have to say I was dumbfounded by its idiocy and triteness. After the breathtaking build up to the film's opening battle in Germania, we are given a hyper edited bloodbath, full of horrid jumpcuts that doAfter seeing this film again, I have to say I was dumbfounded by its idiocy and triteness. After the breathtaking build up to the film's opening battle in Germania, we are given a hyper edited bloodbath, full of horrid jumpcuts that do the film no favour in hiding the fact that it was done on digital cameras and didn't interest me at all, especially when compared to the intensely visceral opening battle in Gangs Of New York, which put jittery slow-motion and jump-cuts to much more effective (and this is a huge understatement). From then on, there is not one sequence in the entire film that works. The whole thing is one big boring, pompous, ugly and altogether hollow mess, so much so that it makes even Troy look thoroughly impressive in comparison. At least that had an interesting story, was aware of its own over-the-top masculinity, wasn't full of laughabley hokey politics and banal dialogue and didn't put a predictable division between the tough, ordinary Stallone-eque good guy and the weird, effeminate villain. Scenes were Commodus (Jaquin Phoenix) lusts over his sister Lucille (Connie Neilson) are unintentionally funny and have about as much resonance with what little story Gladiator has as those of the senate ranting about what they're going to do with Rome. The Colloseum fights are were the film really hits rock bottom. These loathesomely shot pieces of ruthless carnage are gratuitously bloody and devoid of either artistic or entertainment value. I wasn't so much disgusted or shocked as I was bored. The films also serves an unfortunate epitaph for Oliver Reed who is given some of the films most tedious monologues to read out, you can almost feel his boredom. One of the worst Hollywood epic of the last ten years Collapse
2 of 21 users found this helpful
2
opticAug 21, 2010
This piece of rubbish narrowly edges out 'Hurt locker' as the worst movie ever to win an academy award. Cliche after gut-wrenching cliche...
Joaquin Phoenix's villain is so comical that I was waiting for him to raise his pinky finger to the
This piece of rubbish narrowly edges out 'Hurt locker' as the worst movie ever to win an academy award. Cliche after gut-wrenching cliche...
Joaquin Phoenix's villain is so comical that I was waiting for him to raise his pinky finger to the corner of his lip 'Dr Evil' style and say "one million dollars".
Crap. Plain and simple.
Expand
1 of 11 users found this helpful110
All this user's reviews
1
AshH.Dec 22, 2009
Some people are calling this the best film of all time. W. T. F. This film's characters were absolutely terrible. The acting was decent, especially from Phoenix, but everything else about it was quite lacking. Watch it with the Some people are calling this the best film of all time. W. T. F. This film's characters were absolutely terrible. The acting was decent, especially from Phoenix, but everything else about it was quite lacking. Watch it with the professional eye and you'll see that the editing is in fact, quite non-professional and sloppy. The writing was without a doubt the worst thing about it. I don't know what some people see in it, all they look for in movies are action, which this film delivers solidly along with the acting, but does not do so with anything else. Expand
1 of 14 users found this helpful
1
ThomasSmithsonJul 21, 2014
Change the title to GRUMPY MAN and it will pass for an average comedy.

And Crowe got an oscar out of the deal. Great job academy!

The soundtrack supplied the only clothes pins holding up this drippy crap stained sheet on the line.
0 of 11 users found this helpful011
All this user's reviews