Russell Crowe took the lead in the original film as the Roman gladiator Maximus and saw a different presentation of masculinity. Crowe depicts masculinity in its most traditional sense, a physically strong male whose concern is for his family, whereas Mescal shows Lucius’ internal conflict that I believe offers a more 3-dimensonal character. Crowe stereotypically plays authoritative male icons such as Robin Hood where his dominance can be asserted.
the hero of Gladiator II addresses male emotions and inner turmoil that its predecessor neglected
Gladiator II sees Paul Mescal take the stage as Lucius, an emotionally complex and compelling character, one Mescal is well equipped to play from his expertise in emotionally challenging roles such as All of Strangers (2023) and Normal People (2020). Gladiator II depicts how society has evolved across the last 20 years where audiences have come to crave more complex characters rather than stock stories where the hero gets the girl. It feels as though Gladiator has the good/bad roles set rigidly whereas in Gladiator II the villains are less black and white. Those who prefer traditional films with stock roles would lean towards the original, whereas I think Gladiator II is a beautiful re-definition of what it is to be a man.
It would be an over-exaggeration to say Mescal adds a layer of effeminacy to the role however he adds more emotional intelligence. If we were to ascribe the gladiators to Greek heroes, Maximus follows the ideas of what makes Achilles a great hero and Lucius follows the ideas of what makes Odysseus a great hero. Achilles embodies strength and furor (rage) whereas Odysseus showed cunning and intelligence. There is no doubt that Mescal’s portrayal of Lucius was filled with rage like Achilles, but Lucius’ decisions throughout the film show his morals are more than just blood-thirsty.
What both men do depict, is strength and honour.
Although Maximus and Lucius face similar tasks as gladiators, both characters meet different stories and undeniably different endings. Without giving too much away, I found the characters the actors portray are vastly different from one another, most notably in how they perceive their relationships with Rome. Maximus is willing to die for his country whereas Lucius was raised a Numidian. Mescal adds a new layer of vulnerability to his gladiator, a quality that I feel Crowe lacked, which allows Gladiator to be relevant to a modern audience as heroism has been re-defined.
Ultimately, Crowe and Mescal are very different actors and naturally the characterisation of their characters have been approached very differently. To me, it feels the films should be treated separately as each actor works to define his gladiator’s world, their relationship with the Roman Empire, and masculinity. What both men do depict, is strength and honour.
