Like many of the sword-and-sandals epics of its age (e.g. Ben-Hur), Spartacus is deeply subversive in a way that isn't obvious to a superficial "anti-woke" commentator. It's open to debate how directly the allegory is aimed at the modern West and especially America, but that's certainly my reading and the readings of several other dissident thinkers. Many people at the time had a sort of naïve faith that if it had a message as an American film, it must be anti-Soviet in some way  - and some still read it that way - but I'm going to continue with the far more popular dissident reading. Indeed, it's noteworthy that the Soviet Union saw fit to screen Spartacus in cinemas as they interpreted it as an attack on America and the "American Dream", using the Roman Republic as a proxy. It's a coded attack on European civilisation as a whole, using Rome and the whole "it was a different time" logic[1] to justify itself to an undiscerning public. You can still enjoy Spartacus, of course, so long as you bear in mind that you're entering the lion's den -- and get it through your head that Rome is a stand-in for America as the post-WW2 hegemon. The film accurately portrays Rome as a beautiful, glimmering edifice but also (inaccurately) as a soulless and unearned establishment built on the back of slavery and oppression (and therefore internally ugly and invalid). This is how its deconstructionist creators saw America and the vacuousness of the "American Dream", very much in keeping with today's progressive version of history. The protagonists are the opposite: the dirty, bedraggled ragtag group who represent the counterculture. The heroes are intended to represent the sort of "Spaceship Earth", brotherhood-of-man idyll that some see as utopian but that the sane have long rejected as impossible due to its craven incompatibility with natural law and the nature of man.[2] It's a proto-hippy parallel to the early '60s zeitgeist of New Left awareness: a misguided sense of abstract "good" that would ultimately harm all involved (and continues to do so today) and topple the established European order in America in favour of a more.. exotic flavour of leadership. The long march through the institutions as it was termed by its own devisors (including Antonio Gramsci, the neo-Marxist  uber alles) was complete in America by the end of the 20th century, in my opinion, and Spartacus played its part.[3] Like almost all 21st century historical dramas, the epics of the '50s and '60s were totally ahistorical in their own way (though at least the people were an accurate colour). Almost nothing is known about Spartacus's life from primary sources and virtually everything in the film is an invention. Far more is known about Crixus but, again, the film isn't particularly true to life. It wouldn't matter so much if this didn't purport to be a historical drama. Errors in, say, the Fu Manchu series are easily forgiven. Spartacus, less so. Nonetheless, it's apparently enjoyable to many and it's possible to read into it a simpler, more universally agreeable anti-slavery message. I just personally don't see the appeal of it. That may be because I didn't grow up with it. By the time I saw it, I was already analysing it for subtext. It was gratifying in the most superficial sense to observe from  where so many pop culture memes had originated, and the violence was surprisingly realistic (read: bloody) for its time and place as a mainstream Hollywood release. I just don't see its appeal as an all-time classic or even a particularly enjoyable piece of film. But I readily concede that (a) this isn't my genre and that (b) I have almost zero tolerance for attempted subversion at this point (and that my radar is constantly at full power). For the latter, however, Hollywood itself is to blame. I don't keep my guard up the same way when I watch anime, for example. Ultimately, if this film is not already deeply embedded within your life, I don't see any point in exposing yourself to it. You're certainly not missing anything that's going to change your life unless you're a huge fan of these epics and willing to tolerate their shortcomings (while remembering that you deserve what you tolerate). My justification was just wanting it off my cinema bucket list, but it's actually persuaded me that, no, I don't need to run through all 101 Films to See Before You Die (or any similar books/articles). To each his own but, for me, there's still so much great stuff to watch that I simply don't care about Spartacus. [1] This is also the excuse that Boomer women, uncommitted Christians, and some normiecons use to explain and justify to themselves watching """history""" dramas that are essentially soap operas with gore and softcore porn like Rome and Vikings. Incidentally, those series portray their civilisations as being infinitely more diverse than they actually were and with greatly more female combat involvement than was realistic -- so viewers are getting a healthy dose of propaganda with their degenerate entertainment. [2] Thomas Sowell is, ironically, the ideal quote mine for this: "Can you cite one speck of hard evidence of the benefits of "diversity" that we have heard gushed about for years? Evidence of its harm can be seen — written in blood — from Iraq to India, from Serbia to Sudan, from Fiji to the Philippines. It is scary how easily so many people can be brainwashed by sheer repetition of a word." "Is diversity our strength? Or anybody’s strength, anywhere in the world? Does Japan’s homogeneous population cause the Japanese to suffer? Have the Balkans been blessed by their heterogeneity – or does the very word “Balkanization” remind us of centuries of strife, bloodshed and unspeakable atrocities, extending into our own times? Has Europe become a safer place after importing vast numbers of people from the Middle East, with cultures hostile to the fundamental values of Western civilization?" [3] Neo-Marxism (or Western Marxism) is really just the "cultural Marxism" that they (including Wikipedia) tell us is a "conspiracy theory". But Marxism has always had designs on the culture (using, in their own vernacular, the "base" to target the "superstructure"). If you haven't already, you absolutely must read The Communist Manifesto to understand the world we live in. It's only about 50pp and is fairly easy to read. In it, Marx rails against the nuclear family and religion and other pillars of our civilisation, including the very borders that delineate our civilisation from the next. The fact that Wikipedia tells these lies and is heavily promoted by Google which, in turn, has a monopoly over search (and most information) in the US is sufficient to make my point that the institutions have been well and truly captured.