How important is the movie 'Gladiator' when it comes to an understanding of gladiators in Ancient Rome?

How important is the movie 'Gladiator' when it comes to an understanding of gladiators in Ancient Rome?





In other words, how accurate is the movie? and what aspects of the movie are real?|||If you're talking about the movie overall, then no, not very accurate at all.





Some specific things you may be able to pull out and view as being correct but otherwise...





Still, historical films are good at helping you get into a frame of mind of a different sense of time, which is an important thing to try and imagine when studying history.|||Trying to learn history by watching movies or reading fiction books is the worst way simply because the makers/authors are forced to put aside history in order to maintain the "entertainment" value for the viewers/readers. Almost all of the historical aspect of the movie is wrong (such as the emperor wanting to commit incest, killing his father or dying in the arena) and so are many of the scenes/info regarding gladiators.





For example the "Thumbs Up/Down" sign was not in practice, many gladiators were friends, gladiators from one group did not fight from another group, they often fought against those with whom they had trained with. Giving you the link for the complete list of "historical accuracy" of the film. This is not in the link..but gladiators were not usually chained and many of them willingly signed up as gladiators coz the pay was good|||Two different questions there, really...





How important is the movie?





Huge. First major movie since 'Spartacus' to address the theme, gave a lot of people an interest in ancient history.





How accurate is it?





VERY inaccurate indeed.





Seriously, there's not many aspects of the movie that bear close scrutiny.


But most of the inaccuracies are matters of detail - for example, the only uniform reference we have for Praetorian uniforms indicates they were white, not black - and that in ancient Rome, the statues we think of as gleaming white stone were actually brightly painted.





If you can put up with little points of detail like that, the movie gives a good 'flavour' of the period.





Gladiatorial combat was actually very tightly regulated.





The gladiators who fought animals, for example, were a separate discipline - the Bestiarius. They were considered a lower status than Gladiators. No tigers would have been released against Gladiators!





The matched pairs were the highest level of gladiatorial combat.





Each fighter would be trained in a specialised style of fighting using specific weapons: the retiarius, who used the net %26amp; trident, the Thracian, with a short-sword and small shield, etc.


All these types had a different combination of armour %26amp; weapons.





Among these types, there were traditional pairings. The Hoplomachus, with his spear %26amp; Greek shield, was usually paired against the Myrmillo, with a legionary shield %26amp; short-sword.





In a gladiatorial fight, the gladiators would not be alone in the arena. Referees would stand by armed with sticks. They would beat reluctant fighters.. when there were group fights ("Gregatim") they would prevent 'ganging-up', and they would stop a fight when a wound was sustained to see if combat could continue.





It was not always the free-for-all of the movies.





Whoever was sponsoring the games would have to pay the Lanista - the owner of the gladiators - for any fatalities. And the more famous the gladiator, the more he was worth. So for trained Gladiators, fighting to the death was not the usual routine.





Criminals %26amp; prisoners of war - the 'Noxii' - were killed as a matter of routine. In fact, if criminals somehow survived their fight, they'd just have to face another opponent right away.


(When the arena held mass battles with hundreds of fighters, they were usually men of this category, rather than trained Gladiators.)





But if the sponsor of the games was willing to pay for a fight to the death, that's what he got.





Fights could also be declared a draw, considered an honourable outcome for both fighters.





If a gladiator was too badly wounded to continue, then they might appeal to the mercy of the crowd, as per Hollywood.





If they were too badly wounded to survive, they would be finished off by a member of the arena staff, dressed as Charon, the boatman of Hades.





One thing the movie addresses to some extent is the social role the games played.


Political candidates and their factions sponsored games, and tried to outdo each other with extravagance and bloodshed. Free tickets to the games were a tool for keeping the unruly mobs of Rome happy.





The Emperor Commodus really did appear in the arena, under the name of 'Hercules'. His fights were carefully stage managed so he faced no real danger - helpless slaves to be killed, Gladiators who would surrender to him, and he killed literally hundreds of animals. His behaviour was considered disgraceful by the senate %26amp; the nobility. He sponsored lavish games... but he charged the city of Rome for his appearances, so it actually cost him nothing.


He was WAY worse than the movie Commodus!





Hope that helps!|||All the aspect that there are in the film are the same in Ancient Rome.


betrayals,incests,struggles,shows in the Colosseum,slaves,the training of gladiators.


The only thing that may be false is the fight between the Emperor and the Gladiator.


He would never have happened in Ancien Rome.





P.s: I was in rooting for the emperior! can not always win the goods.