The plot                                                                                                                                                                           Introduction= Maximus leads an army to its victory. The king seems to favour him and offers him the throne since he is dying, the kings daughter mentions them having an history once were together. We learn he’s a family man just wants to go home to his family and not be involved in politics. We also learn that he is very patriotic and morally aligned

Complication= Kings son murders the king. Then orders the death of maximus and his family. Nobody but maximus and the princess are aware that the king was murdered. Maximus survives then goes home to find his family brutally murdered.

Rising action= He becomes a successful fighting slave gladiator. the people take notice of him. He becomes in agreement with his owner to use his fame to go back to rome. Where he becomes insanely popular.

Climax- The king comes to watch him, He comes face to face with the king, doesn’t kill him.

perphiany turning point- king can’t kill him but trys to figure ways to. Maximus somewhat gives up on avenging his family and plans to run away in the knight with kings sister

Falling action=The kings discovers their plans, he punishes his sister

moments of final suspense= king and maximus fight to the death and both die.

How Maximus is a tragic hero-

Hamartia[ FATAL FLAW]-

Peripeteia- [Reversal of fortune]- He becomes a slave, family is massacred

Anagnorisis-[when he makes a critical discovery]-

Hubris-excessive pride or self confidence-


Why we experienced catharsis in a much stronger way compared to king lear- To begin with we were more invested in the characters specifically the main character Maximus. This was because King Lear was not a likeable character. I am aware that when looking at the play through that time zone the natural order would have been enough to be invested in his fate. We are not of that time so need more to go on. Such as Maximus was likeable. He seemed like a good person from our perspective. At the beginning he wanted simple things that we can relate to such as to be with his family. The other thing is the way in which his fate came about. It wasn’t like in king lear at the end when everyone just died which made it almost unable to be emphasised with since the death was all so much at once and we didn’t really like any of the characters at all. Having the death of his family towards the beginning then the death of him at the end was more unexpected. Because not only are we used to their being happy endings of that genre. We also wanted to see the villain of the movie get what he deserved. So when they both died at once it was a strange sort of mix of emotions.


Villa in king lear compare to villain in the gladiator.

I feel that edmund was more aware of his immorality. He did the whole blaming thing that commudus did. Like everyone sucks and is stupid kind of thing. However i feel that commodes really did feel that he was being treated wrongly. For example he killed his dad. Because his dad didn’t love him and he needed to be the king. It was his dads fault that he had to kill him. He acted more on immediate emotion. Their wasn’t a heap of schememing involved in his most evil actions. However emund take the playing his brother and father of against each other. That involved more cunning and he knew what he was doing was wrong. However i fully believed that commodes believed that was he was doing was justified. He had a very victim mentality. He was also not as bright as edmund. Commodes relied heavily on his advisor to tell him what to do. he almost seemed like a spoiled brat acting out. Whereas edmund had a reason behind every action and a whole game he had in mind. The biggest difference between the two of them would probably be their upbringing. Spoilt brat compared to outsider because of his conception.

Ideas behind the movie-

Destruction of natural order- I feel that it can be looked at in two different ways. Such as if maximus hadn’t gotten involved in the natural order the fate that befell him wouldn’t have happened so it could be seen as his biggest mistake. However nobody wanted commodes to rule and i feel that even if he hadn’t gone around getting the throne as he had. Everyone would still have hated him in that role. Also the fact that the people themselves at the end of the day chose Maximus instead of comedies as who they liked and routed for says that the natural order may not have been the over arching point of the movie. Although it was a part of it.

Justice- I feel this had a strong theme in the movie. Simply because of how strongly Maximus believed in it. At least at the beginning what i need to work out is was what was driving him after the death of his family his need for justice or revenge or was it a bit of both? at the end when he has the change to kill comedies and doesn’t does that mean his need for justice over powers his need for revenge and would that mean that its his fatal flaw? At the end though their doesn’t see to be justice since they both die and the people don’t know that the late king had been murdered by the new one. Or does that further emphasis his fatal flaw. His belief in justice?








Respond now!