From 'thrilling' 'to 'meh': What the critics have said about Gladiator II

Gladiator II is in cinemas this weekend following a grand final promotion push, with leading man Paul Mescal and even King Charles getting involved.

His Royal Highness welcomed the cast and crew of Ridley Scott’s long-awaited sequel on Wednesday before the London premiere.

Mescal, meanwhile, has been proudly donning his famous short shorts while trying to persuade the public to see him in armour.

The sequel to the 2000 original is one part of what has been dubbed as the Gladdington weekend, thanks to its clash with Paddington in Peru.

Filmmakers have been reportedly playing a bit fast and loose with historical accuracy but whether anyone goes and sees it will somewhat depend on the reviews. Here is what some of the critics have been saying.

The Standard - Four stars: ‘Gung-ho stuff’

Where better to start? Our reviewer Nick Curtis is prepared to overlook historical inaccuracy and the plot resembling the original for the thrills on offer.

“Gladiator II is stirring, gung-ho stuff, and it all looks ravishing, from the aerial views of Rome to the crunching action scenes,” Nick writes.

“Mescal exudes charisma and testosterone, especially when rocking a gladiator’s mini-skirted tunic. Ridley Scott, we salute you.”

The Guardian - Four stars: ‘A repeat, but a thrilling spectacle’

Peter Bradshaw is unafraid to dish out one-star reviews but had a great time watching Gladiator II - his review suggests.

He notes that “little has changed” from the first film, other than the enhanced CGI spectacle.

“This is a sequel that isn’t afraid to get its hands dirty – it delivers the keynote scenes and moments for the fanbase (which is all of us) and the all-important gladiator setpieces have the right hallucinatory quality, as a sea battle is reenacted in the flooded arena or a vast rhino gets its scaly backside kicked.”

The Spectator - (no star rating): ‘Is it meant to be a comedy?’

Deborah Ross is somewhere in the middle with what she feels is an unneeded sequel that does have its merits - even if she is unsure if we should be laughing.

“It will propel Mescal to A-list status. Yet he has little more to do than glower in a manly fashion. I laughed inappropriately on quite a few occasions.”

She was at least entertained.

The Wrap - (no star rating): ‘Echoes in eternity? It’s just repetitive’

The Wrap’s William Bibbiani has fond memories of the original and was perhaps after something fresher than what he considers a retelling.

“One emerges from the theatre thinking we may have just had a good time, but the more it sits with you, the more you realise that no matter how epic the battles were — and they certainly were epic — they didn’t have anywhere near the same impact as the original.”

The Times - Two stars: ‘He puts the “meh” into Mescal’

Not entertained is Times reviewer Kevin Maher. He describes Pedro Pascal as being “wasted” while considering Mescal “disappointing”.

“Mescal’s character is shaky at best, and the versatile actor, but for a couple of dazzling close-ups (very Richard Harris in Camelot), consistently struggles to enliven the gig — he frequently puts the “meh” into Mescal.”

There is praise for Denzel Washington, however. “He is witty, sly, bisexual, nakedly ambitious and burdened by a torturous past.”