Gladiator

"What we do in life echoes in eternity." Unfortunately probably not for this slightly underwhelming film. Why did it win so many Oscars? Why did Russell Crowe win an Oscar for this when he has done much better work?

I want to talk about something that bugs me with modern films. Maybe I am the only one who notices this? The fight scenes were completely spoiled by the editing and the camera work. Everything was done in close up, each shot took only a couple of frames and they seemed to shoot everything on digital camera, which means that there is no blur in each frame. This gives an extremely disjointed effect overall and for me completely destroys any flow or grace to the fight scenes. There is no impression of choreography or strategy to the fight scenes. It completely destroyed any excitement I have for the fight scenes. Nothing works or connects with this style of editing and shooting. Doesn't anyone else see this?

The special effects were pretty cheesy too in this film. It comes back to the same old gripe I always have. Previously good model work works even if you know it's a model, but so far this has never been the case for CGI effects. In fact the only place it works is in an entirely CGI film such as Shrek, where there is no mix of live and CGI action. Ancient Rome was unconvincing to me.

I like Russell Crowe a lot, especially his early work in Australia – you only have to watch two films (Romper Stomper and The Sum of Us) to understand his range, skill and humanity. But this was just a low key performance. Where the film did score full marks was the use of the three wonderful, now sadly no longer with us, great British (well, of the British Isles) actors – Richard Harris, Oliver Reed and David Hemmings. All sadly missed.

The narrative was terribly linear and doesn't stand up to the great epics of the 50s and 60s. This film was not the promised renaissance of the genre.