Uh oh, rhinos and a newspaper are already leading ‘Gladiator 2’ to be called ‘Hollywood BS’

Director Ridley Scott‘s movie Napoleon was roundly criticized for historical inaccuracies. And based on what those who have seen Gladiator II, Scott’s next feature, have to say, the director hasn’t learned his lesson.

Gladiator II, expected Nov. 22, is a sequel to Scott’s 2000 epic, Gladiator, starring Russell Crowe and Joaquin Phoenix, which made millions at the box office worldwide and scored 12 Academy Award nominations, winning Best Picture and Best Actor for Crowe. The sequel stars Paul Mescal, Pedro Pascal, Denzel Washington, and Connie Nielsen, reprising her Lucilla role from the first film. Pascal plays Lucilla’s son and nephew of Phoenix’s Gladiator character, Commodus.

The plot otherwise revolves around Mescal’s story, who, as a boy, is sent into exile but soon returns to Rome to fight for fame and glory as a gladiator in the arena. Like Scott’s other films, it’s safe to expect a visual spectacle, but according to one historian who saw Gladiator II, the movie could have been called Sharknado: Ancient Rome, instead.

Sharks in the Colosseum?

Yes, that’s right, Dr. Shadi Bartsch, an author, professor, and expert on Ancient Rome, says scenes in the movie like a shark-filled Colosseum are “total Hollywood bulls**t.” There were naval battles recreated in the Colosseum, Bartsch told The Hollywood Reporter, but Ancient Romans didn’t even know what a shark was. Likewise, there are accounts of rhinos fighting Gladiators, but not the two-horned breed in Scott’s movie. Nor is there any evidence gladiators rode rhinos in the arena as they are seen doing in the film.

Perhaps most egregious, however, is the scene where someone reads a newspaper — as in ink on paper — while sipping tea in a cafe. According to Bartsch, that one’s a double-whammy. The printing press wasn’t invented until hundreds of years later, and while Romans had news of sorts, it was carved in stone and hung in certain areas. In other words, you had to go to it to read it, and you couldn’t carry it with you. Neither did the Romans have cafes, Bartsch said.

Scott says, “Get a life”

If it’s any consolation, early reports are otherwise calling Gladiator II a good movie, and even though Napoleon was eviscerated for lack of historical authenticity, it was a box-office success, as Scott’s upcoming Roman-sandal-hack-and-slash epic will surely be. Referring to Napoleon’s historical nitpickers last year, Scott told them to “get a life,” so clearly, when it comes to checking his history books for the truth, the director has other priorities.

Scott has made several historical films, and describing his research process, he told Total Film, “I’ve done a lot of historical films. I find I’m reading a report of someone else’s report 100 years after the event. So I wonder, ‘How much do they romance and elaborate? How accurate is it?’ It always amuses me when a critic says to me, ‘This didn’t happen in Jerusalem.’ I say, ‘Were you there? That’s the f**king answer.'”

On Napoleon‘s authenticity, Joaquin Phoenix, who plays the French leader, said, “If you want to really understand Napoleon, then you should probably do your own studying and reading. Because if you see this film, it’s this experience told through Ridley’s eyes.”