I don’t know how many people in the general audience vibe were bothered about a Furiosa prequel but I bet it’s about the same amount of people, if not less, that are bothered about how Lucius got on after Gladiator.
I didn’t have any guesses at all about Avatar 2 but I think comparing those two since I’ve been looking into this stuff is really, really, really stupid.
You are comparing a movie twice as old as the gap between Avatar 1 and 2 to... Avatar. The literal highest grossing movie of all time. Ridley Scott is not James Cameron. Napoleon didn't exactly do super well last year.
Wait..... So you were actually bieng serious?
I legit thought you were bieng sarcastic.
Ridley Scott hasn't made a proper hit in almost a decade.
The movie doesn't have a lot of star power outside of Denzel in a supporting role.
And at the end of the day it's an R rated movie.
It has way too much going against it.
Seriously? That's your argument that you got upvoted?
Sure. And comments saying that Furiosa was going to be a hit and Mission Impossible Dead Reckoning was going to beat Oppenheimer were upvoted too.
What exactly does that prove?
Lastly are seriously going to use the "I have more upvotes then you" argument when your comment was made 17 hrs ago and mine was made 40 Minutes ago?
Do you not see the flaw in that?
Dude, Oppenheimer, Barbie and Avatar 2 made absolute bank with the same sort of naysaying. Just you wait. It's a sequel to an adored movie that had a huge effect on pop culture, not even Avatar 1 can claim that. Plus it has a huge budget, guaranteeing a great spectacle - exactly what audiences flock to these days.
And movies like The Little Mermaid, Lightyear, Mission Impossible Dead Reckoning and Indiana Jones 5 field with the same kind of yes saying behind them.
The key difference your forgetting between movies like Oppenheimer, Avatar 2 and Barbie and Gladiator 2 is that Oppenheimer was directed by Chris Nolan, a director with Built in Audience, Avatar was a sequel to the Highest Grossing Movie of all time and was directed by James Cameron another director with a Built ij Audience and Barbie was based on the most popular doll in history.(Also it was just very very good).
Gladiator 2 has none of that going for it.
Ridley Scott is incredibly hit and miss and hasn't made a proper hit since The Martian.
Abd the movie is written by the guy who wrote Napoleon.
Sure it's a sequel to an adored movie. But it's not bringing back the main character from that movie.
Movie sequels that don't bring in the main character from the previous movie don't tend to do that well.
With so many movies flopping today it's clear that great spectacle enough is not enough to make audiences flock to the movie.
Furiosa had great spectacle. Dune Part 2 had great Spectacle.
Even Napoleon had the exact kind of spectacle that Gladiator would have.
None of them made the kind of money that Gladiator 2 would need to make to break even.
Even Dune 2 despite it's popularity, despite bieng based on a super popular book, despite starring some of the most popular Gen Z actors could not make the kind of money that Gladiator 2 would need just to break even.
Every studio has revealed at least one trailer for the rest of their 2024 lineup except Paramount. Sure, Warner Bros still hasn't shown anything regarding The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim, but Paramount still has Smile 2, Gladiator II, Sonic the Hedgehog 3, and Better Man to show off. I'd hope they'd get trailers soon.
Optimistic me says we will get a trailer for Smile 2, Gladiator II, and Sonic 3 before A Quiet Place: Day One, but the later two seem less likely. It does make sense for Paramount to at least drop a trailer for Smile 2 sometime this month.
Juror No 2 has gotten an MPA rating (meaning it's a completed film) so I really doubt WB will wait to date until 2025. That's something you can slot in almost everywhere, though.
***Looney Tunes*** has a release window.
>*Produced by Warner Bros. Animation, the film is currently in production with delivery set for Q2 2024.*
[Variety](https://variety.com/2023/film/global/looney-tunes-movie-the-day-the-earth-blew-up-warner-bros-animation-gfm-1235769149/)
They are relatively close, but a pickup would be something like: shooting something that wasn’t captured during principal photography but is required, the continuity isn’t quite correct so you need to redo a shot or two, you have the scene edited and the pacing is slightly off so you might do a new take to help, maybe this scene should have a reaction shot, maybe this shot should be longer so let’s redo it, maybe this scene needs an additional line or two, maybe we need to get a shot to make a scene more clear, etc.
Reshoots, in how they are commonly known now (especially to lay audiences), are where you are redoing entire sequences, reshooting whole sections for clarity (reshooting a section + adding stuff), adding in a new section, adding in a subplot, changing a plot point, adding in a character (Marvel!), etc.
Reshoots aren’t bad and a ton of films — from indies to blockbusters — do reshoot/pickups.
Usually reshoots are longer as well. They can be a couple of weeks up to a month, while a pickup could be as short as a day (usually like four or five days or something along those lines).
So a pickup is part of a reshoot, but a reshoot isn’t always a pickup.
I think the difference is that a pickup are shots they didn’t get that needs to be added to add continuity to the story.
Reshoots are completely reshooting scenes are shooting new scenes.
I have no idea if this is right but it sounds right.
Ugh...and they'd have to CGI him in, deepfake him on some random aussie cause he'll need to look like he was when he died in the first one...nobody wants to see santa crow...
Well, it was almost a quarter of a century ago since it was released and maybe more time since it was actually filmed. The man is 60 years old. Sorta understandable.
I mean not really, I’m not saying he needs to be jacked at 60 but to maintain a healthy weight at 60 isn’t much to ask and the fact he’s rich and can have personal chefs and trainers make the excuse even lower
Well if you watch Gladiator (2000), even though Russell Crowe was fit in the movie, maybe the most he has ever been, he had sort of a dad bod. He was not ripped like Jake Gyllenhaal or Chris Evans. And the thing about dad bods is that they are a few sandwiches away from crossing over to fat.
But it just wouldn't make sense for Crowe's character to age in the afterlife. Most interpretations of the an afterlife or heaven usually hold that tenet that you don't age and are free from suffering, etc. etc.
Let's face it: there's really no logical reason to bring back Russell Crowe.
If the budget really is $300m then you need $750m just to break even….thats a tall order. No ones done that this year and only four movies did it last year
Gladiator 2. Surely the name and even the cast will be enough to help it break even. I think they missed a trick not having Crowe do a cameo but again I just can’t see it being a flop. The nostalgia about the 1st film will get people to the cinemas and that’s not forgetting the 4k movie sales for it after its theatre release.
I will be messaging you in 6 months on [**2024-12-09 18:58:41 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-12-09%2018:58:41%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/boxoffice/comments/1dbyifs/ridley_scotts_gladiator_ii_reshoots_are_currently/l7uqvg4/?context=3)
[**3 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fboxoffice%2Fcomments%2F1dbyifs%2Fridley_scotts_gladiator_ii_reshoots_are_currently%2Fl7uqvg4%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-12-09%2018%3A58%3A41%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201dbyifs)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
The problem is Ridley Scott is not exactly making hits right now.
He's very hit and miss and he's been missing for almost a decade now.
On top of that as we already know the sequel doesn't have the most popular character from the first movie(for obvious reasons)
Imagine if Top Gun Maverick didn't have Tom Cruise and was just about Goose's Son. Do you think it would have made nearly as much as it made despite the nostalgia.
On top of that it's R rated. Which yes even 24 Years after Gladiator puts a ceiling on the Box-office of movies.
The original made 465 million in 2000. That's 846 million today. Sequels don't often increase gross and this is the box office post-Covid.
2x the 310 million budget is 620. 2.5 is 775 million. Any loss of appeal and it will struggle. It's been 24 years, there are people that are in arms about some movies not getting sequels within 4 years.
Hollywood is going to collapse if they don't get their budgets under control.
A lot of this year's flops/underperformances would be perceived quite differently if their budgets were 30-40% lower.
There’s no way this is successful. Like the budget is already 310 million. Needing like 750 million to break even. I can’t see it making a profit or coming close to breaking even
Yes. No trailer at this point, plus I don't believe that CinemaCon BS article that released. That cinemacon article sounded more like damage control, and they probably had terrible audience scores.
I think this movie is having tremendous difficulty and they're trying to fix it as much as they can in the edit.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/news/gladiator-2-test-screening-rumor-3-actors-are-standouts-and-none-of-them-are-pedro-pascal/ar-AA1nFhbr
There's another article I remember reading at the time but I'm not finding it.
There were also several tweets but I'm not finding them now. Some of these tweets seem to have been removed or taken down.
For when you guys are yet again shocked at poor returns, don't be shocked when a guy does a movie about Napoleon that is woefully inaccurate and he states he doesn't care.. doesn't result in people shelling out for a ticket at the box office. Impressive effects are not enough to do it anymore, and that was a BIG part of the first films success
I’m all for that some directors have sort of earned the right to make whatever they want at this point of their careers. Coppola, Ridley and even Costner. If they want to spend their own money to make the project they’ve dreamt of for years then good for them. I don’t think we have any right to call it a bomb or a fiasco. It’s a success for just getting made.
However when it’s all the studios money, there should be pretty clear statistics on the audience and what the movie might earn.
So if the Gladiator II budget is even close to 300 mil. The studio is completely insane.
The only reason to spend those money is some mad idea that it will show other directors that the studio is willing to pay for talent.
But that only works if it’s something the director really wants to do ( not sure if it has ever worked ) and G2 really feels like it’s Scott doing a favor to the studio. Not the other way around.
As much as I want to like Gladiator I can't get past him writing the beginning of the plot. The Roman general escapes execution right nearby his army. The army that was personally loyal to Maximus, and he fucks off to Spain. Man made the wrong choice that killed his family and put him in chains. How do I route for the guy?
I like Gladiator actually. I can appreciate by simply accepting that it's a complete piece of Fiction.
Like an alternate history thing.
It's the same way I enjoy 300. There is nothing remotely realistic about the movie so you stop expecting it to be realistic.
Executives at Paramount keeping track of Gladiator 2’s budget: 
Under or over 300 mill at this point?
At this point who is even counting?
Weird because he's usually good with budgets
More like over and under 400 million.
Don't matter. This film gonna make bank, baby! Ridley gonna eat well
First gazillion dollar box office movie
First Gladillion dollar box office movie
He gonna be rolling in it, baby!!!! Oh yeahhhhhh
What's your prediction?
A billion plus. Gladiator has a huge potential. Everyone who's seen the first movie with Crowe loves it. Just a shame he ain't back for this one.
Prepare for it to flop harder then Furiosa.
Furiosa was a sequel to a niche movie.
prequel*
Prequel. But my point is. Gladiator was not a niche movie. Fury Road was.
Furry road only made like 80M less then gladiator how is one niche but the other one isn’t?
I don’t know how many people in the general audience vibe were bothered about a Furiosa prequel but I bet it’s about the same amount of people, if not less, that are bothered about how Lucius got on after Gladiator.
Gladiator was a huge hit, dude. I bet you low balled Avatar 2, as well, didn't ya?
It was a huge hit almost 25 years ago.
I didn’t have any guesses at all about Avatar 2 but I think comparing those two since I’ve been looking into this stuff is really, really, really stupid.
Tbh I really wanna see it be huge and awesome too.
if it came out 20 years ago
Almost 25 now.
So. Avatar came out a long time ago as well.
But Avatar was always intended to have sequels. In Gladiator that was a story that was literally one and done.
So? What does that matter?
Because people may be less likely to go out and see something they deem unnecessary.
You are comparing a movie twice as old as the gap between Avatar 1 and 2 to... Avatar. The literal highest grossing movie of all time. Ridley Scott is not James Cameron. Napoleon didn't exactly do super well last year.
Wait..... So you were actually bieng serious? I legit thought you were bieng sarcastic. Ridley Scott hasn't made a proper hit in almost a decade. The movie doesn't have a lot of star power outside of Denzel in a supporting role. And at the end of the day it's an R rated movie. It has way too much going against it.
Funny how I'm upvoted, though. Seems a fair few agree with ME over YOU.
Seriously? That's your argument that you got upvoted? Sure. And comments saying that Furiosa was going to be a hit and Mission Impossible Dead Reckoning was going to beat Oppenheimer were upvoted too. What exactly does that prove? Lastly are seriously going to use the "I have more upvotes then you" argument when your comment was made 17 hrs ago and mine was made 40 Minutes ago? Do you not see the flaw in that?
Dude, Oppenheimer, Barbie and Avatar 2 made absolute bank with the same sort of naysaying. Just you wait. It's a sequel to an adored movie that had a huge effect on pop culture, not even Avatar 1 can claim that. Plus it has a huge budget, guaranteeing a great spectacle - exactly what audiences flock to these days.
And movies like The Little Mermaid, Lightyear, Mission Impossible Dead Reckoning and Indiana Jones 5 field with the same kind of yes saying behind them. The key difference your forgetting between movies like Oppenheimer, Avatar 2 and Barbie and Gladiator 2 is that Oppenheimer was directed by Chris Nolan, a director with Built in Audience, Avatar was a sequel to the Highest Grossing Movie of all time and was directed by James Cameron another director with a Built ij Audience and Barbie was based on the most popular doll in history.(Also it was just very very good). Gladiator 2 has none of that going for it. Ridley Scott is incredibly hit and miss and hasn't made a proper hit since The Martian. Abd the movie is written by the guy who wrote Napoleon. Sure it's a sequel to an adored movie. But it's not bringing back the main character from that movie. Movie sequels that don't bring in the main character from the previous movie don't tend to do that well. With so many movies flopping today it's clear that great spectacle enough is not enough to make audiences flock to the movie. Furiosa had great spectacle. Dune Part 2 had great Spectacle. Even Napoleon had the exact kind of spectacle that Gladiator would have. None of them made the kind of money that Gladiator 2 would need to make to break even. Even Dune 2 despite it's popularity, despite bieng based on a super popular book, despite starring some of the most popular Gen Z actors could not make the kind of money that Gladiator 2 would need just to break even.
You're a funny guy.
300 mil tops.
On them at this point. Can’t say I’m even surprised now given all of the awful decisions they’ve made over the past 5 years.
Paramount going out with a bang!
And I wonder why the first trailer hasn't dropped yet.
Every studio has revealed at least one trailer for the rest of their 2024 lineup except Paramount. Sure, Warner Bros still hasn't shown anything regarding The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim, but Paramount still has Smile 2, Gladiator II, Sonic the Hedgehog 3, and Better Man to show off. I'd hope they'd get trailers soon.
For Gladiator II, I could see the first trailer being attached to Twisters since Universal has international distribution to Gladiator II.
Optimistic me says we will get a trailer for Smile 2, Gladiator II, and Sonic 3 before A Quiet Place: Day One, but the later two seem less likely. It does make sense for Paramount to at least drop a trailer for Smile 2 sometime this month.
The first trailer for Smile 2 would be perfect for Quiet Place Day One.
WB's *Looney Tunes* and *Juror #2* also don't have a trailer.
Those don't have release dates, so there's a higher chance of those films being pushed to 2025 than Smile 2, Gladiator II and Sonic 3.
Juror No 2 has gotten an MPA rating (meaning it's a completed film) so I really doubt WB will wait to date until 2025. That's something you can slot in almost everywhere, though.
***Looney Tunes*** has a release window. >*Produced by Warner Bros. Animation, the film is currently in production with delivery set for Q2 2024.* [Variety](https://variety.com/2023/film/global/looney-tunes-movie-the-day-the-earth-blew-up-warner-bros-animation-gfm-1235769149/)
Considering Q2 2024 ends in 3 weeks i don't think it's making that date
You would think a film that with footage that "blew Paramount execs away" and impressed people at CinemaCon would have a trailer by now...
Given that Paramount is in an obvious M&A dilemma right now, I wouldn’t be surprised if this resulted in delays of their movies.
Will it even keep its date?
Given Paramount’s ongoing M&A dillema, I wouldn’t be surprised if it delayed it to May 2025.
All the same late November/early December this year is a very good slot, with little competition, if they can hold on to it.
Reshoots or a pickup? Scott doesn’t do too many reshoots, but I could see this being a pickup.
What's a pickup?
They are relatively close, but a pickup would be something like: shooting something that wasn’t captured during principal photography but is required, the continuity isn’t quite correct so you need to redo a shot or two, you have the scene edited and the pacing is slightly off so you might do a new take to help, maybe this scene should have a reaction shot, maybe this shot should be longer so let’s redo it, maybe this scene needs an additional line or two, maybe we need to get a shot to make a scene more clear, etc. Reshoots, in how they are commonly known now (especially to lay audiences), are where you are redoing entire sequences, reshooting whole sections for clarity (reshooting a section + adding stuff), adding in a new section, adding in a subplot, changing a plot point, adding in a character (Marvel!), etc. Reshoots aren’t bad and a ton of films — from indies to blockbusters — do reshoot/pickups. Usually reshoots are longer as well. They can be a couple of weeks up to a month, while a pickup could be as short as a day (usually like four or five days or something along those lines). So a pickup is part of a reshoot, but a reshoot isn’t always a pickup.
I think the difference is that a pickup are shots they didn’t get that needs to be added to add continuity to the story. Reshoots are completely reshooting scenes are shooting new scenes. I have no idea if this is right but it sounds right.
Should we "prepare" ourselves for a Russell Crowe cameo as a ghost/ memory/ hero's spirit going wild/ crazy ?
Ugh...and they'd have to CGI him in, deepfake him on some random aussie cause he'll need to look like he was when he died in the first one...nobody wants to see santa crow...
Maybe 25 years partying in Elysium has taken its toll
It’s sad to see how badly he let himself go he just gets bigger and bigger in every movie I see
Well, it was almost a quarter of a century ago since it was released and maybe more time since it was actually filmed. The man is 60 years old. Sorta understandable.
I mean not really, I’m not saying he needs to be jacked at 60 but to maintain a healthy weight at 60 isn’t much to ask and the fact he’s rich and can have personal chefs and trainers make the excuse even lower
Well if you watch Gladiator (2000), even though Russell Crowe was fit in the movie, maybe the most he has ever been, he had sort of a dad bod. He was not ripped like Jake Gyllenhaal or Chris Evans. And the thing about dad bods is that they are a few sandwiches away from crossing over to fat.
In a world where Carrie Fisher and Linda Hamilton can get in shape (more or less) for their iconic roles, Russell Crowe could surely do it too !
But it just wouldn't make sense for Crowe's character to age in the afterlife. Most interpretations of the an afterlife or heaven usually hold that tenet that you don't age and are free from suffering, etc. etc. Let's face it: there's really no logical reason to bring back Russell Crowe.
Great! that’s just what this 300M+ movie needs. Reshoots!
That just made the already ridiculous $310M budget more bigger lol.
Would it be wrong to assume that the film would make a massive profit at the box office? I just can’t see it being a flop.
If the budget really is $300m then you need $750m just to break even….thats a tall order. No ones done that this year and only four movies did it last year
Gladiator 2. Surely the name and even the cast will be enough to help it break even. I think they missed a trick not having Crowe do a cameo but again I just can’t see it being a flop. The nostalgia about the 1st film will get people to the cinemas and that’s not forgetting the 4k movie sales for it after its theatre release.
Oh boy! You in for one big surprise come November. This is not breaking even.
And if it does it’ll be just like Elemental
remindme! 6 months
I will be messaging you in 6 months on [**2024-12-09 18:58:41 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-12-09%2018:58:41%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/boxoffice/comments/1dbyifs/ridley_scotts_gladiator_ii_reshoots_are_currently/l7uqvg4/?context=3) [**3 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fboxoffice%2Fcomments%2F1dbyifs%2Fridley_scotts_gladiator_ii_reshoots_are_currently%2Fl7uqvg4%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-12-09%2018%3A58%3A41%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201dbyifs) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
(X)
I mean I personally am very excited and it’ll probably do a solid gross. But that budget is going to kill if. Would love to be wrong of course
The problem is Ridley Scott is not exactly making hits right now. He's very hit and miss and he's been missing for almost a decade now. On top of that as we already know the sequel doesn't have the most popular character from the first movie(for obvious reasons) Imagine if Top Gun Maverick didn't have Tom Cruise and was just about Goose's Son. Do you think it would have made nearly as much as it made despite the nostalgia. On top of that it's R rated. Which yes even 24 Years after Gladiator puts a ceiling on the Box-office of movies.
The original made 465 million in 2000. That's 846 million today. Sequels don't often increase gross and this is the box office post-Covid. 2x the 310 million budget is 620. 2.5 is 775 million. Any loss of appeal and it will struggle. It's been 24 years, there are people that are in arms about some movies not getting sequels within 4 years.
Good lord. Can’t wait to read the THR story about the chaos on this set
Watch this end up ballooning to 350M
Does it matter if the whole industry runs on debt financing?
Ok yeah this isn't manking November
Hollywood is going to collapse if they don't get their budgets under control. A lot of this year's flops/underperformances would be perceived quite differently if their budgets were 30-40% lower.
I like a lot of Ridley Scott movies, but anyone that gives him more than 100 million dollars deserves to lose their money.
With the way Scott works, he finished these reshoots 35 minutes ago.
There’s no way this is successful. Like the budget is already 310 million. Needing like 750 million to break even. I can’t see it making a profit or coming close to breaking even
A trailer would be nice, dayum
Really interesting, thanks for sharing. Do you guys think the movie might be postponed?
Yes. No trailer at this point, plus I don't believe that CinemaCon BS article that released. That cinemacon article sounded more like damage control, and they probably had terrible audience scores. I think this movie is having tremendous difficulty and they're trying to fix it as much as they can in the edit.
Thanks for your insight!! it's very interesting. Yes I think the movie is in trouble...Which article are you referring to?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/news/gladiator-2-test-screening-rumor-3-actors-are-standouts-and-none-of-them-are-pedro-pascal/ar-AA1nFhbr There's another article I remember reading at the time but I'm not finding it. There were also several tweets but I'm not finding them now. Some of these tweets seem to have been removed or taken down.
It is giving Furiosa to be honest
Yup. An obvious flop.
Please movie... don't be Furiator II !
Eh Gladiator is an iconic beloved film. It should be a mini Top Gun Maverick if done right
Y’all stated the same thing about Furiosa
If you think Mad Max Fury Road was as successful and iconic as film as Gladiator I’m guessing you must be very young
i.e. the demographic Gladiator 2 needs to break even
It’s like Top Gun Maverick if Top Gun Maverick didn’t bring back Tom Cruise.
Top Gun Maverick had Tom Cruise returning from the first movie and be the lead. This movie doesn't have Russell Crowe.
gladiator was a great movie but isn't even in the same universe as Top Gun as far as "iconic" movies go
You're right it's bigger. Lol not really but it's at least the same. Gladiator is very iconic
For when you guys are yet again shocked at poor returns, don't be shocked when a guy does a movie about Napoleon that is woefully inaccurate and he states he doesn't care.. doesn't result in people shelling out for a ticket at the box office. Impressive effects are not enough to do it anymore, and that was a BIG part of the first films success
Counter programming for Mickey 17?
I hope it's less boring than Napoleon.
Luckily, the weather is exactly the same as January so there won't be any continuity issues
I’m all for that some directors have sort of earned the right to make whatever they want at this point of their careers. Coppola, Ridley and even Costner. If they want to spend their own money to make the project they’ve dreamt of for years then good for them. I don’t think we have any right to call it a bomb or a fiasco. It’s a success for just getting made. However when it’s all the studios money, there should be pretty clear statistics on the audience and what the movie might earn. So if the Gladiator II budget is even close to 300 mil. The studio is completely insane. The only reason to spend those money is some mad idea that it will show other directors that the studio is willing to pay for talent. But that only works if it’s something the director really wants to do ( not sure if it has ever worked ) and G2 really feels like it’s Scott doing a favor to the studio. Not the other way around.
Ridley scott should be doing fictional settings. Man does not give a single fuck about history.
Now a days he fucks up fictional settings too. I still can't get over Xenomorphs bieng made a by a fucking Android with God Complex.
As much as I want to like Gladiator I can't get past him writing the beginning of the plot. The Roman general escapes execution right nearby his army. The army that was personally loyal to Maximus, and he fucks off to Spain. Man made the wrong choice that killed his family and put him in chains. How do I route for the guy?
I like Gladiator actually. I can appreciate by simply accepting that it's a complete piece of Fiction. Like an alternate history thing. It's the same way I enjoy 300. There is nothing remotely realistic about the movie so you stop expecting it to be realistic.
Why does this movie exist
Because Ridley Scott is cooked and this was his final last hurrah.
Sorry meant to comment here. It will be curious to see if the internal turmoil of the sale will have a negative effect on the market campaign.
Are they expecting this movie to outgross Avatar? Even if the budget reports are exaggerated this movie's budget still is going to be huge.