The real reason why Gladiator II was panned by the critics – and it had nothing to do with sharks

ChatGPT Image Jun 3, 2025, 01 43 53 PM

It was when the CGI baboons came howling into the Colosseum—snarling, leaping, and performing martial arts routines that would have left Bruce Lee clutching his hamstring — that I began to have doubts about Gladiator II.

Because—and I say this as someone who has studied baboons in their natural habitat (Chester Zoo)—these creatures are not, generally-speaking, bloodthirsty berserkers. They are sociable, contemplative, even a little lazy, content to pass the time loafing around delousing their amigos, while displaying all the vigour and energy of a TikTok-scrolling teenager.

But in Ridley’s version? They’re simian Spartans. And if that wasn’t enough, in come the sharks. In the Colosseum.

You might say that Ridley Scott jumped his own shark.

And here’s the twist: the AI-powered CGI was cutting-edge. In fact, visually, the film was flawless. Even Derek Jacobi put in an appearance. And yet almost every review panned the film. Why?

Because when it comes to communications, no matter how good it is, AI isn’t enough.

It’s still all about the storyline.

Yesterday, on an Institute of Internal Communications webinar, I spoke about how AI will transform organisational comms — creating hyper-personalised content, delivered across multiple formats, tailored to every employee.

But even with the best AI platform, if your story doesn’t connect, the message won’t stick.

Gladiator I gave us Russell Crowe walking silently through a field of wheat—an image now seared into cultural memory – it’s even being parodied on social media: https://lnkd.in/eBAx86bx

No tech. No AI. No CGI. Just powerful storytelling.

In the age of AI, storytelling is still your most valuable skill.W

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn