SVT Play: All Systems Operational Normally

Watch Online Gladiator

(1239296) 8.5 155 min 2000

Gladiator is a movie starring Russell Crowe, Joaquin Phoenix, and Connie Nielsen. A former Roman General sets out to exact vengeance against the corrupt emperor who murdered his family and sent him into slavery.

Russell Crowe, Joaquin Phoenix, Oliver Reed, Connie Nielsen
Adventure, Action, Drama
Ridley Scott

Disclaimer: This site does not store any files.

Product details

Audio English  Deutsch  Italiano  Español  Français  Gaeilge  Svenska  Nederlands
Subtitles 日本語  Čeština  Português  Australia  한국어  Filipino  Tiếng Việt  हिन्दी 
Quality 480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Genres Adventure, Action, Drama
Director Ridley Scott
Writer David Franzoni, David Franzoni, John Logan, William Nicholson
Stars Russell Crowe, Joaquin Phoenix, Oliver Reed, Connie Nielsen
Country Malta, USA, Morocco, UK
Also Known As Gladiatorius, Gladiador, Gladiaator, Gladiateur, Gladiator (El gladiador), Μονομάχος, Gladyatör, Gladiator - Special Edition, Skylmingaþrællinn, Gladijator, Monomahos, Gladiatorul, Gladiatoren, Il gladiatore, Gladiátor, Vijeta, Gladiaattori, The Gladiators
Runtime 2H 35M

Top reviews

Friday, 02 Oct 2020 01:14

Having been a big fan of both Mel Gibson and Ridley Scott, I was extremely excited to see them both collaborate to produce a movie on the same theme: the brutal exploits of the Roman Empire. Gladiator is a great movie that brought the story of Claudius, the founder of the Roman Empire, to life. The best aspect of this film was that the story felt very authentic, and therefore, almost felt like it was set in a true historical setting. The other major aspect that made this film a hit was the cast, which included a star studded cast of characters. All of them put in memorable performances. Mark Wahlberg, Russell Crowe, Christian Bale, Hugh Jackman, and Peter O'Toole were all superb. However, the two most memorable characters were Domna and Domna's son, Brutus. Crowe was absolutely riveting, and played his part brilliantly, with a real portrayal of brutality and emotion. The young actor was also excellent. Russell Crowe is one of the most underrated actors in Hollywood, and he really brought some of the best performances of his career in this film. He also had a major presence in the film. Director Ridley Scott made this film one of his greatest efforts, and he really did a great job. Although there were some issues with the script, he handled it well. The pacing of the film was also very good, making the movie flow at a good pace. The CGI was also great, and definitely stood out among other films in this genre. The special effects were very impressive, and really show the brutality that the Romans suffered during their reign. The music was also superb, and complimented the action sequences well. Overall, this is a great film that is a must see. It is not an Oscar contender, but it is still a very impressive and exciting film.
Sunday, 20 Sep 2020 19:04

Steven Spielberg brings us another knockout movie. Unlike "Dances with Wolves", which lacked the complexity of that well-known story, "Gladiator" is like a knife to the heart. A ruthless man can't be portrayed in a more graphic manner, and the destructive behavior of the character can't be made to look pathetic. Leonardo DiCaprio has proved himself one of the finest actors in Hollywood today, and it's a given that he's going to be remembered for the best performance of his career. The way he played the role of "Gladiator", like a true human being, was nothing short of brilliant. And what does this movie have to do with the story? Well, let's just say it's about the Roman Empire, what with it's spectacular architecture, super-numerous gladiators, and the apparent high value it placed on beauty. One of the main problems is that we never get a chance to see how they're killed. That's a main criticism, and if you've read the book you'll understand what I mean. The whole movie is full of references to other films. Gladiator is very much the most accurate depiction of Roman gladiators and the Roman Empire. I really enjoyed this movie. It's not like you could call it "necessary" or "important", it's just a great film. I can guarantee you'll enjoy it more than other movies you watch. In a movie that is, on the other hand, close to being boring, it's not as if you'll feel the need to stick to your seat and watch it over and over again. Go watch this movie, you won't regret it!
Saturday, 19 Sep 2020 02:15

When it comes to the storyline of this film, I have to say I have never read the novel. However, I don't think I would have noticed the many inconsistencies, had I not read the novel first. For instance, Commodus (Tim Roth), the highest ranking Roman official, is really his father. Not exactly how I would have thought of it. I guess the author thought of this quite a while ago and added it as a subplot of the book. The girl is a lot like Kathe'at "The Fist" or "Altaic" and looks more like her sisters. How do I know? It's because I have recently been in an army recruitment clinic in Iraq and the boys of my age group (14 and under) wore the same combat fatigues as the boys of this age group in the book. Plus they all wore the same types of hair ties. In short, there are many great things about this film but some bad aspects. The acting by all of the actors is great. They portray each character perfectly. I was a bit perplexed by why there are no characters in this film who look like them in real life. Now, I understand that this is not a realistic portrayal and there are unrealistic situations. However, the fact that no one in this film is in fact a real Roman, from a society that was a slave-owning society, is ridiculous. Then again, how would you expect a person living in a slave-owning society to be the most famous Roman? And if anyone is that famous, how do you think the populace would react to that person? I was actually very surprised at the level of admiration I had for Commodus. However, I was also a bit disappointed when he was introduced. After all of the years spent toiling at the Ministry of War and Commodus' exploitation of the people to accomplish his goals, his character is never mentioned. We get to see him only as a feared dictator. We never see him as a figure of respect, or a mentor. He is the most hated Roman in history, even more so than his father. The main problem of this film is that in reality he is not the most important Roman. He is the Emperor and a great threat to Rome. The book is an example of how things could have been. He is portrayed as a real Roman. He is the son of a common Roman, but is he just as great a threat as Commodus? That is what the movie is trying to say, but in the end it does not succeed.
Thursday, 13 Aug 2020 17:08

The 'great' and 'original' film of 2013 is Gladiator. Although based on a major historical event, it is not the first film that has been adapted to film, but this was done first by Ridley Scott (Blade Runner, Gladiator). The story of Gladiator is about two brothers, Cal (Kurt Russel) and Vercingetorix (Leonardo DiCaprio), and their father's battle to reign supreme over Rome's empire. Cal leads a rebellion, and is treated as a god, whereas his brother is treated as a servant, although he himself leads the revolt. They decide that Cal should be spared, and Vercingetorix becomes a warlord for the empire. Vercingetorix decides that his brother will be spared if he succeeds in his goal, and he gains the support of Cal's tribe. It is at this point that things get violent and bloodthirsty, which leads to Vercingetorix killing Cal and Vercingetorix's brother. This scene set the stage for the film, and it was really violent. The violence is much more gory than that in films like The Dark Knight (2008). Although the film is not really one of the greatest historical dramas, it is still great. In fact it is even better than Gladiator (1996). There is a lot of gruesome scenes, and the film is even more graphic than Ridley Scott's previous film. It is so brutal, and it's very well shot. The setting of the Roman empire, including the world's most powerful empire, are just so beautiful. The effects are amazing, and there is very little CGI. The film is told from three different viewpoints, which is very good. Both DiCaprio and Russel are great, and DiCaprio seems to be the main focus in the film. The film also stars Edward Norton, and he is amazing as the man who is very self-centered, and always sad. The film starts with a very slow and gentle introduction to the story, as Cal, the leader of the rebellion, meets with his father's chief minister Velleius. He meets with his father to try and explain that Cal and Vercingetorix are not brothers, and that they are from different nations. This meeting is very long, and the meeting is very confusing, until Vercingetorix explains that Vercingetorix was a warlord for the Romans, and Vercingetorix was a gladiator for the Gauls. Cal tries to explain that he was raised by his father and his mother to be a good fighter, and that he had a lot of luck because of his father. However, Vercingetorix explains that Vercingetorix was a gladiator for the Gauls, and he wanted to play the role of Vercingetorix. Cal tells Vercingetorix that he was a soldier for the Gauls, and that he should be treated the same as his brother. Vercingetorix says that he was a warlord, and he was treated differently because of that. In the end, Cal and Vercingetorix resolve their dispute, but Vercingetorix is killed by Cal's own men, and Cal is eventually driven mad with grief. Cal is killed in his last moments, and Vercingetorix is freed from prison. In fact, Vercingetorix is about to fight the Romans again, which is not very likely. This movie is an excellent and historically accurate film. It is beautiful, and the characters are interesting and well-developed. It has some really great scenes, like the scene where Cal sacrifices himself for Vercingetorix, the scenes where Cal leads the rebellion, and the scene where Cal is tortured. The violence in this film is very graphic and very much like that of Ridley Scott's Blade Runner (1982), but the film is actually more gory than that of Ridley Scott's Alien (1979), and Alien (1986). The violence in this film is also very realistic. There are times when scenes are not necessary to be in the film, and the film just ends when the violence is over. Although the film is about two brothers, the characters are not well developed, but I do like that the film actually shows
Sunday, 09 Aug 2020 03:13

The only reason I am giving it an 8 instead of a 10 is because I was offended at the one song in the movie that was put in there. (Warning: minor spoiler below) One of my friends said it was a terrible thing that the beginning credits didn't start with 'Arno' I told him it was terrible and he didn't like it I even had a meltdown and told him to tell me why it was bad. Then I realized why it was terrible. It was totally unnecessary. I'm sorry, I was just a little offended. The next thing I know, I was actually watching the movie and felt this way. I was making a lot of jokes, I was giggling a lot and laughing. But it wasn't in a good way. It wasn't "funny". I was laughing at the stupid things that the characters said and to the point where I couldn't control myself. This movie is a very good movie, it has great acting, the characters are interesting, and the plot is well structured. And a big part of that is the music. My girlfriend actually said she loves the music and I agree. It's catchy and has a good melody to it. But I think that they should have used a song in the beginning of the movie that wasn't a song at all. It was like a sin-no, the end credits song. A sin-no. Just a bad way to start the movie. There should have been a movie logo, or something in it. The fans of the movie could have gotten a shout out or something saying how they are so proud of the movie or some sort of words to that effect. There should have been a musical number that they could have done in the movie, they did this in Kill Bill, but it was so terrible that I didn't care. The thing that bothered me the most was that the movie made me hate the characters and their personalities. I had to laugh at them constantly, and this was done in the most funny way. I could have done it myself, but I am glad that I didn't. There are many things that I hated about the movie. There were some things that I could have done better and I was just really confused by the things that they did in the movie. The way that they moved the actors around was horrible. I think they moved their actors around a lot in the movie, in the beginning and at the end, and they didn't feel it at all. I was moving around myself and not liking it. Also, the way that they tried to capture the movie was really dumb. I don't like using special effects because I think it's just going to distract me from the movie. But it was obvious that they didn't use any special effects in this movie because when they captured the movie, the movie looked like a fake. I didn't like that. They should have taken some of the effects from a certain film and put it in this movie. I think that they should have used a lot more special effects in this movie. Also, what was that line from the movie? 'Arno, remember the things that made you happy? Everything changed'. The line in the movie was basically: 'You see, Arno, everything in this movie changed for you. And when you died, everything changed again'. I don't know why that was in the movie. I couldn't really understand it. If you want to see a good movie, watch the first one. If you want to see a good movie but still watch the first one, watch the second one. It's only 3 hours, so you can't really miss a thing. I do recommend watching this movie, but I recommend it to be watched by people that like to have fun and have a good time.

Write a review