"Caesar, pirates are attacking the grain ships from Egypt!"
"That's not important right now, we need to send out the ships to capture more sharks for the Colosseum!"
The need for revenge unjustified, women in battle is a big no no and should be at home making dem sandwiches, and finally Pedro Pasquel's character crapping on masculinity.
It should be at least better than Napoleon.
Are most of the *ahem* usual (pansy) viewers getting upset at white YT's opinions again?
shareyou're all over the place. not sure which side you're on. anyways,
"women in battle is a big no no and should be at home making dem sandwiches"
why did you phrase it with a sarcastic tone as if this wasnt true? are women somehow warriors today?
They allude to it. Saying women should be kept far away from battle and the men are supposed to do the dirty work. What is a woman to do then but wait at home, do nothing? They'd be making dem sandwiches and patching the hubby up after giving the ravishing smecks he rightly thinks he deserves after a hard fought battle.
shareIf too many women die how do you repopulate? There's a reason women are kept out of battle, JFC.
shareyea that is a good point but also the fact that women simply arent tough enough to be warriors. the kind of men we see today when we walk around society are not the warriors we see in a war. they're much much tougher than that and can within extreme stress and violence. that's why you look at men and women walking around and you think, oh they're not that far apart. fact is, they're not even close to their limits every day. so when a war actually breaks out, women would get fucking destroyed in a real battle. women have never ever been warriors in all of world history for a reason. there are always exceptions but they're not plentiful enough to even form a battalion, never mind a whole army.
so why would anyone want to send women into a battle when they could give birth and do support activities at home.
Was critical drinker one of them
shareI found the response from YouTube’s White male reviewers profoundly disappointing. Their criticisms barely scratched the surface, and their lukewarm verdict — that the movie was merely mediocre — was a pathetic cop-out.
Where was the outrage over the woke nonsense crammed into this film? Female warriors, Black New Yorkers absurdly cast as Macrinus — roles they have no business playing — these choices aren’t just laughable; they’re insulting. And then there’s the glaring absence of strong, memorable White male leads.
Equity — the insidious 'E' in DEI — is the reason for this erasure. Strong White male characters have been systematically 'de-centered,' forced to share the spotlight with minorities or, worse, overshadowed entirely. In some cases, they’re excluded altogether. The fact that these reviewers failed to call out this blatant pandering with the anger it deserves is disappointing.
I don't what the "white male reviewers" say but yeah, Macrinus wouldn't have been black, but he would've been dark-skinned and North African.
Someone like the guy playing Ravi might've fit better in that particular aspect - but Hollywood isn't a institute of historians doing the most accurate depictions for our education. Denzel Washington has a major pull factor it's not like you could just swap around top tier celebrities like that and get someone else.
I don't know about the "female warrior". It was only one woman, in a land where she and her husband already were foreigners. It's not like she had much of a fate without him.
BOTH protagonists were literally strong white men. Acasius was a disgruntled general not content with men's lives being wasted in conquest. Lucius was a warrior, gladiator, and rebel commander who constantly participated in battles and in the end, led his own legion towards a revolution. The movie also mythologizes Maximus a lot too.
Acasius is played by Pedro Pascal, who is not White. And that is precisely what I was talking about — he’s the ultimate DEI hire. Instead of casting a White actor, which would have been the most authentic choice for the role, Hollywood, in its obsession with quotas, has made that impossible. So what do they do? They cast a Chilean actor who conveniently ‘passes’ as White. This way, they can brag to the DEI department about hiring a minority while still ensuring the character looks White enough to satisfy the narrative. It’s a perfect example of their hollow, box-ticking bullshit.
shareOn what basis do you draw the line on who is or isn't white? Chile is predominantly of European ancestry. Besides it's a FICTIONAL character so really it's for the director to decide who he is and how he looks. Even if he was a historical person you wouldn't know how he looked anyway.
A minority is just a group that there are few people of in a country so what does that have to do with anything? You do realize that you can be an minority ethnically in America and still white?
I think the cast bar Denzel perhaps paints a plausible picture of how these people might have looked and that you're seeing what you want to see. In the end that's why it's acting. Nobody was in Rome physically to give you an accurate, up to date representation of ANY of the things we see in the
movie our best guesses is all we have.
You'd be better off watching WWII movies where they could have consulted real veterans, watched real footage and complaining there.
First, it’s well-known in Hollywood that Pedro Pascal is not White, but he 'passes' as White, which is precisely why he’s cast in certain roles. This has been reported by Nerdrotic and others with insider connections in the industry.
Second, while 'minority' technically refers to a smaller group, it’s often used colloquially to mean Black and brown people. That’s the sense in which I’m using it here.
Third, we do know how historical figures looked thanks to the historical record — documents that detail their origins—and through the work of researchers who recreate their appearances. You can easily find such reconstructions online. For example, here’s a YouTube video featuring reconstructions of Roman emperors:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dz90uauo9nI&t=146s
I’ve timestamped the part featuring Macrinus (the character Denzel Washington portrays).
So i take it that you don't know yourself where you draw the line on who is white while simultaneously claiming that Pedro Pascal isn't. Because some guy "Nerdrotic" says so.
If he passes as white then why does it matter? That means his doing his job good. It's not like anyone else in the movie is a Roman citizen so i don't see why you need to get hung up on this specifically.
We don't really know down to the skincolor what a person looked like, even those that have busts of them remaining. Still it's unlikely that Macrinus was black as Denzel but i said that before.
Honestly, Pedro Pascal doesn’t bother me. If he passes as White, fine — not that big of an issue there. What does bother me is this insidious Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) agenda. The only reason he was cast is because he’s “technically” not White, and that alone checks a box. It’s quota-filling bullshit, and it’s infuriating.
If they wanted a White actor, they should’ve just cast one. But no — thanks to this DEI bullshit, being White is practically a disqualification. Forget about making a movie centered entirely on White people, or having a writers’ room full of White talent. Everything has to be force-fed “diversity,” and it’s so blatantly artificial and utterly repulsive.
This toxic, anti-White ideology — disguised as progress — is being shoved down Hollywood’s throat, and it has spread like a disease to every other industry as well. It’s maddening to watch
Eh….Pascal is a white dude.
shareHe is Chilean.
https://ethnicelebs.com/pedro-pascal
"Ethnicity: Chilean – including Spanish [Andalusian, Asturian, Canary Islander, Castilian, Catalan, Extremaduran, Galician], Basque, Indigenous, 1/16th French, 1/64th Welsh, remote Portuguese, as well as Argentinian, Bolivian, Mexican, Panamanian, Peruvian"
Two things:
1) His ethnic ancestry is mostly from Spain with a few other things thrown in…..which is European and white.
2) In the Chilean Census figures…..almost 60% of the country identifies as white.
Pedro Pascal is a white dude.
Hell, the first six ancestries listed on your cite…are Spanish, Basque, Indigenous, French, Welsh and Portuguese……5 of those are European.
I agree, he’s primarily of European descent, but he also has Indigenous heritage. I believe he mentioned in an interview that one of his grandparents were Mapuche.
shareBut who is the target audience for this film? It's mostly men and boys, and probably white ones at that. Why not give them what they want, instead of subverting the characters and themes that made the first film such a success? Why not have respect for your audience? It's only like this when IP is one that appeals to white boys and men.
shareIt’s amazing how something so reasonable and obvious refuses to be considered by the powers that be. Either they are so profoundly stupid that they don’t understand it, or they are so deeply captured by this insidious Woke, anti-White ideology that they refuse to see reason. I suspect it’s the latter. They are ideologically captured, and that’s why they refuse to learn.
share