The movie Gladiator directed by Ridley Scott could be the biggest disaster of a film on ancient Rome. This film’s only positive trait was how Ridley Scoot and the writers showed an accurate view of how the people and violence were at that time which was the 2nd century AD. Even with this positive trait, the movie historical is a disaster due to the massive amount of historical inaccuracies that are littered throughout the movie. The historical inaccuracies included gladiatorial, military, and political inaccuracies.
The gladiator fights made up a decent amount of the film, which was to be expected from reading the title. Even with the gladiator fights being the focal point besides the made up revenge plot the gladiator scenes in the movie contained historical inaccuracies. Gladiator fights were one various one combat of well-trained fighters. The scene where Maximus charges in an arena, solo and combats a group of gladiators would not have
…show more content…
Even so, the director and the writer did add some historically inaccurate information of the politics of Rome. Begin with a senator in the film, saying that the Roman Senate was elected by the people of Rome to represent the people of Rome. This is false the senate was selected by a high ranking official like the emperor never the people. The film also mentions that the Rome was a Republic when it was founded. This statement is false as well Rome was founded as a monarchy in 753 BC with Romulus being the first king. Rome did not become a republic until around early 500 BC.
Overall the movie Gladiator in the eyes of historical value is a disaster. The gladiator inaccuracies in the movie did not provide a great view of gladiator’s life in the arena. The military inaccuracies provide a poor image of the well-organized Roman military. Finally, the inaccurate information on the Roman politics provides false