History Buffs: Gladiator

Download videos:
hd720 medium


Gladiator (Profession) film review movie review history buffs historical accuracies historical inaccuracies Marcus Aurelius (Monarch) Commodus (Monarch) Review (Media Genre) History (TV Genre) roman history

kritonas dionysiou
damn please tell me your intro song! BEST INTRO ON YOUTUBE!!!!
Hans Zimmer is a genius
Daniel H
Alexander Forbes
I'm surprised he didn't mention all of the flaming shit during the opening battle. None of which were ever used or even possible to create with their technology.
How do you not mention that gladiators were rarely killed in these games?
Rick Veenbergen
sea battles in that coleseum...... I WANNA TRAVEL BACK IN TIME NOW !!
Phil Bolton
These days when I watch a "historic" movie, I go in assuming its pretty much all bullshit. But I'm usually willing to cut them slack if its a good story that at least looks authentic.
This is odd. You are showing scenes in Gladiator that i have never seen before. And i have seen this movies over a dozen times. Are these cut scenes or is there another version?
Roman cavalry didn't have stirrups. A small error but an error nonetheless.
Sam Geuvenen
If Commodus' reign was the beginning of the end for Rome, then I must extol him for being such a magnificent failure that he helped destroy the nation of Rome.
When you said that the movie showed exactly how romans were fighting i sudenly remembered another youtube channel that deals with battles, weapons and armors that busted this battle as full of errors. Just sayin.
Charlie To0 Human
2:40 Obi Wan Kenobi was truly a great emperor.
Prince of Antioch
4:14 "See that map on the wall, Marcus? It's a 12th Century Arab Muslim World Map, and shouldn't exist yet,"
Kathryn Roberts
I'm a little disappointed Nick didn't mention the TV show 'Spartacus', which more accurately depicts how gladiators were trained and treated. However, I think 'Gladiator's point wasn't "this is how gladiators were treated" but rather "life in ancient Rome was cheap". And that's true. If you examine Roman nobility, women's rights, treatment of slaves and infants - you'll realize how little they cherished basic human rights.
Ethan Davies
I hate it when I see the Roman Empire fall or decline
Doofus Rufus
'Glad he ate her.' ;)
The more I watch this movie the less I like it. Also, it's a rip-off of the fall of the roman empire. With bits of Spartacus and Ben-Hur.
Atticus TheDeathMetaller
By God the fucking beginning is the best part of the movie!!!! Ihr seid verfluchte Hunde!
Am i the only different man here? If my dad was an Emperor or a millionaire i would race after him to become even greater than he was.
Matthew Eagerton
I'm not really meaning to criticize you at all but @History Buffs what separates this movie from braveheart? They are both mostly fiction that Hollywood made based around real life people to get some money?
Drvsvs Perennis Of Rome
You forgot to mention that the pila were not spears but were thrown at the enemy before the main engagement took place
Yamete Kudasai!!!
I don't mind watching Russel Crowe and Joaquin Phoenix fighting naked in the showers ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Milan Judák
I cringe every time i see thouse flame arrows Also gladiator deafs were rare There job was to fight not to kill Same with modern boxers Killing was not the goal
ganesh raja
I cry every time i hear this movie's climax music...
Tucker France
i'd love to see reviews for: Lincoln, Bridge of Spies, 12 Years A Slave, Pearl Harbor, The Alamo, Valkyrie, Troy! great job and love the vids
Damn boiiiiii gotta love that opening music!
Joseph M
Gladiator was a fine movie, Russel Crowe was excellent.
every time i think about the roman empire it reminds me of the current situation in the west, its like empires are bound to fall no matter how dominant they are at some point.
Solar Emperor
I completely disagree with your analysis of the opening battle sequence. NO, the Romans did not have NAPALM, no they did not break ranks immediately after contacting the enemy in melee combat, no they did not use volleys of fire arrows. How is this at all an accurate recreation of Roman military tactics?
ethan hatcher
3:24 damnit, I was going to make that comment!
Josh Weekley
I do wish this channel would stick to actually pointing out historical facts, what the movie got right and wrong, and stop just outlining the plot as if we've never seen the movie.
New Dawn
How about King Kong...would like to know if it is historically correct?
Slim Charles
What are you on about, mate? This film doesn't accurately portray Roman military tactics.
Well its not really that the previous four of the five good emperors abandoned the succession by male heir, they had either no children or no sons to survive to inherit the throne, so they adopted their would be successors, and groomed them to be emperors. Marcus Aurelius himself had been adopted by the previous emperor Antoninus Pius. Marcus Aurelius had no need to adopt a successor, he already had one. But yes, Commodus was never in question, he was the legal heir to his father. The battle at the beggining despite showing how powerful Rome was, is full of tactical inaccuracies, most notably that the roman cohorts quickly disintegrate into a free for all once the barbarians charge and the battle is joined. Also the barbarians are depicted as more of a band of brutes, using what it seems like bits and pieces of stolen armor and studded leather, they are more ugly than fearsome. I should point out though, that i absolutely love this movie, its one of my all time favourites, but i like nitpicking at historical movies :P Also, the intro with palladio is fucking amazing, nice videos dude :D
rene hernandez
hey nick, have given any thought about doing one on TROY?
2:40 is that . . . Obi-Wan?
The problem between a historical film and history leads to complex discussions. A historian watches a film and criticize all its inaccuracies, taking into account all the collected knowledge that: as an expert, has accumulated through years of book research. The objective of such professionals is to be closer to the actual true. On the other hand, the objective of a film is to tell a story. During production, all the crew members work together against time and budget. A lot of individuals with different opinions who are focused by the director to create the best product possible. These artist deal with locations, weather, technology, scenarios, and actors... to create a world that does not exist. Nevertheless, neither the film nor the historian have the final true, because the historian never was present at ancient periods of time; and the film just wants to establish an epic legend, not factual history. Similar to the Aeneid, written by Virgil between 29 and 19BC. It is well known how the poems from the ancient writers depict fantastical events, which are impossible nowadays. The main reason of a film is to inspire our human nature as equal as the beauty of written poems.
Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Within 4 years of Commodus' death, Septimius Severus had restored order and set Rome back on the straight and narrow. I'd consider the Crisis of the Third Century the big break between relative strength and stability and gradual decline (of the west, that is). During Commodus' reign the frontiers were quiet, there were no civil wars, the Antonine Plague died down, and the emperor's eccentricities were confined to the capital. The senators may have been alarmed, but your average provincial wouldn't have given a fuck so long as they could live their lives in peace. The shit hit the fan after Commodus died and the subsequent murder of Pertinax.
Rowan Gallagher
Love your videos, but I'd suggest dropping the intro. I, and probably many others, skip it every time.
Over rated movie. Certainly should not have won Best Picture
Caucus Flow
Congrats on your huge sub boost !
If you actually think that is how Roman legions acted in battle your understanding of their military tactics is no better than Hollywood. The initial battle scene is widely considered laughable by historians. Some of your other points aren't bad, but you screwed the pooch right up front.
Nicktrains thompson
Flaming arrows did exist! They were recorded as being used in the war between the Judeans and the assyrians in 700 bc, and the roman had a number of different devices for launching them. Hah
Rob Davis
I stopped watching after the second f-word. You really don't need to use language like this.
Alonzo McPhaul
Are you Serious?! This was a terrible film. I think you just like to give passes to English directors. You can't label Mel Gibson a troglodyte and also say that Gladiator is a good film. That plot was shit. The inaccuracies were blaring. And why would any director make a film about Roman Gladiators and subsequently title said film "Gladiator" just to build the plot around someone who, Even within the confines of the storyline, technically wasn't even a gladiator. This was a shit film. Ridley Scott gets away with this asinine nonsense simply because Blade Runner was awesome. And because Aliens had lots of chase scenes. Come on, Bro. Really? This was a good film? even in terms of what constitutes a good film this wasn't a good film.
I think that you have to look at modern war epics, post-80's, as focusing more on getting the look and feel of an era more correct than the facts. Part of this, I think, is that History is often more dull to the general audience than fictional story-telling is. For that reason, historical accuracy in Hollywood films is often more based around making things look and sound right. That said, I love this series and would love to see you move towards non-war epic historical films. Maybe Passion of The Christ or Imitation Game to start.
Justin 123
You know what funded the Colosseum? In 70 CE, Rome took Jerusalem, burned the city, and carried away all the Temple's gold. That gold was then used as currency to build that horrid place.
Charles Xll
''The beating heart of Rome is not the marble of the Senate, it's the sand of the Colosseum.'' For some reason I just love that quote.
It may not be 100% accurate, but it treats much of it's topic matter with respect. That's why people would think of this film as a good historical movie about a piece of Rome
Joshua Fox
Can't believe they didn't say anything about how RARE deaths were in Gladiatorial games. you really think the owners would spend all that money treating them like " well-bred race horses" if there were a 50% probability of losing one each match? How much would you invest in a race horse if you knew that if it did not win it would be immediately slaughtered? Gladiatorial combat was basically ancient RAW ( as in American wrestling) only less scripted.
...and he didn't even go into the armor & weapons...(sigh)...
Craig Dillon
Why does no one mention Demetrius And The Gladiators??? This was a great film from 1954-ish. Victor Mature, he is great in the arena. WATCH IT!!
I never thought for one moment that, at the end of Gladiator, the Empire would continue undiminished. In fact, I get the impression that the Coliseum was never used again. I mean, how could it be used once more, the people had been betrayed by Commodus and so the last thing they'd want to do or even be able to afford was more Gladiatorial Games.
Zab Romero
Maximus Decimus Meridius and his MF DOOM helmet >>>
Ey b0ss
if you'll do movies like this then please do thin red line thanks
Chris Cross
Another inconsistency is the use of the word, "emperor". I don't, for the life of me, in making films like this, why Hollywood can't get this right. In theory, the Roman Republic never ended-it simply became autocratic, to an extent. The figure mistakenly referred to as, "the Roman emperor" was actually someone given a series of titles by the Senate, based on what he'd achieved, militarily and otherwise. One of these titles was "imperator", which is a Latin word meaning, "commander-in-chief", and was originally used for the highest ranking officer in a Roman army regiment. This word later on got translated into French as "empereur" and into English as, "emperor", and lost its original connotation. Despite this, and the other historical inaccuracies you mention, I agree that "Gladiator" is a great film.
Turul HEMA
Great video, but there were a couple things you missed here. 1. Flaming arrows would largely be wasted arrows. They don't go far, would be expensive to make, and have reduced penetrating power. 2. Most gladiator fights did not end in death. Most deaths were accidental and the owner of the gladiator who was responsible for the death had to pay for the gladiators replacement. 3. The Colosseum is not nearly as large as it is depicted in the film. 4. The whole thumbs up or down for live or die did not happen and was actually conceived of in a painting called "Pollice Verso" that you actually included in the video. Bonus Fact. Not all legionaries wore red tunics. Roman Marines wore blue, and land units largely had a choice of color. It is said that legionaries like the color red, but that is largely the end of the historical description. Tunics likely were Red, White, as well as Yellow as those were cheap colors to make. The tunic colors were likely based upon where that legion is from. For example a Legion from modern day Spain would likely have yellow tunics as that was a regional dye.
Max Jet
I am very sorry, but I feel that you did an inadequate job on this video. There is just so many obvious things I feel you have left out. Just to name a few examples. 1. During the first battle the formations by the Roman troops were drastically incorrect. Any leak in the formation would have resulted in the forces being slaughtered instead of prevailing through 1 to 1 combat. Roman forces were very ill equipped and ill trained for 1 to 1 combat, there are hundreds historical events where the break of formation resulted in a total rout. Also Romans certainly didn't have german shepperd dogs. Onagers never fired into shelter like deep woods or at hills. That would be nonsensical 2. The depiction of Rome and it's architecture is grossly wrong, leaned on paintings from the Renaissance, but absolutely incorrect EXCEPT maybe the collosseum. 3. The gladiatorial fights are in no way historically accurate. Gladiatorial fights had a very little death rate and were primarily for show. Most of the gladiators put on huge weight in order to show injuries in a more specacular way and trying to protect bones and inner organs from being cut. Gladiators didn't want to kill each other, they wanted to entertain. Most fights were staged, they had much more to do with modern Wrestling, than actual fights. There are dozens of other important things. I feel you could have done a lot more research on it.
Yusei Fudo
Please review the Spartacus Saga! It's not very accurate historically speaking, but it's just awsome
i definitely prefer the old intro song like on this video.
The Flying Penguin
+ History Buffs Great review I like how u kind of did it a little bit differently this time. And yah I love this movie but I saw many unlikely things that would probably not happen while watching this move. Great job man keep up the good work!!!
Jack J
Really in the end it wasn't even the Roman Empire a lot of the people outside of Italy probably had more relations to the barbarians then rome
- musklz -
Wackeen Phoenix
Elijah Anderson
11:17 Wow. That's almost exactly what Batiatus said in the movie "Spartacus". " A gladiator is like a stallion. It must be pampered."
Reynolds Colton
When talking about Rome I can't help but think about how ironic it is that Italy would eventually become a shit hole and those geanic tribes would eventually become one of the world's most powerful nations.
I thought the Romans Epicenter was that little Casers restaurants.
Cyrus Moore
I'd really like to see a historical review on the starz series Spartacus
Pierre Enjalbal
Great work mate!
The movie Fury
I know it took a lot of work, and that it looks really good and it is cool. But a minute for a youtube intro is frankly ridiculous.
Kaiser Wilhelm
Your intro gives me a boner
Benjamin Rome Clarke
Marcus Aurelius didn't re-institute the firstborn-male-heir rule. It always existed, it's just that Marcus was in fact the only emperor (minus Vespasian) who actually had a son to succeed him in the first place. Unless they were deposed (in which case the Senate or Praetorians decided on the successor), most of the previous emperors had had to adopt their heir for lack of having sons (though this heir was always related to them somehow until Nerva adopted Trajan). Legally speaking, Marcus was the son of Antoninus, Antoninus the son of Hadrian and so forth back to Nerva. In fact, Commodus was the first future emperor who knew he was going to be an emperor from childhood (Caligula might have him beaten, but it's disputable). This might explain the entitled attitude Commodus (and indeed Caligula) carried into office. I'm sure you probably know this, History Buffs, but I thought this point needed some elaboration. It makes me wonder whether medieval Christian states would have had more effective leaders if rulers had adopted their successors rather than being obsessed with dynastic purity and resorting to incest all the time. *cough* France *cough*.
javier ortega
Your cartoon looks like a band member from gorillaz
Carl Johan Rehbinder
Another historical flaw is that they call Colosseum by the name it got almost a 1000 years after it was built - Colosseum. The original name was the Flavian Theatre, which it kept until around the year 1000.
Joanna Godfrey
my pet hate, stirrups and the wrong saddles, wish they'd go to some of the reenactments along Hadrian's Wall
graziano galasso
you made a lot of mistakes talking about this film, the rapresentation of the roman world in this film is really inaccurate and you haven't pointed it enough -the battle scene is inaccurate because the legionaries are using they're pila as spear and not like javelins, they helmets are pretty bad too -the most entertaining game for the romans was the chariot race and the colosseum was pretty small if compared to the Circus Maximum where these races took place -most of the times the loser gladiator would be killed because as you correctly said the gladiators were high valued -if the imperor had to decree the life or the death he used a different action sorry for my bad english
there was a scene where two fighters had watches on ..
daylight living
total krap the Anfitheater is so small inside,,,,the gladiator they didnt kill each other,,,its all balony Hollywood krap historicly ..The film is good but it has nothin to do with reality...And history books are krap too ,,,grow up people
Asa Hamarrhjarta
I love Commodus's death scene in this, with the rubber prop dagger bending during their struggle 😂
Caligvla Caesar
Actually, Fighting to the death in these games was quite rare. Are you fucking serious dude? Imagine if on every game a gladiator died... How soon would they be out of slaves. Usually if a gladiator fought well and honorably but still lost, he would be spared. It was actually like MMA today, only it was fought with Gladii and Axes and sometimes gladiator was killed. it wasn`t that bad at all. and NO they didn`t fucking fill the arena with water, that didn`t actually happen. There is no historical proof of that so you cannot say that it happened. BTW, i would say that speed is more important then strenght, since someone who is agile can dodge and counterattack effectively, he can keep his distance and quickly move in and make some good quick combination attacks. Rome didn`t "dissapear" forever dude. You insult Rome with that line! Gods damn you! Eastern Roman Empire lasted all the way to the 1453, Rome made the western Europe, without Rome Europe would be a shithole and America is pretty much modern Rome. Rome never died.
Patrick Stewart
If you had a slave that was a scribe who could read and write 7 languages, why would you make him a Gladiator? He'd be more useful as, well, a scribe!
Teddy N
Do the legend of the titanic or Balto.
Fire arrows... -_-
NICK CROMPT... no wait.
There seems to be many deleted scenes here that were not in the final cut of the film.
Qrow Summer-Rose
Gladiator: I will not have my historical accuracy questioned by you! HistoryBuffs: I’m not questioning your historical accuracy, Gladiator, I’m denying its existence
Nowel Bobke
God fucking damn it is that movie good, I dont cry easy, but that fucking soundtrack when Maximus dies man, god damn it's so sad and so good.
Fisty Carrera
so, the barbarians speak some barbarian language and the romans speak english...
paco ramon
No word about how Maximus gone from Germany to Spain in no time.
I need to detour away from your video's to get away from your accent.
Adriano Vazquez
even with all of the backlash and all of the comments on how it didn't deserve Best Picture (because it didn't), I have to say that 16 years later, Gladiator is still a very very good film. Hell, it feels a little more special now as an epic considering all of the uninspired blockbusters we get nowadays
OcarinaSapph1r3 -24
Thanks for this! I have to say, though- I was surprised by one glaring historic inaccuracy you failed to mention; that of Lucilla & her son *outliving* Commodus - more than merely an emperor's daughter or sister, she was an empress in her own right, as her husband, the Elder Lucius Verus had been Marcus Aurelius' first co-emperor- & when he died, it's implied she tried to keep a hold of political power (married for a second time, though she & her mother didn't initially approve, as he wasn't of the same level of nobility)- didn't get on with her sister-in-law, the new empress (left out of the film), & ultimately tried to overthrow her brother through an assassination & coup, but failed. By her first marriage, she had 3 children, 2 daughters (not mentioned in the film) & the Younger Lucius Verus (who, in fact died young)- & another son from her second marriage - the coup involved family, including her surviving daughter, cousins & her husband's relations, as well as the dissatisfied, including a commander of the Imperial Guard. Those involved were executed; the women were initially only banished, but he had them killed a year later- her second son *did* survive his mother & uncle, to be killed in the reign of later Emperor Caracalla of the Severan Dynasty (they, too were of noble Syrian extraction). Also, obviously, as the name & focus of the film is about gladiators, you know they're less likely to talk about other forms of Roman entertainment; but in truth, the Colosseum's arena didn't hold half as many spectators, nor was it as popular as the Circus Maximus, the hippodrome for chariot races that were *the* Roman obsession. Finally, & this is probably a ridiculously small nitpick to most, but it still felt glaring to me- history nerd that I am: Maximus' name is inaccurate, even for a fictional character; most male Roman citizens had 2, 3, sometimes 4 parts to their names (men like emperors or generals could even have more*)- his full name is apparently Maximus Decimus Meridius - however, the name Decimus would have been first/ cognomen (there were only about a dozen or so first names to be had ie. Gaius/ Marcus, & Decimus was accurately one of them, it originally meant 10), Maximus means 'great', not unlike Magus; it seems more an agnomen/ additional name (these were often used to tell great men with the same name apart: Marc Antoni's father was Marcus Antonius Creticus (relates to his governing of Crete)- personal name, family name, additional name/s for distinction; his grandfather was Marcus Antonius Orator)- & Meridius seems to link to his heritage, as he was a Roman of Spanish extraction- Meridia was a long-standing Roman settlement, in a 'civilised' part of the Roman world, Hispania - so 'Decimus the Great of Meridia', is what I've guesstimated his 'real' name to be - he doesn't seem to have a nomen/ family or clan/ gens name, unless Meridius is standing in for it- ie. Julius (the Julii), Claudius (Claudii), or- to give an in-film example, Aurelius, for one of the Aurelii gens. *when you get to adoption of emperors, freed slaves who by convention gained a kind of citizenship (family name from their former master, whose client they became) & such, it got more complex. Sorry for my ramble, lol.
Nick Bloom
"From this point forward, the empire focused in on itself and after centuries of mismanagement, inner fighting, and quite frankly going soft, would leave the empire open to uncontested barbarian invasions before it finally disappeared forever". Sounds like a warning for something very similar happening in European countries and countries of the Americas...
Discovered the channel yesterday...can't stop watching....help! Great video's and information giving about the historical correctness :) Really loving it!
Didivs Ivlianvs
Why didn't you even mention one of my favorite films and the original version of "Gladiator", 1964's "The Fall of the Roman Empire", with Alec Guiness as Marcus Aurelius, Christopher Plummer as Commodus (almost played by Richard Harris) and Stephen Boyd as Livius (the Maximus part)? Underappreciated on its release, it was a great movie, probably late for the genre. I love Livius' line to the conspirators after slaughtering Commodus, "You would not find me an acceptable emperor because my first act would be to have all of you crucified." And the bidding begins for the sale of the world (ignoring Pertinax).
"Grandpa Joe" officially secured a "thumbs up" for this video. lol
Say What
I beg to differ, Hans Zimmer could make a 10 minute long single shot of an empty can of baked beans look epic.
The Dishonored Coward
So when the Romans had invaded the Celts many refugees fled to south Africa,  beginning the south African iron age.
Eduard Macovei
In my opinion, at 4:20 it's clear to see that Marcus Aurelius speaks about the world ''I created''' because he refers to himself as '''Caesar'', which is, beside the actual title - ruler, emperor, you name it, a standard, a thing beyond the meaning of the titles. I think that's more in his mind than the actually title. It's like a superpower, it's like a demigod thing. I don't know if it's true, but this thing can be an explanation.