Gladiator: The Restoration of the Roman Epic Genre.
The historical epics of Ancient Rome have resonance for American audiences with their narratives of political intrigue, violence and sex high places as in the contemporary Clinton administration The Rome of the historical cinematic epic stands for America, corrupt at heart, its foundations based on enslavement, pursuing pointless wars beyond its borders and whose citizens forego a civil society for the barbarianship of “bread and circuses” Gladiator (2000) was the recipient of five Oscars including Best Picture, Best Actor (Russell Crow as Maximus) and Best Visual Effects. The film received a great deal of attention ,was an enormous commercial success and brought back to life the traditional cinematic Hollywood Roman blockbuster epic film, with interactional characterisation reflecting contemporary concerns but with the authentic resonance of the ancient world. Gladiator created a Rome and Romans with the capacity to become symbols of current debates about the status of American society and culture and possesses a thematic resonance of collective symbolism and expression. The massive popular box-office response enshrines Maximus, the enslaved chatteled gladiator, as a heroic icon of resistance in popular culture. He becomes a clarion for the freedom and liberty enshrined in our political ideals and against contemporary political tyranny, and a symbol of independent assertion against unjust oppression against the individual freedom of the citizen. Past Cinematic Influences Gladiator uses the epic format to reconstruct and recreate a historical characterisation of the ancient world. Ridley Scott’s Roman epic revitalised the historic ancient cinematic genre which had been in hiatus for thirty five years and marked Hollywood’s return to an era of lavish productions such as Ben Hur (1959) and Spartacus (1960).
The Fall of the Roman Empire (1964) was the last of the Hollywood historical epics, which after the disaster of the 1963 Cleopatra, had failed to attract the spectacle weary public to the box office despite lavish costumes and sets. As Arthur Max, the film’s production designer, held, it was a formidable task to recreate the grandeur of Rome without bankrupting the studio as almost happened in Cleopatra “that was the challenge and there was no margin for error. Gladiator was the first major Roman ancient history film of its era and Anthony Mann’s The Fall of the Roman Empire clearly served as its model. It coincidentally revisited the same timeframe, the second century AD, the same characters and the same events, namely the death of Marcus Aurelius and the ascent and declined of Commodus. In his evocation of earlier films Gladiator picks up where the genre died and gives it a rebirth, narrating us through the landscape of antiquity with the big technological cinematic breakthrough of CGI, (Complete Graphic Imaging). This new computer digital imaging technology radically brought down the cost of the scenes, imagery and spectacles of ancient Roman, providing awe-inspiring, unprecedented detail and scale. Gladiator enjoys the economic and visual advantages, not just of computer-generated special affects, but of an entire generations worth of developments in film technique.
Gladiator has innovative techniques of persuasion and a compelling narrative, engaging the spectator through an interpretation of ancient history, not necessarily accurate but with a multiplicity of powerful technical achievements and cinematic devices. A further uplifting variable is Scott’s, emphasis upon the rebuilding of old Rome rather than focusing on the fall of the Roman Empire as in The Fall of the Roman Empire. As Cyrino (2005:224) states, “Gladiator was more overtly aware of its involvement in manipulating and retelling the myth of Rome.
As in past historical cinematic epics the protagonist still seeks revenge for the death of loved ones and though the Christianity is removed, Scott retains the narrative of romantic relationships. The film is not radical and though it challenges the regime, it retains a deeply conservative strategy. Maximus is loyal to his family values in his longing to be reunited with his wife and child. He creates a family shrine with tiny familial figurines wherever he goes. As a farmer and s a father he has sacrificed both his pastoral idyll and his family life for the greater good of Rome, though he is a provincial Spaniard and has never visited Rome. We see his longing to return home as his hand tenderly caresses a meadow of wheat. Though Maximus could not protect his own family and son from death he becomes not only a moral hero, but a universal father who seeks to protect not only Lucille’s son but all Rome’s children. Maximus has an African companion, Juba, which provides contemporary civil rights concerns of race and remembrance of the civil rights struggles. This is resonant of the significance of the fictional African gladiator, Draba, in Spartacus (1960) and its allegorical screen significance to the American civil rights (Wyke1997: 68).
In Gladiator such allegory also addresses the issues of the identity, representation and place of the African-American in American history and society and the way in which these concepts relate to the unfolding of political antagonism, and the mirroring of such antagonism in the political/legal institutions and in American cinema and its reception. Gladiator provides added contemporary resonance as Maximus is presented as a Spaniard set alongside the diversity of racially mixed gladiatorial fighters. The discourse adds to the persuasive and imaginative power of the film and its cultural effect on audiences. Scott wanted to reconstruct and to recreate in Gladiator another world as he had done in Blade Runner. This was to be a new millennium in filmmaking. However, Scott synchronised tropes which other cinematic representations of ancient Rome had made familiar.
We see political intrigue, as in Quo Vadis (1951), Ben Hur (1959) and Spartacus (1960) , the carnage of the games, the deadly rivalry fought out in arena sequences, the presence of the evil Emperor and the resonance of totalitarianism and the fascist reconstruction of Rome. Arthur Max, Gladiator’s production designer states, “We looked at films like Spartacus and Ben Hur several times and Benji [Fernandez] had served as the set designer on The Fall of the Roman Empire.” They deliberately mixed the time periods, using a painting of Napoleon as an enthroned Roman emperor as a model for the Empress throne in Gladiator. Magid (2000: 55).As Max states, Scott “had this tremendous idea of starting Nazi propaganda films like Triumph of the Will since they copied the Roman [aesthetic].we copied them copying the Romans, which added an extra layer and another cultural interpretation…ultimately, we tried to build Rome to be as big and rich as we could. After all, size matters!” Magid (2000: 55). The power of mass spectacle has long been exploited by totalitarian regimes. Rome was natural site for the spectacle and became Hollywood’s model for decadent and corrupt empire builders such as Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy and for any regime seen as antithetic to ideals of individual freedom and morality. This was especially seen in the fifties and sixties films, when Roman epic films had reached their zenith were affected by the post war political climate, when there was a fear of political and military tyranny (Elly1984: 89). The signatories of Roman imperial iconography used for cinematic spectacle had long been used as tools of exploitation for the masses particularly by totalitarian regimes with iconic symbolism such as fasces and eagles. This utilisation is clearly seen in the scene Leni Riefenstahl’s Triumph of the Will (1935), whose documentary patterning of Hitler’s arrival in Nuremberg for a Nazi party rally, under the eagle his totalitarian regime supported by an invincible army, is duplicated by Scott in his dark depiction of Commodus’ triumphal entry into Rome, with the use of aerial views, the large crowds of humanity, the drums and the eagles As in Triumph of the Will where Hitler is greeted by a little girl presenting him with flowers, so Commodus is greeted by girls presenting him with floral attribute (Richards 2008: 177).
Such cinematic hyperbole produced a negative examination of the Roman Empire especially post-war Britain ( Wyke1997: 23). This scene and Scott’s narrative direction makes a connection with recent history and post-war sentiments. The gladiator as in Spartacus is positioned as the central iconic character to present the moral debate for cinema directors and audiences, against a Rome which has become the symbol of oppression and corruption and utilised as a setting of moral significance. Paintings Many British and French romantic painters painted renditions of Rome’s heyday. In fact the French artist Jean-Léon Gerome’s Pollice Verso, “Thumbs Down,” (1872)inspired Ridley Scott the entire movie . This nineteenth-century romantic vision painting was of an arena scene in which the gladiator stands at the centre of the Roman Colosseum looking at the Imperial box awaiting the Emperor’s for decision of kill against his defeated opponent. Nineteenth-century paintings and literature have long utilised the decadence of Rome and its arenas as sites of moral significance for the martyrdom of early Christians .Pollice Verso invoked within Scott “the Roman Empire in all its glory and wickedness… the ideal time to revisit what may have been the most important period of the last 2,000 years, if not in all recorded history – the apex and the beginning of the decline of the greatest military and political power the world has ever known. Pollice Verso with its depiction of the editorial combat and ferocious spectators demanding death had already influenced the arena scenes of Enrico Guazzoni’s Quo Vadis? (1913), the film most instrumental in the initial cinematic projection and articulation of this historical period (Wyke 1997: 118-120).In Gladiator this expands to a new disturbing spectator placement when Maximus, in the second provincial combat sequence, hurls a spear at his audience and cries “Are you not entertained? Are you not entertained? Is this not why you were here?” but instead of being rebuked the crowd cheers him, confirming Proximo’s later analysis, “Win the crowd and you will win your freedom.” The world of Rome is seen as a world where killing is part of circus and therefore is a dark, grim place in which we the spectators participate and reinforce. Movie theatres themselves constitute an arena for spectatorship and a place for distraction for modern audiences to insulate against political reality. Brantlinger (1983) holds that the pseudo-leisure mass media of television which daily saturates modern America is parallel to Rome with its continual circuses. This entertainment substitution of “bread and circuses” permeates distraction in civilized society, allowing corruption to develop at the heart of a society bent on pointless wars and enslavement of others.
With parallels between gladiatorial combats and military battles there is the implied connection between militarism and oppression and there is an allegorical implication that contemporary America is distracted from political realisation and truth by the appeasing pacification of mass media (Cyrino 2004).As Rushton (2001: 36) states, “spectacle... provides the environment in which tyranny thrives.” He holds that the moral lesson of Gladiator is that “Democracy and freedom are only possible if we first of all free ourselves from the lure of spectacle.” However, it is through the spectacle of Maximus’arena contest with Commodus, “spectacle in the face of tyranny,” that Rome wins its freedom. Gladiator standing over his victim, from Quo Vadis? (1913) Rome constituted a world of beauty but a world darkness in which murder is authorised by the Emperor and by the crowd. Scott is interested in the relationship between the gladiator and the state, challenging the regime, seeking justice and freedom but also seeking vengeance for the death of those he loved. This concept Scott places within the idea of spectatorship and of the reconstruction of the world of the Colosseum. The Opening Battle Scene The opening battle with its snow squall and fire enveloping the forest on a bleak northern frontier of Rome, as the Roman army defeats the impotence German barbarians, is brutal and a vivid spectacle. Instead of the resonance of a sombre voiceover, the opening scene innovates the audience with a prologue which is scrolled across the screen and is accompanied by rousing music of Hans Zimmer. The battle manifests a visual display of intensity and daring (Cyrino 2005: 226, 227). Ridley Scott was lucky enough to obtain a large tract of pine forest schedule for cutting by the British Forest Commission and as Arthur Max states, “We made it into a battlefield by chopping down some of the forest, and then set fire to it as part of the actual battle scenes” (Magid2000:56). With the use of special effects and cinematic techniques, with multiple cameras filming at various film rates there engenders the battle scenes with the tumult of Spielberg’s Saving Private Ryan (Cyrino 2004: 130). This scene emphasise the concept of frontiers in the geo-political situation of Roman history and picks up where the genre had died, giving it rebirth. Marcus Aurelius the ageing philosopher- Emperor, is concerned over the corruption by despotism of the republican ideals of Rome, and holds Commodus, his son, to be immoral. Knowing that he is dying Aurelius tells Maximus, “I want you to become the protector of Rome … I will empower you, to one end alone, to give power back to the people of Rome and end the corruption that has crippled it.” Maximus, a Spaniard, has never seen Rome, the city he idolises and sees as the light, and, being from the country, is not tarnished with its deceit, decay and political intrigue. Maximus Maximus (Russell Crow) is a provincial farmer and a loyal family man who sacrifices home and family life for the greater good of Rome. He is introduced as a leading Roman general, a soldier and, as a Spaniard, showing the Rome of Gladiator to include a vast spectrum of cultures. The mixed characterisation places Maximus as an Outsider in Roman politics and as more intricately complex than his cinematic predecessors. The social construction of the Other forms the basis of an enabling response of human resources, both moral and psychological, to break through the constraints of the debased condition of chattel slavery, this despite the unrelenting endeavours by the state to subject them as slaves to total domination. “If we stay together we survive” becomes the emblematic mantra of the oppressed and racially mixed gladiators, showing an investment in the diversity of their kinship.Maximus holds that he has gladiatorial “power only to amuse the mob,” but Lucilla responds, “This is power.” Hence, Maximus, the enslaved gladiator, is able by his celebrity status, to fight back against the oppression of against a corrupt and immoral state which destroyed his farm, crucified his family and commits him to perform murderous gladiatorial conflicts.
Because of his status he responds as the signifier symbolising the moral hero determined to restore the vision of Aurelius’ Rome, which he loved and for which he had fought. The Roman Colosseum As the gladiators enter Rome Juba says to Maximus “Have you seen anything like that before?” The camera spins 360° and provides a spectacular display, bringing attention to the might and architectural splendour of the city, which is reinforced by the cinematic technological innovations of CGI while providing awe-inspiring detail of the Colosseum and the sites of historical Roman. The Colosseum was recreated through computer generation and not only were the four tiers generated but also there was a physical reconstruction of the lower tier, the combination of which allowed the viewing audience variabilities of angles and distance in mid range viewing including from the imperial box and also at ground level with the arena strewn with slain and injured gladiators. “Several ground level views create breathtaking impressions of the Roman arena in its heyday…Colosseum walls frame an arena floor strewn with fallen gladiators, their futile weapons, a roaming tigers and rose petals, all bathed in light either streaming through wooden latticework…or diffused and mottled[evoking]neoclassical nineteenth century paintings” (Solomon 2001: 93).As Winkler (2004: 101,102) states, particular explicit aural and visual violence battle arena scenes “border on the fantastic.” Such sequences include the Battle of Carthage and Maximus simultaneous fight with the Tigris of Gaul and the tigers. Gladiator presents the Roman Colosseum in accurate and reconstructed exquisite form with the use of computer-aided recreation. The Colosseum is the main place for spectacle and is a symbol not only of Rome, its empire but empire but “by extension, of all Western culture and civilisation” (Winkler2004: 87, 91). The new technology provides awe-inspiring explicit detail of the Colosseum and extreme close-ups of the fighting and carnage, empowering the spectators with the chance of moral outrage against the depraved proximity of Commodus. Arthur Max states that though they could not afford to build the whole of the Colosseum which was as 150 feet high. “We built a huge J. shaped section of the first tier, which was 75 feet tall, and some fragmentary elements like the opposite entry and the opposite box .we then cheated the reverses by flopping the negatives. This required great mental agility on Ridley is part directing left to right and right or left.” the actors for the reverse angle shots were required to hold their swords and shields in the opposite hands. The visual effects team raised the Colosseum to its intended height and added 55,000 people. As Max states “a challenge was to bring the scale of ancient Rome to life…we were very accurate (Magid 2000: 57-59). The scenes of gladiatorial combat are scenes of a great spectacle. At the beginning of Gladiator’s time period the gladiator games had being absent from the Roman arenas because the philosopher- emperor Marcus Aurelius has outlawed them, however, when Commodus assumed the throne, after he has murdered his father, he revives the games declaring, “I will give the people of vision of Rome, and they will love me for it.” As Russell (2007: 170) states, Commodus is “a ruler whose ultimate downfall is his heavy reliance on the destruction of the arena.” Gracchus observes that Rome is a mob which is susceptible to distracted by violent political entertainment of the arena. Gladiator has a voice on the moral and political value of spectacle and that the film argues Rome is self-destructing because it is hypnotised by the spectacle production of the Colosseum and that it is therefore nothing less spectacle which provide environment in which tyranny thrives. However, this dangerous place of bread, circuses and brutality, the bedding ground for the rise of despotism, is also an arena for the opportunity for social change. Maximus effectively uses the gladiatorial circus in as a medium for social change…a dissenting political opinion. Maximus has real battlefield experience and he sees triumph in the arena as the way to political power, popularity, and revenge. He is able to use the gladiatorial arena as a medium for ridding the world of Commodus and fulfilling the democratic ideals of Aurelius’ last wishes for the restoration of the Roman Republic. Both in the battlefield and the arena exceptional courage and performance are the key to freedom and honour. This route to power is translated by Lucilla, Commodus’ sister, in the words “Today I saw a slave become more powerful than the Emperor of Rome.” Maximus also sees combat and the gladiatorial spectacle of the arena with its crowd enticing properties, as the only hope to win his freedom and his right to be recognised as a Roman and as a civilised man. In Maximus’ fight against Tigris of Gaul he refuses to kill Tigris and this act of mercy is not only makes the crowd loved him more but it also has a civilising effect on the mob. However, though Maximus is identified as a symbol for the oppressed, most of his cause is one of revenge, motivation which alone would have been insufficient for the earlier political historical epics Nevertheless Maximus is seen as a moral hero and an idealised figure fighting against the corruption of Rome in the cinematic hyperbole of the aren “My name is Gladiator” promotes Maximus as Everyman. Maximus has no political ambitions .When he wins in the arena of violence he rejects the false heroism of celebrity desiring only to be reunited with his wife and son. Commodus Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix) is an evil tyrant and ruler of a corrupt empire and his utilisation of the arena is a symbolism of moral depravity .He is a symbol of utter depravity but he humanised by knowledge of his dysfunctional childhood, with the lack of paternal affection and the absence of a mother, reflecting the modern concern and “nostalgia for traditional family values” .Rome as America The cinematic use of the Roman as a decadent empire builder became a metaphor not only for fascist and totalitarian regimes such as Nazi Germany and fascist Italy, but also for corrupt American society with its antithesis to American’s Foundation ideals of morality and freedom. The United States of America with its Manifest Destiny to control the world was seen as an imperial power like Rome and the military battles of Rome and the gladiatorial combats stand as parallels for militarism and oppression. In this context and allegory, Maximus is seen as an archetypal Hollywood hero, fighting against moral corruption and the loss of individual freedom. As the film’s advertising slogan declares, “A Hero Will Rise.” Because Maximus neither wants power nor visited Rome he is uncontaminated with its corruption and the corruption of its Senate. While Maximus’ heroism is connected with his military status the film presents him as an Outsider yearning for his Spanish farm, rural idyll and his family.Gladiator is not necessarily a truthful historical account but possesses the necessary narrative structure to support a film about the decline Rome. The film is about the reconstruction of Rome with emphasis of its regeneration. Gladiator reflects a resonance for traditional family values, the concept of empire in favour of old-fashioned republicanism, rural idyll and pasturism, values which George W. Bush was presenting before the aggressive American policy and American empire. These values were evocative of American political history in the framing of figures of George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and John Adams and indicate the American need to return to the founding father principles as source of constitutional and moral civilisation. Conclusion Gladiator was the first big-screen ancient epic in thirty five years in the tradition of spectacle enabled by computer-generated technical innovations to present the Roman Colosseum with its awe-inspiring amphitheatre and its fatal combat as a major thematic functioning .Gladiator is an affirmation of spectacle and providing audiences with the apparatus of “true engagement” to replace Hollywood “bourgeois ideological representations”. The polarities in this revival of the traditional Hollywood Roman epic is not the pious orientation of Christianity versus tyranny, a contest which may now seem old-fashioned in the new millennium, but the oppositional forces of tyranny and the Republic, with the resonance echo of human rights concepts, the individual against the tyrant state. Into this arena strides Maximus, the gladiator, the Everyman hero and father. Maximus does not have to be redeemed with Christian conversion, “What he does –after a fashion-is recall the Romans to their own great tradition as free people” (Wiseman 2005: 43). Gladiator constructs its framework of cinematic heroism, as in the Western genre, with popular mythology, reaffirming the hero’s essential individuality and pro-social function, and depicting a world locked in a struggle between the oppositional moral forces. The hero’s role is to further the cause of civilisation, morality and individual freedom motivated by his own existentially derived personal code of honour and justice.The gladiator hero fights against the moral corruption of Rome in the spectacle of the arena and against the evil ruler, Commodus, at a vital turning point in Rome’s history. Maximus is true to the myths of Rome and we love him for it, the elements of which capture the vast box office audience and the accumulation of the multitude of Academy Awards and thus reviving the genre of the historical epic.
The Fall of the Roman Empire (1964) was the last of the Hollywood historical epics, which after the disaster of the 1963 Cleopatra, had failed to attract the spectacle weary public to the box office despite lavish costumes and sets. As Arthur Max, the film’s production designer, held, it was a formidable task to recreate the grandeur of Rome without bankrupting the studio as almost happened in Cleopatra “that was the challenge and there was no margin for error. Gladiator was the first major Roman ancient history film of its era and Anthony Mann’s The Fall of the Roman Empire clearly served as its model. It coincidentally revisited the same timeframe, the second century AD, the same characters and the same events, namely the death of Marcus Aurelius and the ascent and declined of Commodus. In his evocation of earlier films Gladiator picks up where the genre died and gives it a rebirth, narrating us through the landscape of antiquity with the big technological cinematic breakthrough of CGI, (Complete Graphic Imaging). This new computer digital imaging technology radically brought down the cost of the scenes, imagery and spectacles of ancient Roman, providing awe-inspiring, unprecedented detail and scale. Gladiator enjoys the economic and visual advantages, not just of computer-generated special affects, but of an entire generations worth of developments in film technique.
