Throughout the Roman Empire, different emperors had varying styles of ruling. Some were considered part of the “Five Good Emperors,” while others met their demise through assassination. These rulers either prioritized their own interests or genuinely cared for the people of Rome. The film Gladiator portrays the society and gladiator games of ancient Rome. Nonetheless, how accurately does this movie depict the historical events of the Roman Empire? I am particularly fascinated by the authentic history surrounding gladiators, even though this film remains one of my favorites.
Upon reflecting on the movie, I came to the conclusion that it failed to faithfully portray the true lives and experiences of gladiators. The storyline presents Maximus as he ascends to a position of trust as a general and advisor following the demise of the emperor. However, when Commodus seizes power, Maximus is sentenced to death but manages to evade capture only to be captured by slave traders who coerce him into becoming a gladiator named the “Spaniard.” Henceforth, he must engage in perilous battles for the amusement of paying spectators.
Maximus, known for his impressive battle skills, becomes celebrated and respected for his performances in the Colosseum. Motivated by a desire to avenge the loss of his freedom and family, Maximus intends to challenge Commodus, the man responsible. Eager to test his own abilities, Commodus confronts Maximus by forcing him into deadly battles. The movie begins by depicting the end of Marcus Aurelius’ reign, a revered emperor among the “Five Good Emperors,” followed by Commodus assuming power.
Marcus Aurelius, a great emperor who cared about the Republic, is depicted in Gladiator as the father of Commodus. In reality, this portrayal is accurate. However, the film falsely claims that Commodus killed his father. It is evident that the movie’s directors and producers had to create a storyline, thus resulting in an inaccurate depiction of historical events. Surprisingly, the movie introduces Commodus as having a sister, a detail that does not align with historical facts.
They also revealed that Commodus died in the arena with Maximus, a fictional character. However, historical records state that Commodus was actually strangled to death in his bathtub by a man named Narcissus. History teaches us about the dynamics of Roman families, where men held power over everyone, including the ability to sell their wives and children into slavery. It is puzzling why the movie did not adequately portray these family dynamics, as it would have given audiences a better understanding of this concept. In the film, Maximus, portrayed by Russell Crowe, is depicted as loving his wife and child deeply and would never contemplate doing them any harm.
When I took Friedman’s History class, I became skeptical of the portrayal of men in the past after watching the movie Gladiator. It taught me not to blindly believe everything I see! However, I must admit that the depiction of gladiatorial fights in the film was historically correct. The Colosseum was accurately represented with statues around the arena, numerous seats including a designated box for the emperor and his family, underground tunnels for gladiators and animals, and a sandy floor.
The movie revealed that the majority of its shots were computerized, as remaking such a colossal setting by hand would be unfeasible. The daunting task of constructing these enormous objects manually is unimaginable. Despite being prisoners of war and slaves, gladiators were all treated as slaves. Proximo, a former gladiator turned merchant, declares in the film, “These slaves are rotten… I’ll offer $2,000 for humans and $4,000 for beasts.”
Proximo was responsible for purchasing and training Maximus, transforming him into the celebrated gladiator he became. True to his reputation, Proximo treated his men as if they were animals. In fact, he valued the beasts more than the men, spending greater sums on their acquisition. The assessment of potential gladiators was solely based on their physical appearance, ensuring they were strong and healthy enough for purchase. “I didn’t pay for your company; I paid to profit from your death,” Proximo openly admitted. These statements exemplify the disregard society had for gladiators, who were mere slaves. Their sole purpose was to put on an impressive spectacle, with no concern for their well-being or personal worth.
The film Gladiator did not offer much insight into the training of the men. Most of it focused on their battles instead of what went on behind the scenes and their intense training. Watching the behind-the-scenes footage was fascinating, as it made me realize the tremendous effort these men invested in becoming gladiators for the movie. It’s no surprise they had muscular physiques, given that they trained for hours daily. In Roman times, gladiators underwent extensive and grueling training to prepare for what lay ahead.
Maximus, in the movie, was considered Rome’s top general and therefore believed to be skilled without requiring any training. However, one historical inaccuracy I observed was the spectators’ chants at the arena. In reality, when a gladiator was wounded, the audience decided whether to spare or kill them. This decision was indicated by waving thumbs around for mercy or pressing thumbs against their opposite hand to signal for the gladiator’s death.
The movie accurately depicted the gladiatorial games but fell short in portraying the characters’ lives. The audience portrayed their approval or disapproval by waving their thumbs in different directions, although there is no historical evidence to support this practice during Roman times. While some aspects of the story were true, many were fictionalized. It would have been more impressive if the film incorporated more historical accuracy, but it remains a brilliant film nonetheless.
The film Gladiator is an awe-inspiring piece of cinema that showcases remarkable characters portrayed by talented actors, stunning scenic views, magnificent set design, and a powerful narrative. Its objective goes beyond mere amusement; it seeks to captivate its audience. The movie’s sheer magnificence left me in awe. While it presents visually realistic elements, it places more importance on aesthetics rather than historical precision. It accurately portrays the atmosphere surrounding the characters and Rome’s attitude towards the gladiatorial games and its people. It is fascinating how our perception evolves as we age, enabling us to accumulate wisdom through the passage of time.
When I first saw this movie in grade school, I thought it was the best film ever made because of its captivating story and other elements. However, since then, my understanding of what is authentic has improved. Surprisingly, my uncle, a history teacher, said he wasn’t particularly impressed by it, which surprised me. Overall, if you’re interested in watching a film about gladiatorial games, this would definitely be the best choice. But if you want a historically accurate portrayal of the emperors from that time period, it might not meet your expectations. Despite this drawback though, many people agree that it’s one of the greatest movies ever made.
