Film Gladiator and American Politics - Essay Example

s Gladiator and American Politics The film Gladiator was a critical success for director Ridley Scott that forever engraved his name in Hollywood as one of the most leading filmmakers. The story followed the fall and rise of a Roman general, Maximus who was wronged by the ambitious Commodus and forced into slavery, after a conspiracy gets him involved in the murder of the king. Maximus loses everything in the process, even his family; as his wife and young son are tortured, hanged and their bodies burnt. Gladiator became one of the most successful Hollywood films, not only because of its extravagant special effects and compelling storyline, but it was also because the commentary it served as on the then state of politics in America. The essay will summarize the parallels drawn in the film and the metaphoric representation of all the political processes and in conclusion, the paper will discuss how the movie succeeded in emulating and approximating the real-world sentiments. One of the greatest themes discussed in the movie was the theme of democracy. This is not only because Rome was the first empire to implement the basic principles of democracy, but at the time the film was made, the United States was already tackling a string political scandals that the then-President Clinton got involved in and George Bush was about to assume the office soon. The former concept is shown in a very intense scene after Maximus wins a battle in an epic showdown, using his military expertise which grabs Commodus’ attention. The crowd loves Maximus to the point that when he publicly threatens Commodus, he is able to go unharmed and is allowed to live because the public favors him greatly. The aforementioned was not only intense because of the great acting by both Russell Crowe and Joaquin Phoenix, but because of the symbolic value of this entire scene. The gladiatorial games were vastly meant for public entertainment and therefore they had ultimate say in helping the winner achieve glory and position in the society, even though the individual in the arena is more or less of a slave. When Commodus is confronted by Maximus, he is forced to give him the thumbs up as the crowd fervently hailed Maximus and roared his name. The helplessness of their so-called Emperor to public demand was ostensible and such is the case in a democratic system of government, whereas the government caters to serve the public and keep them happy to ensure they do not rebel against them. This is the reason, why Commodus had to put forth a charming and amiable front despite his conniving and brutish nature. It makes it ostensible that in a democracy, politicians create an image according to the demands of the people so that they are elected and loved by the people. (Scott 2000) Before delving in to the state of affairs at the time of the release of this film, the substance of this prose will first describe the personality traits of each character first. The main protagonist of the story, Maximus can be seen as a loyal and shrewd general, who is greatly loved by the Emperor Marcus Aureoles who also wishes for Maximus to become his successor. Despite the many accomplishments under his name, he still longs to go home and is not tempted by the glory and his successes to take up the offer that Marcus gives him. He wants a quiet peaceful life with his family, but he stays with Marcus for the sake of his country as well. Therefore, it can be observed that he has all the qualities of an ideal hero. He has made a shrine in his tent with figurines of wife and son. The scenes where he is shown kneeling in the shrine, the cinematography and lighting is done in such a manner that it seems almost like a church and gives a sense of spirituality that Maximus is clearly endowed with. Before going in to battle or any gladiatorial game, he bends down to rub the earth on his palms and then he smells it. This particular action establishes that Maximus possesses humility and was also symbolic of love for his country. Even with regards to Maximus’ general appearance, he was shown to have a beard and masculine traits. On the other hand, Commodus is the love-starved son of the emperor and is portrayed as an exact antithesis of Maximus; he is clever yet ambitious and has no real regard for family. His father realized his son’s nature and subsequently chose Maximus as the ruler, but the king is eventually murdered by Commodus. He is infatuated by his sister and throughout the movie a romantic link is hinted between the two. He has a boyish charm about him, unlike Maximus’ masculine appeal. His lecherous nature becomes even more pronounced when he is about to force his sister to create a pure bloodline with him. His lust does not end at his sister, but he also cheats in order to defeat Maximus to establish his own power and get rid of the senate. The distinction between Maximus and Commodus is quite obvious, but it is intriguing that these characters were in fact mere parallels for real-world politicians and political drama that was going on at that time. When President Clinton was found guilty of cheating on his wife with his secretary, it was a very trying time for the entire nation for they had raised their leader on a pedestal that makes them seem almost saintly in all there endeavors. Commodus’ character was loosely based on the people’s perception of Clinton at that time, whereas Maximus was based on George W. Bush who was marketing himself as an America, Christian family man. The public had been sorely disappointed in Clinton and therefore, when Bush came forth with his immaculate image, a lot of people were motivated to vote for him and as a result he was elected as the president. The most important aspect of the entire political drama was that the public played an integral role in it and eventually, the main deciding authority was given to them. Clinton lost his integrity and honor because of the scandal, because not only was he found lying about the affair but he kept on denying it. After substantial evidences were found, only then he came out and even then tried to justify himself by claiming that he had no forms of penetrative sex with the woman (Hennenberger 1998). This aspect was found in Commodus as well, for he did not feel an ounce of remorse after killing his father and long after it he tried to justify his behavior as he felt it was the right way or the only logical solution. Clinton’s affair was metaphorically represented in Commodus’ unhealthy infatuation and lust for his sister. At the end of the movie, the senate prevailed and the power is returned to the people and in real-world, the so-called happy end was obtained with the election of George Bush. Another interesting aspect covered in the film was the role of women in the governance of the country. Commodus’ sister is a widow who is left with a son. She is aware of her brother’s affections for her, but there is in fact a love triangle between Commodus, Lucilla and Maximus. Lucilla was a gifted politician; she had the diplomatic nature of an ideal leader, which was obvious when she used her charm and charisma to calm her brother down and even keep the senate at bay, when they were clearly displeased by Commodus’ instability and his rash behavior. She is more perceptive than Commodus and is more shrewd than Maximus; the latter can be observed when Maximus haughtily brushes there offer of collusion, whereas Lucilla acts civil towards her brother despite knowing the threat poses to her and her son. She acts discreetly; however, even then she is not suited to be ruling position and her character can be considered to be a parallel for several real-world personalities. The reason why Lucilla was not considered to be fit for an authoritative is because she was too emotional that rendered her incapable of staying objective. In the end she turns out to be traitor, who divulges the plot to Commodus after giving in to his threats. Although, her reasons for turning back on the plan are understandable and it is important that she only feared for the safety of her son and she did that to save her son, but usually for such tricky it is usually desirable that the individual is able to detach their self from emotional attachment to successfully execute a plan. This facet of the problem explains as to why people are so skeptical in electing a woman to the office. Even though there have been several worthy candidates but in the end, all of them get caught up in scandals that forever mar their reputation in the public eye. For instance, Sarah Palin’s multiple scandals and frivolous earned her great rebuke and censure from the public that in the end resulted in her resigning from her post. Palin not only gained attention for her media image but she was also considered to be wasteful and known to be spendthrift when it comes to purchasing dresses (Dunn 2011). Hillary Clinton was one of the most prominent rising female politicians; even she was no stranger to criticism. In conclusion, the film gladiator is a loose representation of the state of American politics that is established according to audience’s perception of events. For the public, either an individual is completely good or completely evil, which in this case can be seen in the form of the main protagonist and antagonist, Maximus and Commodus respectively. The movie also discusses the role of women political affairs and why they are unable to come to the forefront of all governing a country, even though they possess the tact and attitude to be excellent leaders. The film deals with the general public opinion and it is not absolute that women are inept when it comes to politics, but so far it is the widely held view. The movie ends by highlighting the importance of public image and underlines that in the end, an individual may survive only because of their popularity Works Cited Dunn, Geoffrey. Palin Agonistes: Governors Aides Charged with New Ethics Violations. The Hufftington Post. 2011. Web. Gladiator. Dir. Scott, Ridley. Universal Pictures, 2000. DVD. Hennenberger, Melinda. The President Under Fire. The New York Times. 1998. Web. Read More