Historical dramas are a difficult genre to work in. There is always that balance between accuracy and entertainment and the point of harmony between them is different for each viewer. Most people just want to be entertained and so don't have a major problem with the films portrayal of past events. There are others, like myself, who think that one does not have to be sacrificed for the other, that an accurate portrayal of times passed can still be wrapped around a good yarn. Any film with a historical setting is obviously setting itself up for this sort of scrutiny, especially one that is set against known events and uses real life characters. Now don't get me wrong, I loved this Ridley Scott epic, but there are still a few points to be raised against it. Having said that it is still way above most of the other films that fall into this category. Mel Gibson, for example, has a way of rewriting the facts when he attempts this kind of thing. The Patriot took place in a clean cut, black and white version of the American War of Independence that would be unrecognisable to any historian and to say that Braveheart was a portrayal of William Wallaces life is like saying that Star Wars is a factual critique on space exploration. With Gladiator we are on slightly firmer territory.

Marcus Aurelius and Commodus are historical realities and they are portrayed ably by Richard Harris and Joaquin Phoenix respectively. Russell Crowe is like a young DeNiro in the lead as a brooding hunk, his body language and expressions saying so much that is dialogue doesn't have to. Maximus, as far as Im aware, is thankfully a created character and Crowe comes across as everything that you think a Roman Warrior should be. Not so much a supporting cast as a lot of A list players taking on lesser roles make every scene come alive. Connie Neilsen plays the old flame and is as regal and elegant as a member of the Roman nobility should be, even if its just an image of our own making. Oliver Reed is the slaver that Maximus is set to work for, and sadly passed away during the making of this film, but he will rest assured that he went out giving one of the best performances of his life. Derek Jacobi and David Schofield as the scheming senators pay some memorable scenes and even Omid Djalili (Irans only stand up comic) is in there adding a touch of humour.

The purist will find a few bits difficult to swallow, Commodus introducing one of the political rivals as Senator Gaius for example, is like calling Mr Blair "Prime Minister Tony not a big moan I`ll grant you but something that with a bit of care could have been ironed out. The big stumbling block is this plot device of re-establishment of the Republic a political system that was not only a thing of the past but also an idea that would have been so treasonous that to talk of such things would have meant arrest and probably execution. "Rome was founded asa Republic"claims Commodus at one point, well that's not true is it, the Republic came about as a result of a backlash against the rule of a succession of tyrannical kings. This idea of having Maximus become the Protector of Rome is also an odd concept and more in keeping with Cromwell's position in Seventeenth century England that anything found in the Roman world.