Gladiator vs. Kingdom of Heaven

[Garbarsardar]

Following a discussion here with Roman_Man#3 I was thinking that the relative appeal of M2TW vs. RTW is no different than the one of Kingdom of Heaven vs. Gladiator.

Now let me say (and I will be flamed for that) that I consider both essentially bad movies. I despise Ridley Scott and his whole style over substance film making that probably worked in Alien and Blade Runner but after that gave us a downward spiral of bloated epic after bloated epic. But you can read my opinion about him here...

Still, I believe that Gladiator is a "better" picture than KoH and I will present the reasons that gave it this marginally elevated standing.

1. The Lead

Both movies are the kind that stand or fall by their lead. There is few or no contest here. Bloom never had the required gravitas for the role. Crow brought to the tripe of a film that was Gladiator a sense of importance, of universal significance; despite his limited facial expressions Maximus comes out as both fearsome and frail, tormented and wrathful but most of all humane. That means flawed. On the other hand Balian with his <cheap shot follows> elvish quality is as persuasive as a wooden duck in a shooting contest. You can never really tell what this nauseating adolescent is doing playing with the big boys and why anyone should pay any attention to him. That is far more evident when actors with the required experience, like Edward Norton can dominate whole scenes acting behind a silver mask.

2. The "big battle scene"

In Gladiator the battle is probably the best scene in the movie. It is visceral, dark, with multiple editing and on hand blurry shots; you can smell the burning trees, the blood the sweat. You can often smell fear. The death of the German leader is a magnificent tragedian moment, the charge of the Roman cavalry has ghostlike charm. What has KoH to show for that? A sub-LOTR siege with so many wide shots you stop caring about the plot and the individuals involved and a marginally better "after the battle" scene (the destruction of the army of Jerusalem) which unfortunately shows no battle.

3. The quotes


No film can claim serious philosophical dialogs here (and why would it need to?) but let me ask which quotes you remember better. Maximus again plays in important part with his voice in making those quotes memorable:

• On my signal, unleash Hell!
  
• My name is Maximus Decimus Meridius, commander of the Armies of the North, General of the Felix Legions, loyal servant to the true emperor, Marcus Aurelius. Father to a murdered son, husband to a murdered wife. And I will have my vengeance, in this life or the next.
  
• There was a dream that was Rome. You could only whisper it. Anything more than a whisper and it would vanish, it was so fragile.
  
• Strength and honor.
  
• Brothers, what we do in life... echoes in eternity.
  
• Hold the line! Stay with me! If you find yourself alone, riding in the green fields with the sun on your face, do not be troubled. For you are in Elysium, and you're already dead!

Now compare that with KoH. Until I posted I could not even remember those quotes...

• It is a kingdom of conscience, or nothing.
  
• One may stare into the light, until one becomes the light. I've done it many times.
  
• A king may move a man, a father may claim a son. But remember that, even when those who move you be kings or men of power, your soul is in your keeping alone. When you stand before God you cannot say "but I was told by others to do thus" or that "virtue was not convenient at the time. This will not suffice. Remember that.

4. The plot

With KoH Scott dived into uncharted for him waters. KoH was bound to have political undertones; he tried to dodge the issue with his usual deftness (bad priests-good warriors) but the result is that he actually took the soul by one of the more intriguing periods of medieval history. Gladiator had no such problems. Emperor bad-General Good is much more easily digestible for the average viewer. Also the more straightforward from-riches-to-rags revenge story makes for more relaxed viewing compared to the similar but heavily convoluted rags-to-riches-to-rags-to-riches-to-rags yet again plot of KoH.

5. The music

Ermmm...I don't remember KoH's music. Sorry.


And here I end my rant.

Now close your eyes and imagine Balian and Maximus in a series of scenes that cover any possible interaction between them (yes, that too) and decide who comes on top every time...

[William the Bastard]

Seen any modern TV Garb? It's all the same. Drivel for idiots. Then again after working a long shift sometimes I like to sit down and watch some random shite with big explosions, simple plot lines and recognisable actors. Other times I want depth and quality.

For that I have Shakespeare to either read or see on stage. The Filmic adaption of Henry V in 1944 was brilliant too but they don't make them as they used to. People want action and the average viewer couldn't really grasp the complexities if Hollywood did a proper good Historical epic. There are a few diamonds in the Rough ("A Bridge Too Far" to name but one) but even then they have to have massive budgets and many top class and recognisable actors to play each role otherwise the viewer would simply get lost.

I have to agree with you that Gladiator was the better film of these two but there are other films that should have been better. How the hell do you do a film on Alexander properly? The shite we were offered was visually brilliant but they missed out so much that it is laughable. The only way they could have done it right is to have the budget and ability to make 3 films (or more) like LOTRs did. Even then the were lucky to get the funding and many of the fans of the book still complain that it will never replace the book. I agree with them but those films were brilliant to watch if your mind is switched off.

[jankren]

Gladiator was a better movie because Kingdom of Heaven almost put me to sleep in much of the beginning of the movie.

[Lord Condormanius]

The director's cut of Kingdom of Heaven is fantastic. It fills in a lot of the blanks in the story. There is also a commentary by Ridley Scott, explaining that much of what was cut for the theatrical release was against his objections. This cut, I believe, makes the film better than Gladiator.

That said, comparing the two theatrical versions, I would have to choose Gladiator by far. Although, I don't agree with Garb's assessment of Orlando Bloom or the rags-to-riches-to-rags-to-riches-to rags description of KoH.

[different_13]

I agree with OP.
Orlando Bloom has never really appealed to me, and I notice in every film that I've seen him in I prefer at least 2 or 3 other characters over him.

I found Gladiator much more entertaining (watched it again 2 days ago, in fact). Commodus comes out as a twisted maniac, whereas Guy's more of an angry man (though I've heard in the director's cut he's far more of a political animal?)

Qua plot, I prefer Gladiator also.

[Kanaric]

Gladiator rules ALL. Compare it to Braveheart but no other!

[Valus]

The soundtrack for KoH is imo far better than that of Gladiator, I dont know why but I always shiver (sp?) when hearing that soundtrack..
I prefer KoH over Gladiator but this is probably because I am a greater fan of the middle ages than antiquaty...
I must say though that Crowe is a far better actor than Bloom and having Bloom as the lead character was probably the greatest drawback of KoH, other than that the actors of KoH (especially he who plays Guy de Lusignan) were splendid...

edit: I do beleive my spelling has called in sick today so you must forgive me for any errors

[Cavalier]

I have not seen the Director's cut of KoH, but it has gotten great response..
anyway, to get to my point.

I enjoyed KoH almost as much as Gladiator. I can see the both of them over and over again. But, as I am a big Roman fan, I'd have to say Gladiator. That's the only reason.

[Lord Condormanius]

In my above post, I left out the fact that KoH was was more historically accurate than Gladiator. That is always a big deal for me with historically based films.

[Henry of Grosmont]

Now let me say (and I will be flamed for that) that I consider both essentially bad movies.

Flamed? Finally, the voice of reason.

The director's cut of Kingdom of Heaven is fantastic.

Agree. Director's cut makes KoH better than Gladiator.

Gladiator rules ALL. Compare it to Braveheart but no other!

If you throw Braveheart in, I'll post on all three of them.

1. The Lead.
Russel Crow is taking it, although Norton, Irons and Phoenix make Crow and Bloom look awful. As it should be. Gibson out of the contest there. His "Scottish" accent cracks me up.

2. The Big Battle Scene.
Out of the G and KoH - Gladiator. But Braveheart's scenes are far better.

3. The Quotes.
Gladiator again.

4. The Plot.
As it is, Gladiator.

5. The Music.
Braveheart, hands down.

I'll add some categories of my own:
6. Costumes.
KoH. In Gladiator, it seems that some fantasy elements were added. Braveheart is the worst of them. Scottish Nobles should look more like de Bruce than that nonsence. Scotland couldn't field great armies, but Paladins were famous all across the continent.

7. Supporting Characters.
Gladiator. Commodus takes it alone. KoH is close second. Braveheart is a total disaster. To portrait Edward II like that... Was over 6 feet tall, had a beard and was one of the strongest men in his realm (according to contemporaries). Btw, fearless soldier (when he had to fight), he left the battle of Bannockburn the last with his retainers, "after killing many of Scotts".

And the last, but not the least - Historical Correctness.
Well, with all its flaws, the least incorrect would be KoH.
Having Commodus killing his father, cavalry with stirrups, fantasy "Roman" archers, etc., Gladiator is the second. Just because Braveheart takes the "Most Incredible Crap" award. Wallace banging Isabella from his grave?
Which leads us to the assumption that Edward III, who devasted Scotland (like his grandfather, "The Hammer of Scotts", did) was, actually, Wallace and not Plantagenet.

After all, I'd say Kingdom of Heaven is the better of them.

[Niccolo Machiavelli]

Just from an athmospheric POV, Braveheart - all three are more or less crap, but Braveheart - whilst largely being one concerning the historical accuracy - at least doesn't actually look like a fantasy movie, compared to the other two.
Their main plots don't really claim to have any historical references, do they? If at all, they use some historic figures and events as a scaffold to construct an AD&D-style fantasy plot around it.

[God-Emperor of Mankind]

If you are gonna see KoH then Directors cut is the only version you should see.
The theatrical is smoking pile of well you know what.
However which one is better is a hard call.
Gladiator is IMO vastly overrated and I was very dissappointed when I saw it.
But Crowe was a good choice to play the lead and together with the old veterans like Oliver Reed, Richard Harris and Derek Jacobi lifted the movie a bit.
And as stated KoH didn't have that good of a cast.
Norton was brilliant and as Garb stated managed to steal pretty much any scene he was in. Him and Ghassan Massoud was really the only ones that did a brilliant performance while the others while good actors seem to be struggling somewhat with their characters.
And naturally Bloom who was simply terrible.
But overall I would say that KoH(once again this is the Director's cut version) is slightly(very slightly) better then Gladiator.
I don't know, to me it just feels like Scott was a bit more sure of himself and what he wanted to do with KoH then with Gladiator.

But compared to Braveheart, both KoH and Gladiator wins hands down.
Braveheart has good music and good acting but suffer from very bad editing that really ruins the film.

[IndianPrince]

Gladiator can be compared to as said before ... Braveheart. But nothing else ... it is an excellent movie. Though maybe not entirely historically accurate it has its moments & the characters have been done very nicely. The music & dialogues are very motivational too

Edit: Listening to "Now We Are Free" right now

Prince

[Centurion-Lucius-Vorenus]

Looking back i liked the directors cut of KOH better then Gladiator. Russel Crowe's performance was awesome, so was Joaquin Pheonix's, but i didnt think anyone else was really noteworthy. KOH was an excellent job all around.

[Mathius]

Carefully considered as ever G but give Ridley a break

I despise Ridley Scott and his whole style over substance film making that probably worked in Alien and Blade Runner

Most film directors would torch their genitals to have made one film of that caliber.

Anyhooo, Gladiator. If only, as you point out, for the opening battle, and the nicely handled ending

[Serious Spamurai]

The only thing KoH really had going for it was the "Crusaders" song in the soundtrack and the Saracen Costumes.

[Prince_of_Macedon]

Gladiator > Kingdom of Heaven

Kingdom of Heaven was, to put it bluntly, boring. Also, Orlando Bloom was a horrid actor. There was a certain pretension in his character that really disgusted me. Eva Green, Jeremy Iron and everyone else played their roles flawlessly.

That said, Kingdom of Heaven was incredibly uninteresting. When a good movie comes to DVD, I'll buy it immediately. That's exactly what I did with Gladiator. But with Kingdom of Heaven, I constantly see it sitting on the shelves. Sometimes, I'll see it in the $10 bin. And I still don't want it.

By all means, Kingdom of Heaven shouldn't be bad. It's got great costumes, countless extras, superb SFX, historical flavor, etc. But somehow Kingdom of Heaven comes out horribly uninteresting. (at least in my opinion).

[The Good]

I've yet to see Kingdom of Heaven, I know it is based on the Crusades, and Crusades time period is neat and interesting, but I prefer Gladiator for the fact that it has better music, quality, and is based on my favourite time period in history, the era of the Roman Empire.

[Lord Condormanius]

I've yet to see Kingdom of Heaven, I know it is based on the Crusades, and Crusades time period is neat and interesting, but I prefer Gladiator for the fact that it has better music, quality, and is based on my favourite time period in history, the era of the Roman Empire.

Just a quick question...

How can you know that Gladiator has "better music, quality" when you have not seen KoH?

Watch the director's cut of KoH and you will not be disappointed.

[The Good]

Just a quick question...

How can you know that Gladiator has "better music, quality" when you have not seen KoH?

Watch the director's cut of KoH and you will not be disappointed.

Lord Condormanius, from what I've seen of the YouTube videos of Kingdom of Heaven, I just thought Gladiator had a better soundtrack. I especially like The Battle, and The Ending Music. I do want to see Kingdom of Heaven one of these days though.