I should also take a moment to address the historical inaccuracies, given the attention I paid them in reviewing the recent U-571. There really was an Emperor Marcus Aurelius, and an Emperor Commodus. The gladiatorial matches were often this elaborate and bloody, and were sometimes more so. Commodus really was hopelessly corrupt, and really did fight in the arena. However, Marcus Aurelius did not advocate the return of the Republic, and there was no General Maximus under his command. And Commodus, rather than what happens in Gladiator, was killed by a conspiracy of politicians. Here, though, the history doesn't really matter. Nothing is changed in the long run; any descendants of Commodus or other Roman citizens are hardly likely to bemoan the treatment of their ancestors. Although the historical violations are disturbing and distracting in U-571, here they're irrelevant.
from this site
and this
# The gladiatorial program was inaccurately portrayed. The normal program included beast-hunts in the morning, execution of criminals over lunch, gladiators in the afternoon. Edmondson says the use of tigers as part of the fight between the retired Gaul and Maximus is also very implausible, adding that wild beasts were used to execute criminals or for combats with specially trained beast-hunters.
# he thumbs up/thumbs down by the Emperor to signal that the gladiator could kill his defeated opponent and the salutation "Those who are about to die salute you." Edmondson says that salutation was, as far as we are aware, actually uttered just once -- by condemned criminals to the Emperor Claudius before they were slaughtered at a mass naval spectacle he was staging on Lake Fucinus, south of Rome.
The overlooking of much vivid historical source material on Commodus himself. "Contemporary texts ñ particularly that of the Roman senator and historian Cassius Dio who witnessed Commodus' exploits with great unease first hand ñ report that Commodus was a very good athlete, who loved to appear in the arena himself," says Edmondson. "In private, he occasionally killed men, and sometimes sliced off a nose, an ear and various ëother' parts. But in public, he never used real weapons and refrained from shedding human blood. Commodus also frequently performed as a beast-hunter, killing domestic animals and bears --100 on one occasion -- tigers, hippopotamuses and elephants. His love of the arena was so intense that it was eventually rumoured that his father was not Marcus Aurelius, but a gladiator who was his mother's lover."
It would have been absolutely impossible during this period that Maximus was an army commander, but not a senator. "All army commanders were appointed by the emperor from among the senators," says Edmondson. It was only later, in the third century, that this rule was increasingly overlooked."
The Amphitheatre was not called the Colosseum until Venerable Bede's time, around AD 700. It was known as the Flavian Amphitheatre or, simply, "the Amphitheatre".
all from here
http://www.yorku.ca/mediar/releases_1996_2000/archive/051100.htm
1. I like Gladiator
2. who said it was historically accurate to begin with? It's a movie........fiction.....somebody sat down and wrote a story. Nobody claimed it to be "based on a true story". Star Wars is not historically accurate either..........
3. why is a thread about an epic-drama in the sci-fi forum?
Originally posted by Evil Dead
1. I like Gladiator2. who said it was historically accurate to begin with? It's a movie........fiction.....somebody sat down and wrote a story. Nobody claimed it to be "based on a true story". Star Wars is not historically accurate either..........
Originally posted by GCG
Gladiator is not meant to be a documentary - historicity doesnt count and its silly to judge it as a shitty movie on that basis.
Exactly, it wasn't meant to be historically accurate in the first place so to dismiss it as a good film on that basis is just well idiotic really. On that note, has their ever been a film that was 100% historically accurate anyway?
In answer to the origianl posters question. Some of the characters and events were real but most of the film especially the story was fiction. I'm sure you'll be able to figure out what was real from what was fiction by just doing a little bit of research.
Originally posted by forumcrew
yea the real thing to say is who cares because it wasnt on the history channel... you know I heard that theres no historial proof of a so called middle earth damn we better hate on LOTR now
😂
Originally posted by Evil Dead
3. why is a thread about an epic-drama in the sci-fi forum?
That's what I keep asking
Originally posted by BackFire
Who cares? Gladiator is a piece of shit.
Jeez, we get it! You've been saying that over and over.
Anyways, I don't care whether or not it's 100% historically accurate. It made sense, stayed true to history for the most part(except for some nitpicts that no one cares about whatsoever), had great writing, and had fantastic acting.