Pompeii Movie for Those About to Die Funny
It all depends on your attitude
Yous can take this movie from two different sides.
As somebody who is very much interested in history and geography and has studied both for many years, this movie is obviously full of mistakes and incorrect stereotypes. It is nearly every bit inaccurate as the "Spartacus" serial. And this is never an original movie. We accept all watched movies with very similar story lines about the evil Romans who want to control everything, the poor gladiators who stand up confronting them and the forbidden love between a rich young adult female and a foreign slave. I can understand why many people are rating this film downward. If yous really want to watch a sophisticated pic about that time, become for the classic "Ben- Hur".
What I recollect is strange is that all these stereotypes were highly predictable from the trailers only. I am asking myself why people even went to watch this motion picture if they were going to hate it for the reasons mentioned to a higher place. Some people but want to bash a moving-picture show and seem to have a very sad life if they waste their fourth dimension watching picture they dislike so much.
I went to watch the movie for something different. I wanted to lookout man a colourful flick with impressive sets and costumes and stunning 3D furnishings of an exploding volcano. I was eager to lookout man a fast footstep flick with a lot of fighting scenes, some tension here and at that place and maybe a few beloved scenes with beautiful actresses. And I exactly got that.
In improver to this, the acting was just adept enough and included a few interesting characters. I really liked Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje and Jessica Lucas in this film even though they played stereotypical characters and could take had more screening time. If y'all are going to watch this movie for Carrie-Anne Moss or Kiefer Sutherland, please practise not. They have been much better in other movies in the by.
In the stop, it all depends on you lot. If you lot want to watch an original and profound movie and acquire something about the Roman Empire, just forget information technology. If you want to lookout a effect ridden action adventure, y'all are going to like this. It is not the movie of the yr merely I surely had a smashing fourth dimension watching information technology.
354 out of 444 constitute this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Pompeii
Let'south get-go with the positive: the pic looks great, the visuals and effects really work. Fiddling else does, though. The bandage acts wooden, the story is predictable and boring, borrowing many elements from Gladiator and the end is cheesy equally hell. Overall a real waste of time.
47 out of 56 institute this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Underrated
While non a classic, Pompeii is really a pretty enjoyable disaster/activity motion-picture show that I couldn't expect to encounter back in 2014. I remember enjoying it in cinemas and have just sentinel it again for the 2d time. I really demand to get effectually to watching the 24 minutes of cutting footage as I feel several characters were highly underused, especially Carrie Ann Moss and Jessica Lucas. While the ending nevertheless kinda annoys me, I really don't retrieve it could've concluded any other manner.
It's fast paced, has some keen activeness scenes and is an overall pretty decent. Nowhere near every bit bad as others are making out to be. I wish Emily Browning would make more large budget movies.
x out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Why DID I like this film?
Many people are out at that place saying information technology'south "historically inaccurate", information technology's "a remade of gladiator WITH A VOLCANO!" and a very cliché motion picture. but I'thou saying it is a actually good motion-picture show on information technology'southward own, considering that this IS A DISASTER MOVIE. And in many aspects this is better than 2012, Volcano, or other movies similar these. For starters, there is an actual plot to the movie before the volcano erupts.
Other things I liked:
- The gladiatorial theme is well presented. Yous can see people who hate being a gladiator, people who are but waiting for their freedom, people who believe they are gods in the arena, and so on, and you can lookout how the majority of Romans loved these shows, just some didn't. Y'all can make yourself an thought of the weather of that theme.
- The romance is conceivable. I hateful, information technology happens very fast, merely it's not Disney'southward "Real Honey" They are only two people who Like each other caught in the massive chaos of a volcano, non much more.
- the special effects are manifestly crawly! Not but the gigantic explosion and lava bombs, and tsunamis. Also the pocket-size things, similar the views of the urban center in the background, and the aerial shots.
- The city was astonishing. People complain "Pompeii is not a port city" Well, really it WAS, merely the eruption inverse the shape of the coastline. And the fact that THAT metropolis shown in the picture show WAS Pompeii. They actually shoot in identify and then recreated the city out of the remainings using CGI. So the filigree shape, the walls and everything is in place simply as it was 2000 years ago. Archaeologists take in fact praised the managing director for his recreation of the city
- the volcano. It's the star of the movie without a doubt. It seems to accept about a personality. The mode the eruption happened was very close to what actually happened. Some artistic liberties were made for the sake of entertaining. You won't be seeing any clichéd lava river because Mount Vesubius doesn't piece of work that way.
- The ending. It was amazing. I tin can't spoil it for you lot, merely making it in any other way would accept damaged the quality of the motion picture.
- The acting. Information technology was really adept for what I was expecting. Milo surprised me a lot, considering I could really believe him as a atomic number 82 man. The daughter also. She seemed and then plain in photos, but once the moving picture started I could say she nailed the function perfectly and was by no means just "miss fanservice", as girls in these kinds of movies tend to exist. The real surprise was Atticus. The actor totally stealed the movie for himself in every scene, something that was perfect for an invicted champion in the peak of his gladiatorial career.
What didn't I like? The fact that the other famous city in the vicinity of Vesubius(Herculaeum, I think information technology's called) wasn't showed in the aeriform shots. I mean, obviously the flick would exist to complicated if we include it in the plot, but an aerial cameo of this other urban center would have been a fine addition to the motion-picture show, and would have improved the accuracy of information technology.
53 out of 63 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Outside of some effects - just bad.
Dialogue & acting - repackaged as old English language (18th century) by Hollywood for it's lyrical movieness (and to fit Hollywood stereotyping). Acting was daytime lather TV level.
Characters - noncreative, plug and play characters due east.1000. gladiators (i black & soon to become friends with adversary - been done before); other gladiator sees parents die at Roman hands and is at present old enough for revenge - too been done before; really bad Romans acting desperately; aristocratic pretty daughter (still has 21st century make upward, center liner, etc.) falls for slave gladiator (of class).
Action scenes - good gladiators defeat dozens of Romans as brunch (I was waiting for i manus tied behind the back and blindfolded simply the writers copped out).
CGI - flashes of CGI volcano every five to ten minutes to remind united states of america of what the movie is nearly. Familiar scenes of water rushing over the urban center - already used in many tsunami movies and is getting old. Looked like the same moving ridge used in several Indian Ocean tsunami films recently, but non as well washed every bit say in "The Impossible". Fireballs came off every bit comical fireworks effects.
23 out of 34 establish this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3D first, Movie 2nd
The movie Pompeii was obviously thought-up and directed around the 3D furnishings. The plot, acting, and script must have all been after-thoughts to the 3D fireballs shooting off the screen, 3D ashes floating in front of your eyes, and the 3D objects being hurled around by tidal waves.
It was watchable, but don't be expecting a fabulous plot that you haven't seen dozens of times in other amend movies. The bad writing had near of the actors come off sounding like lifeless wooden statues that would say and do very unbelievable things only to keep the story going. Everything was very predictable. So anticipated, in fact, at that place were a couple of moments I could have sworn I did come across information technology before!
This was a proficient example why I typically do no like 3D movies. Having some expert 3D effects is non a valid excuse for making a bad motion-picture show!! This definitely could have been much better!
165 out of 218 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Extremely Underrated phenomenal film!! Its non gladiator its Pompeii!! Loved it!!!
1st off it isnt gladiator nor is it trying to exist!! Its a disaster movie with an first-class story thrown in. I compare it to the masterpiece titanic. Not as proficient as that but very very close!! If it was iii hrs it might exist correct in that location with it. Loved the plot, the special effects were spot on non overdone just enough to give it that tension and fright that a disaster creates. The dear story wasn't forced and was believable they had chemistry and what an crawly catastrophe!!! The 3d was exceptional and it's in my top 25 3d movies of all fourth dimension. It actually benefited my buy of the bluray because of the moronic low five.five rating ( really?????????l) I literally stole this jewel for fourteen.95 brand new delivered!! Its and then funny how motion picture goers have become such followers they hear tenet is a great motion-picture show and everyone follows adjust even though that picture stunk!! Its at least 3 stars below this moving-picture show!!! Pompeii should easily exist a mid to loftier 7 or 8. To the cast and crew BRAVO!!! Job extremely well done, also kiefer made a GREAT villian!!! Whole cast from pb to extras ALL were excellent non 1 was mediocre or average!! Rewatch this pic open your eyes and encounter it's an Underrated jewel!!!!
vi out of 7 plant this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Romance and Tragedy
In 79 A.D., a Celtic tribe of horsemen is slaughtered by the Roman Senator Corvus (Kiefer Sutherland), his right-manus homo Proculus (Sasha Roiz) and their army. The boy Milo is the merely survivor that is captured afterwards and sold every bit slave. Seventeen years later, the slave Milo (Kit Harington) turns into an invincible gladiator in a province and is brought to Pompeii to participate in the games in the loonshit. While walking to Pompeii, the noble Cassia (Emily Browning) and her chaperone Ariadne (Jessica Lucas) cross with the path of the slaves and Cassia is fascinated past Milo. He shares the cell of Atticus (Adewale Akinnuoye- Agbaje), who is near to become his liberty depending on winning his last fight. Meanwhile Cassia meets her parents Severus (Jared Harris) and Aurelia (Carrie-Anne Moss) and learns that she has been betrothed to the corrupt Senator Corvus that is pressing her parents to marry her. During the games, the Mount Vesuvius erupts and Milos and his friend Atticus succeed to escape from the arena. But Milo wants to salvage his beloved Cassia in the middle of the anarchy and the Romans.
"Pompeii" is a full of activity and dull romance in the tragic environment of the concluding days of Pompeii. Disaster movies were pop in the seventy's ("Airport", "The Towering Inferno", and "Earthquake" among others) and Paul W.S. Anderson returns to the genre after "Titanic". The entertaining story is featherbrained with poor lines and dialogs, but never slow. Kit Harington, the "Jon Snow" from "Games of Thrones", makes it worth to come across at least on DVD. My vote is six.
Title (Brazil): "Pompeia" ("Pompeii")
25 out of 42 institute this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Impressive and shallow
Hollywood deals with an aboriginal catastrophe.
The above phrase contains all one needs to exist aware with regards to Pompeii. Vivid and breathtaking spectacle marred by superficial storyline.
We live the last days of Pompeii leading to the eruption of Vesuvius. A slave arrives in town in order to fight for his life as office of a spectacle for a senator from Rome. He befriends another gladiator and the daughter of the town's governor falls for him.
On the one hand, a corking job has been done to escalate the audiences tension as nosotros await for Armageddon to hitting and the visual climax does not disappoint. The furnishings are spectacular and the destruction is displayed to its total core.
Sadly, whilst these men who were treated like animals and were an object of sport for their slave owners had a chance to escape they put everything to jeopardy for a girl crush who was also part of the organisation that oppressed them. Had this been presented from the bending of a friendship between 2 men that were to fight one some other to expiry it would have some resonance but for some cheesy romance it proved a major bathos in the otherwise impressive high point leading to sheer indifference as to whether whatsoever of them survived or non.
14 out of xix institute this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Cheesy. Okay. *Just* Okay.
"Pompeii" is cheesy and okay. Just okay. The special effects are skillful plenty, and the cast is very expert, so it could have been a much amend film than it is. Ooooh well.
Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje stood out for me every bit Atticus a noble, undefeated gladiator. I couldn't help merely retrieve that this guy should be a bigger star, and that perhaps his difficult proper noun stood in his way. Kit Harington is charismatic and conceivable as Milo, a sensitive, horse- loving Celt who is forced to fight every bit a gladiator. He charms Cassia, a rich Roman girl (Emily Browning) and their love is believable. Kiefer Sutherland is an evil Roman Senator. Sutherland camps it upward, doing a Boris Karloff imitation throughout the moving-picture show. Not certain why he picked Karloff; perhaps merely to see if anyone would observe. Sasha Roiz, who is from Israel, has a face, caput and hair right off of a Roman mosaic, and he'southward good equally even so another sadistic Roman officer, Sutherland'southward correct-mitt man.
This motion-picture show is obviously thrown together with petty thought or heart, and it'south a shame that more than was not done with it. There's a scene where Milo and Cassia escape on horseback. That scene could have been classic – you've got a handsome slave who faces cypher merely death in the arena, a cute maiden being menaced by a predatory Roman senator, and a nighttime escape on a gorgeous white horse: so much to work with! Instead their escape is just plopped on screen with no artistry at all. You're watching a rehearsal, not a existent movie.
Special furnishings include aeriform views of ancient Pompeii, earthquakes, cracking villas, sinkholes, volcanic eruption, and a tsunami. These are all okay, just I bet yous could see equally good footage, if not meliorate, on televised nature documentaries. In that location is lots of gladiatorial combat. I'm non qualified to approximate these scenes. I commonly squint my eyes and grimace throughout them and I take no idea how authentic they are. Somehow the consistency with which Milo and Atticus are able to defeat many more, and better armored opponents didn't convince me.
While watching this movie I couldn't help but reflect on Cecil-B- Demille-style sword and sandal movies from the fifties and early sixties. Those movies had special furnishings, just they also focused on gripping storytelling, larger than life stars similar Charlton Heston, Yul Brynner, and Richard Burton, and they had some larger point. Even without the CGI, those movies were oftentimes more satisfying than more contempo films who sink everything in special effects and ignore more old fashioned storytelling craft.
74 out of 128 establish this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Not the disaster you may have heard the movie to be, this uneven mix of a disaster movie and a 'Gladiator' action-romance is great on the former and terrible on the latter
Warning: Spoilers
Paul W.S. Anderson has never been a director of story or character; instead, as he had demonstrated with five capacity of the 'Resident Evil' franchise, information technology's all nearly giving his audition the most bang for their buck with pure activity spectacle. And just every bit he did with zombies previously, Anderson spares zippo in recreating the destruction of the aboriginal Italian metropolis laid to waste by the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in A.D. 72, and then rest assured that it does evangelize genuine spectacle equally it promises.
The only catch? The volcano only erupts an 60 minutes into the movie, which also means that Anderson has to grapple with his twin Achilles' heels of story and grapheme for that aforementioned duration. We won't kid you - the wait till fire and ash rains down from the legendary mountain is quite literally a slog. The fault isn't entirely Anderson's; though the leaden direction is to blame for the cliché-ridden melodrama, it is the screenwriters Michael Robert Johnson (Sherlock Holmes), Janet Scott Batchler and Lee Batchler (Batman Forever) who are responsible for the utterly pedestrian script and some truly blench-worthy dialogue.
What they have washed essentially is to take a gladiator drama and throw in a 'rich girl/ poor boy' romance in the vein of 'Titanic' equally a pretext for the inevitable eruption, with the old relatively more than fleshed out than the latter. To ready the stage, we see a young Celtic male child watching his parents being murdered by the ruthless Corvus (Kiefer Sutherland) and his top soldier Proculus (Sasha Roiz), both Roman guards whom you know the same older boy will come up face to confront with afterwards on. Fast forward to seventeen years later and the boy named Milo has adult into a strapping gladiator known every bit 'The Celt', picked out amidst a grubby Londinium arena for the big league in Pompeii.
Milo'due south meet-beautiful with his romantic interest Cassia (Emily Browning) happens en route to Pompeii, when the latter's carriage becomes stuck in the mud and causes i of her horses to endure a severe fall. In an act of kindness, Milo kills the horse with his bare hands to put him out of its misery, and immediately earns Cassia'southward fondness. Back in Pompeii, Cassia'southward begetter Severus (Jared Harris) and mother (Carrie Anne-Moss) play host to Corvus and his Roman entourage, whose favour they depend on to fund their plan to revitalise the city past building aqueducts. Turns out yet that Corvus is only doing and then to force Cassia's hand in marriage, whom he unsuccessfully courted while the latter was all the same back in Rome.
In the meantime, Milo forges an acquaintance with Atticus (Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje), one of the fiercest fighters who is according to the law just one fight away from earning his freedom. Needless to say, Atticus soon finds that his masters have no intention of honouring the law, and instead of existence opponents, Milo and Atticus team upwardly to rebel confronting their captors. All this culminates in a nicely shot showdown in the town's coliseum, where Milo and Atticus take on an unabridged Roman battalion in club to simulate Corvus' invasion of the Celtic homeland.
From that time on, Anderson's best instincts as a filmmaker take over, injecting the moribund proceedings with a much-needed shot of life that immediately jolts his viewer out of his seat. The sight of Vesuvius starting to eddy over is a truly humbling ane, even more than and so when information technology starts to rain fire, stone and lava downwards on the hapless citizens of Pompeii, not excluding our protagonists. Anderson skilfully cuts between wide shots offering birds-eye views of the scale of the devastation and close-ups of the disaster from the point of view of its victims, and it is to his credit - as well as that of his cinematographer Glen MacPherson and VFX supervisor Dennis Berardi - that we are just and surely transfixed.
Lest you call back it'southward all about the volcano, well the calamity turns out to be much more multi-faceted. Besides watching out for fire and rock from to a higher place, those looking for a manner out of Pompeii are too either swallowed into the ground as the world underneath them collapses or are swept away by an enormous tsunami precipitated by the tectonic forces causing the same eruption. As if that weren't enough, our star-crossed lovers likewise have to contend with Corvus' relentless pursuit, while Atticus proves a more than than worthy ally against Proculus. Anderson channels his best inner Roland Emmerich to ensure that his disaster movie never has a boring moment in one case nature'due south tragedy strikes, and allow'south just say the terminal 45 mins is tense and exciting stuff.
Fifty-fifty so, Anderson threatens to be undone past a perennially weak link in his flick, and that is the quality of the acting. 'Game of Thrones' star Kit Harrington is no less wooden than he was in the HBO miniseries, and at that place is nigh nix chemical science between him and 'Sucker Punch' actress Emily Browning. Though '24' star Kiefer Sutherland looks out of place in a sword and scandal epic like this, he proves more than entertaining than our leads in a deadline campy mode. The all-time of the lot is without a doubt Adewale, who brings unexpected dignity and gravitas to his role in a movie that mostly demands much less from its performers.
Only really, one should not expect differently from 'Pompeii', which every bit we said at the get-go is no more than an opportunity for Anderson to leverage on historical events to deliver an action-filled disaster movie packed with visual spectacle. As long equally you tin become past that start hour, the prolonged cataclysmic climax will grip, astound and awe you lot - and since this is meant to exist a disaster movie first and an action- romance second, the priorities are just right.
71 out of 126 establish this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
What drivel
Alarm: Spoilers
This is i of the worst films i have always seen. A rehash of Conan and Gladiator. Adept guy Celts are slaughtered by bad guy Romans led by Bad Histrion Kiefer Sutherland. A niggling boy is the lone survivor. Taken to Londonium [ London ] and trained to become a Gladiator. Conan. He is so good, he is sent to Pompeii to fight in the arena. On the mode he comes across a dryad in distress and helps her with her wounded horse. Love at first sight. A Roman legion arrives led past estimate who? yes bad guy Kiefer Sutherland. Adept guy Gladiator wants revenge. Bad guy Kiefer Sutherland has his middle on the damsel in distress, who happens to be the girl of the headman of Pompeii, only she is in love with good guy Gladiator. Gladiators in Pompeii were the celebrities of the period. Not held in dungeons like in this pic. Also the citizens of Pompeii were Romans themselves,as well dissimilar in this movie. I won't continue with the rest of the story, as i recollect you should encounter for yourselves. The acting was terrible, particularly by Sutherland. He started with an American emphasis and then later an English emphasis. The bad guy characters were like something from an English school Pantomime. As for the disaster itself. Fifty-fifty with the 3d effects, it was not edge of the seat stuff. Dissimilar Titanic. The story in Titanic was a romance around a disaster, but without the 3d effects, you were glued to the screen. All you see as soon equally the eruption comes burning rocks raining down, goose egg else. Also it shows people panicking straight away, which is nonsense, because as i was told past the guide, when i visited Pompei, the populace had no thought of what was happening and just stood and watched until the lava started to flow downwards and even then, they tried to save their holding. That is why so many perished and as well why Versuvius was mistaken for a mountain and at that place is no give-and-take for Vulcanoe in Latin. Too once the fume continued to to the sky, light pebbles rained downwards on the city. So for a while, they thought there was no danger. Hollywood has gone downhill in the last twenty years. They blame DVDs for people not going to the cinema, and then they make more films in 3d.The standard of acting has gone downhill. In that location are no stories to their films whatever more, and so they put all these furnishings in to compensate for this. If y'all want to meet a skilful DVD most Pompei buy the DVD BBC documentary drama with Tim Piggot Smith called Pompeii The Last Day. On with it is the story about the Colosseum, called Colosseum A Gladiators Story.If you want to see a good fictional story centering around the disaster, get the Boob tube Miniseries The Last Days Of Pompeii starring Lawrence Olivier, Anthony Quayle, Ernest Borgnine, Barbera Carrera and a host of others. I promise i have not bored yous with this review, only i don't like to waste coin and i am certain you don't.
48 out of 71 establish this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Horrible picture, full of clichés.
This was a consummate waste matter fo time. Here are the principal reasons:
1. The performance by the main characters was very poor and artificial. 2. The managing director did a bad task, equally did the editor. 3. The main story is weak and bromidic. There are clichés all over the place. Dialogue is poor and boring. The whole story is completely dubious and it is hard to take the movie seriously. four. Historically speaking, the pic sacrifices the existent events that occurred for the sake of extra special effects. The fact that two cities were destroyed before anything got to Pompeii is ignored completely. The 'fire rain' on Pompeii as well never happened, as did the tsunami. It simply made no sense to add everything just the kitchen sink into this movie. 'The Gladiator' was fictional, just it never claimed to be anything else. This film claims to be based on existent events, when information technology conspicuously isn't in the nearly important aspects of what happened that day. In Pompeii, people died because they inhaled the fume, not because fire rained down on them or tsunamis washed them away. The arena (stadium) was never destroyed by the earhquake and it notwithstanding stands in Pompeii to this day. Dubious to the extreme.
Overall very very poor.
400 out of 554 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Should be awful simply information technology works...for the virtually part
Warning: Spoilers
I will make one affair explicitly clear well-nigh Pompeii, you CAN really enjoy yourself just you lot have to turn your brain off, sit down back, get your popcorn set up and just have fun. Yes, its one of those movies. It isn't Gladiator, information technology isn't Titanic...its crazy, sappy, cheesy fun. My expectations for this were extremely high though the horde of bad reviews probably brought them down to a slightly more reasonable level. I kept trying to get see this and for i reason or some other didn't get to so I was pretty excited to finally catch information technology on its last night at the local theatre. I didn't come across it in 3D which is fine by me because 99.9% of the time I find this new 3D fad a consummate waste though I tin encounter in this moving-picture show where they certainly made it a bespeak to brand sure it was 3D capable. Every bit many other reviews have said, the film is a blend of aboriginal Roman gladiators and a disaster pic. Anyone who knows even the slightest bit of this story knows how its going to plough out. The story is decent, certainly entertaining enough, only so many of the characters and performances are downright cheesy. Fortunately sometimes campy can win you lot over and in this instance I concluded upward relish information technology despite those performances or because of them in at to the lowest degree one case which I will mention before long.
Kit Harington is a relative newcomer and someone I wasn't familiar with. The piece of work he put into his concrete functioning cannot get unnoticed because he looks incredible and his trunk is ripped. Fortunately for him he actually turns in a pretty darn skillful functioning too as our hero. The character in many ways is almost a carbon re-create of Russell Crowe'southward hero in Gladiator merely Harington pulls it off and keeps your attending and I don't think this motion-picture show will do much for his career only I recall we volition see him in something big eventually. Emily Browning too gives a pretty solid performance as the daughter that falls in love with him. Their romance is a little rushed and very Titanic-esque but it isn't likewise rushed and makes sense and their chemistry is very good. Its non epic just it works. This is really one of the better performances I've seen from Browning, especially lately. Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje seems to be the 1 thing from this moving picture that comes out unscathed by poor reviews and for practiced reason. He is mesmerizing and fantastic as slave-champion Atticus. In fact, this would have been a whole different level of film had he been the star. He absolutely steals every scene and is literally magnificent in an otherwise "okay" movie. The human relationship between him and Harington drives this story to new heights. I adore Kiefer Sutherland and was excited that he was in this. He is the aforementioned "terrible" performance that I loved. He is beyond campy in this. His imitation (and poor British accent) and he simply looks bad-mannered and out of place and yet he was an astoundingly evil villain. It was similar a cartoon villain simply a neat i complete with one-liners and truly evil similar glaring and cackling. He would have made an awesome 80's activity villain. The balance of the bandage were mostly filler and some did better than others. Jared Harris was practiced in a small role as Browning's protective father whereas Carrie-Anne Moss was atrocious every bit her female parent in a thankfully small role.
I am a big fan of the Resident Evil Serial and there is no doubt that Paul WS Anderson loves to residual spectacular special effects and tons of activeness with a decent story. Some of his films are truly top notch in my books (The Three Musketeers, Resident Evil, Event Horizon.) It seems sometimes he focuses too much on the special effects and Pompeii is partly one of those projects. Some of the CGI is poor at all-time. Some IMDb reviewers rave about the Volcanic eruption scenes looked cartoony to me (perchance because they were meant to be in 3D.) However, at that place are some strong scenes of CGI also. The build up in the moving-picture show is to the apocalyptic eruption so I constitute myself waiting anxiously for it to happen and when information technology does, its a little bit of a letdown. Still I realized walking out of the flick that I enjoyed myself. It was a fiddling fleck of mindless fun and certainly not meant to be a historical ballsy. I volition watch information technology over again and enjoy it for what it is. It won't change historical epics but have some fun! 7.5/10
7 out of ten plant this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Cool and Ostentatious
pc95 seven September 2014
Alarm: Spoilers
The captions on the poster on Pompeii, reads "No Warning, No Escape" - a fair warning for audiences inbound this mega-turd. A shiny Hollywood steamer, "Pompeii" is comically absurd. It is amongst the turkeys of movies for 2014. Director Paul W.S. Anderson is certainly more focused on look than substance, and the direction is egregiously poor - which follows in kind with poor interim. It is a shameless money-grab hardly worth the gratuitous library cheque-out. The storyline and look steals a practiced deal from the markedly better "Gladiator"; the other side of the story is a large, impaired D- quality effects disaster flick with the Mt Vesuvius volcano. The fact that characters are ignoring the awaiting doom is chief amidst it's inadequacies. Logic is thrown away in favor gloss. The music simply added to the aburdity, blaring and chiliad amplifying the ridiculousness. I had heard from a co- worker that it was bad, and information technology was completely that. Not Recommended.
xiii out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
rofl
I got dragged to run into this. I knew it was going to suck. It sucked in a "it'due south then bad it'southward good" kind of way. I was never bored. Mostly laughing and saying, "You know cypher John Snow."
But you lot know a movie is bad when it ends with a scene that is supposed to be emotional and tragic, and the whole theater bursts out laughing.
I feel like in that location's no point in me going over how poorly written the characters were, because I'm certain everyone else has already done that. The romance was extremely random. It's similar they didn't even care about the story.
To be fair, the visual furnishings were nifty, only actually, today there are and then many movies with great visuals, this one does nothing new. Although it turns out that the filmmakers did their enquiry for this moving-picture show and the set designs and the eruption were very true to fact (except for the lava bombs and the tsunami) and even the ash-figures we see at the end were based on (stress on based on) actual figures that were discovered. Then that raises the picture show a bit in my respect.
Also,
Atticus: Which bastard will be the one I kill today? Me: Ned Stark's bounder.
Sorry. :P
112 out of 206 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Got what I came to see
I watched this movie for these reasons:
i. Kit Harington's abs two. Epic volcano three. Watching slaves fight dorsum
I got what I came for and expected nothing else
12 out of 14 plant this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Waste of fourth dimension
Warning: Spoilers
This is my showtime review at IMDb, and I cannot withstand from warning the people reading the reviews: this movie is very bad. If I could give a cipher, I'd do that. I've read so many reviews that really helped me a lot to choose the movie I'd like to watch. Pompeii (2014) is i of a few movies I didn't inspect properly before watching. And that was a large mistake. This picture has no sense, no story, actions are amateurish, emotions are artificial, dialogues are brainless. We laughed a lot during the movie on how stupid many scenes and dialogues could exist. Paul Anderson should really retire. I read his books and I liked them, but as a movie manager, I'thou sorry information technology's probably non for him. Later 2 hours watching this moving picture and afterward the terminal sequence of scenes, I really wonder what all that was nigh? Even if because a dear genre, this picture doesn't belong to it either. Love betwixt the primary characters was very funny and superficial. Please, don't waste your fourth dimension on this moving-picture show. It'due south completely worthless.
P.South. By the way, the volcano eruption was so funny. Virtually of the time information technology shoot burn bombs instead of producing lava. And the shoots were actually not bad. I remember Paul Anderson took this from Starship Troopers where the huge conflicting insects shoot the like bombs in space.
78 out of 129 institute this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Enjoyable Eye Candy
Alarm: Spoilers
It's pretty much impossible to say that "Pompeii" is a flawless motion-picture show. It's love story is clichéd and and its lighting at times leaves much to exist desired. On the other hand, I believe the term "guilty pleasure" fits perfectly here, as I certainly enjoyed this motion picture plenty to recommend it.
"Pompeii" tells the story of the legendary natural disaster that covered the Italian city of Pompeii and its residents in ashes, preserving their bodies for eternity. Like "Titanic," "Pompeii" mixes in a star-crossed lovers story into the disaster genre. Post-obit the rich- girl-loves-poor-boy trope, a wealthy woman named Cassia (played by Emily Browning of "Sucker Punch") falls in love with an enslaved gladiator named Milo (played by Kit Harrington of "Game of Thrones"). When Pompeii'southward volcano erupts, information technology is up to Milo to salvage Cassia from being left to die in the eruption (there is more to the story but I don't desire to give anything abroad).
Admittedly, the beloved story is by far less convincing than the one in Titanic. The two leads Cassia and Milo spend a bare minimum of time getting to know each other and their relationship lacks development. However, in a disaster movie that focuses more on providing audience- pleasing thrills, this is much less of a problem than it could have been.
On the reverse, Milo's relationship with a young man slave named Atticus (played by Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje of "Thor: The Dark World") is surprisingly well developed throughout the film. In the first deed, Milo learns that he must face Atticus, a human being who has been promised liberty after ane more boxing. Several scenes of dialogue in a prison house cell and action in the loonshit they are forced to fight in requite the audience a proficient feel for who these characters are and give a practiced plenty reason to root for them. Considering that this is a disaster movie made by Paul West.Southward. Anderson, both characters have a substantial amount of substance to them, and the actors give adept enough performances to make their friendship conceivable.
On the field of study of Mr. Anderson, I have never really been a fan of his work. "The Three Musketeers" was mediocre at best and his "Resident Evil" movies are admittedly dreadful. Here he seems to accept improved his ability to tell a story, though there are a few flaws here and there that carry over from his other works. Much similar "Conflicting vs. Predator," Anderson struggles to properly low-cal a few nighttime scenes, casting what could have been a slap-up looking shot into l% blackness. In addition, his editing can occasionally be choppy, but compared to something like "I, Frankenstein," it's nowhere nigh equally jarring.
To his credit, which I believe is often overlooked, Mr. Anderson certainly knows how to stage and take reward of an action setpiece. Ane scene involving gladiators fighting soldiers chained to a spiked pillar made full use of its environment, and will likely have audiences entertained. Something else worth nothing are the special effects; they are very well done and information technology is articulate that the VFX team put a lot of effort into bringing the legendary eruption of Mt. Vesuvias to the big screen. What'southward even better is the 3D; lately 3D has been sorely mediocre in Hollywood films, but in this case information technology is very effective. From volcanic ashes to falling beams of forest, "Pompeii" succeeds in taking total advantage of the 3D engineering with stunning results.
The last act of the film is amongst i of the well-nigh thrilling disaster scenes I have always scene in recent years. Fans of disaster movies volition likely exist pleased by all of the mindless carnage and devastation, and like "2012," the visual grandeur is seat-grippingly ballsy.
"Pompeii" is nowhere virtually a high-quality moving-picture show, nor is information technology gratis from typical Hollywood clichés. All the same, this was non a film that left me feeling insulted or merely jaded. Rather, this was actually a memorable disaster/action menstruum piece that I could easily recommend taking some friends to see. The feel alone is pretty damn absurd.
108 out of 187 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
prissy
Kit Harington. and few crumbs of Pompeii. the engineering science transforms a volcano eruption in piece of block and the usual dear story saves the mistakes . part of a trend - cocktails of legends, ancient history and myths- using history equally vehicle for blockbusters, information technology is only new occasion for the atomic number 82 player to remains the same hero from the Game of Thrones. only the wearing apparel are dissimilar. and that detail is far to be surprising. because the clichés are essence for the film. Pompeii is a kind of isle under the Roman pressure level. zippo new. that is the Pompeii. a nice moving picture. non great but , as many from same genre, skillful offset for discover new informations about a lost world.
2 out of two found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Awful, awful movie
Alert: Spoilers
Princess Bride, but played direct, with no self-awareness or sense of humor. "My name is Milo. You killed my male parent. Gear up to die!".
Avoid. The fight scenes are entertaining, but and then prolonged that one is taken out of the moving picture to think "Yeah, but there's no way he'd be able to *keep* fighting for this long".
The whole audience (in Paris) laughed at the terminal utterly ridiculous frames. This was meant to exist poignant/heartbreaking - like Titanic. The audience by then simply wanted it to be over.
At that place are a few wooden performances, but I suspect it's difficult not to be with this script and direction. Even so, Sutherland should be ashamed of his showing in this. He must just have been counting his pay the whole time.
Too: 'Milo' the Celt ?? How near using Celtic proper noun?
140 out of 216 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Waste of fourth dimension
What a piece of crap wannabe blockbuster . If information technology was not by the fact I got free tickets for the premiere, I would be p***ed off to waste my money in vain. Well, my time was wasted anyway...
The plot is the epitome of stupidity: shallow characters and a predictable story made me wonder what the director was thinking. The history of Pompeii and its fate was completely ignored (I have visited Pompeii myself) - the tsunami scene was only one of the non sense historical goofs. The moving picture finish is absolutely stupid and I was relieved it finally ended.
If you want to waste your time, this is the perfect opportunity.
204 out of 312 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Roman pleasance suburb
Pompeii may very well have earned the title as the start suburb albeit it was some miles from Rome, about where Naples is now. Information technology was a pleasure city where the rich and powerful of Rome came to relax and indulge the vices. Being near Mount Versuvius it was warm there all the time with thermal like estrus surreptitious. But in 79 AD Versuvius erupted and the place was destroyed.
If you're expecting to run into something like a remake of The Final Days Of Pompeii I'd forget that notion. The last 3rd of the pic Pompeii comes down and Versuvius erupts with some nice computer graphic spectacle. Only the plot is a skimpy ane, about a slave boy turned gladiator and the patrician woman who thinks he'southward something special in those gladiator tights. Boy and girl are Kit Anderson and Emily Browning.
Villain of the piece in a truly classic Snidely Whiplash is Kiefer Sutherland who chewed the scenery which is what you exercise when in a turkey. He's a corrupt Roman Senator who wants to take Browning dorsum to Rome as a trophy wife. Not if our gladiator hero tin assist it. Then the volcano erupts and everybody's got bigger problems.
Yous'll like the spectacle, simply the story is a ball of corn.
7 out of 12 constitute this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Much better than the ratings would lead you lot to believe.
Warning: Spoilers
I'll be the first to acknowledge, I'm not a fan of Paul WS Anderson. His afterward Resident Evil films are all quite horrible and I prepared myself for the worst.
The starting time gives us a Conan-esque start, with a modest child the only survivor as his village is massacred. I was prepared for cheese and, to exist fair, the pic is pretty predictable. I mean, you know Vesuvius is going to blow its top at some point and the dear involvement and villainy is fairly heavily telegraphed. Even the acting is a bit weak.
Yet despite all this, somehow the picture merely works. It's all things to all men attitude should spell a disaster worse than the same eruption. Still it doesn't.
And so why does it work?
You get the obligatory "dear conquers all" storyline. You get plenty of gladiatorial action. Y'all get Kiefer Sutherland, who merely lacks a moustache to twirl to be a classic villain. You get deserved vengeance.
In short, it has all the elements of a good pic, in just the right amounts and just a picayune curt of cheesy, to brand a decent, rip-roaring chance.
The real star of the pic, of class, is the eruption of Vesuvius. Information technology's clear a cracking deal of the budget went on this and information technology shows. Starting at about the 1 60 minutes mark, it signals a change from the measured pace which preceded it to near not-end activeness for the side by side 40 minutes.
I think the master reason why this disaster seemed more entertaining and visceral was entirely down to the change of scenery from the usual modern-twenty-four hours disaster flicks such every bit 2012. The Roman setting somehow just seemed more existent and immediate than watching skyscrapers toppling.
In the finish, whatever makes the moving-picture show work, it does information technology well. It's a salient reminder that, no matter how many duds a director turns out, they are still capable of surprising us from time to time. The final judgement on any movie, of course, is whether nosotros leave the theatre feeling proficient. And in this example, I certainly did.
SUMMARY: Really decent Roman/disaster/gladiator movie. Shouldn't work, but does. Worth a lookout.
ix out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
bad effort
Alarm: Spoilers
Canada should really terminate making movies. This was a shockingly poor affair. A big budget and some good actors does not brand upwards for a feeble script, confused and muddled plot, limited characterisation, totally inaccurate history for a historical film, and a surfeit of political correctness.
Like most Hollywood epics, the Roman Empire'due south heart seems to exist in Britain. And that was where this movie commenced. But information technology was goose egg like the existent Britannia. A clichéd damp English conditions, and assorted rebelling "equus caballus tribes". A pointless massacre of said rebels, and a male child left inexplicably alive. This was apparently a major military entrada to "open the Northern merchandise routes". Sounds more like a amateur attempt to paint Romans as evil from the starting time, and fix a revenge sub-plot. A child could come up with a ameliorate plot.
The mysterious "Celt", having survived against the odds becomes non a horseman similar his father, merely a gladiator. Having overcome all competitors in United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland, he is sent not to Rome but to Pompeii.
This Pompeii is cypher like the real city. Its residents do not regard themselves every bit Roman. Odd that, as Pompeii was role of the Empire, its citizens were Roman citizens, and the city was a Roman resort. Rather like the citizens of Bournemouth hating Londoners and not regarding themselves every bit British.
Pompeii is dominated past a huge active volcano, which disturbs the locals from fourth dimension to time. The real volcano looks just one-half the size (I have been in Pompeii) and it was non known to exist active until the eruption itself.
I know mod audiences similar gladiators, nigh as much equally Romans did. Only what is entirely omitted from the movie is that gladiators were part of a religious rite, and that the fighting was both drama and intended to award the Gods. Real gladiatorial combat did not ever result in death. In fact gladiators were too valuable to impale swiftly. Most combat during the course of the 24-hour interval was not lethal. This picture represents gladiatorial combat as simply a form of mass murder, equally savage and swift as possible. Dozens killed in minutes. Even during the nearly costly games in Rome itself gladiators were not "used upward" so swiftly.
The eruption of Pompeii looked impressive, but was completely incorrect. The real mountain released clouds of pyroclastic textile that suffocated and cached thousands, and collapsed buildings. Rather like a build up of snow on buildings. Most residents escaped. In this version in that location was a preternaturally hot pyroclastic menstruum, incendiary missiles, tsunami and other commotion. No i survived, and in fact nothing of the city would have survived.
Culturally the motion-picture show got it wrong likewise. Autonomously from the erroneous view of the urban center of Pompeii, the role of slaves was misrepresented. In this version of history they were either "animals" and treated as such, or friends and companions whose condition was just shown by the use of "master" from time to time. No sign of manacles or of slaves being whipped, no sign of social classes at all.
The young girl Cassia was for some unexplained reason sent to Rome to grow up, accompanied only by a slave. No chaperone, and no reason why a young girl would be parted from her parents. She returns only to avoid the snares of an evil senator. Convenient plot device, merely highly improbable.
The emperor Titus is implied to be a degenerate autocrat, uninterested in the cities of Italia, much less the Empire. The existent Titus was a soldier, and a popular and good emperor.
Many people exercise not believe that historical accuracy matters in a historical film. To a degree they are right. However history should non be changed unless it fulfills a purpose in the movie. The departures from historical accuracy in this moving picture merely brand it dislocated, casuistic and a bad film.
20 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Source: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1921064/reviews
0 Response to "Pompeii Movie for Those About to Die Funny"
Post a Comment