TheDenizen wrote:Russell Crowe sucks, the CGI was garbage, Joaquin was a joke (though he's been good in other stuff, his performance in Gladiator was baaaaaad) and the writing was painful....one eye rolling moment after another.
Just an opinion, and example of how awards shows consistently reward stuff that doesn't appeal to me. Hence why I find them to be utterly without merit...
I couldn't disagree with you more.
Russell Crowe is a great actor has proven so in tons of films; The Insider, A Beautiful Mind, American Gangster and he did an amazing job as Gladiator. I had heard his off-screen personality is questionable, but so are many such as Tom Cruise and Mel Gibson (who are also great actors).
Joaquin is another great actor, and I thought his performance in Gladiator probably carried him up the Hollywood ladder.
The CGI was great for the time, and the fight scenes were terrific. Ridley deserved that best director and it's a shame he didn't get it. One of the main characters actors died (Oliver Reed) and Ridley managed to use CGI to recreate that actor so the movie could be complete!
The only valid criticism of the film would be that the story was fiction.
Considering history has provided us with a wide variety of fucked up and entertaining stories from the Roman Empirical times, it could be claimed that it wasn't necessary to conjure up a fake Gladiator story.