Pompeii (2014)

I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Touches You

Excellent adaptation.

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

The story line in this movie is similar to previous movies, gladiator rescues rich woman. The battle scenes are well done, and the special effects look like something out of Star Wars. I suggest the way to enjoy this movie is not to get too wrapped up in the plot, just sit back, relax and watch the action roll out to you. Good movie.

I confess I had some curiosity about this movie. Disaster films with volcanoes are no longer new ("Volcano" and "Dante's Peak" are good examples) but a film about a real historical fact as dramatic as the destruction of Pompeii (and the nearby city of Herculaneum) in 79 AD, is somewhat unusual. Unfortunately its much weaker than I thought it would be.The plot is simple: a Celt, captured and enslaved after Romans massacred his family, becomes a successful gladiator and gets the attention of a wealthy Roman girl, disappointed in her culture's cruelty. When Vesuvius erupts, he will have the chance to flee with her and avenge his family, as the girl's forced bridegroom is, precisely, the one responsible for the massacre that has killed them. The influence of films and series such as "Gladiator", "Rome" and "Spartacus" is evident, but the fact is that the script is frankly underdeveloped, with characters so basic that we can summarize each one in a single word. Another problem I felt was the partiality of the plot, demonizing Roman civilization. The end of the film tries to be unpredictable but isn't properly capable of that, besides that makes everything too melodramatic. About historical accuracy... forget it. Who wrote the script totally ignored historical facts. That bombs or that tsunami are obscenities that attempt to the intelligence of those who know the basic about what actually happened in Pompeii.Paul W.S. Anderson has a bad name as a director but this was his first movie that I actually watched. In this case, I recognize reason in the criticisms: he's a weak director, dazzled with the CGI but incompetent in the direction of the cast and the script. Regarding the cast, there are some heavy names like Kit Harington, Emily Browning and Kiefer Sutherland, but the performances were generally mediocre and uncompromising. It is true that the characters are too basic and underdeveloped but the actors also did not feel like sweating the shirt by their characters. Browning, for example, was unable to build a chemistry with his romantic pair. That intense love that should have existed is never there and everything sounds unlikely and artificial. Sutherland, who was the villain, is simply ham and histrionic. The best actor here was Akinnuoye-Agbaje, with a performance capable of harmonizing strength and action with some psychological depth and drama.Visually, the film is a CGI feast and visual and sound effects of good quality and a lot of impact, mainly from half the film to the end. Cinematography helps, emphasizing the colors and with the camera moving quickly in the action scenes. The problem is that these were the only aspects where the film was really good, and this is not enough to make the movie good. It just makes it bearable.

Why all the hate for this movie? It's not that bad. Yes i agree , it's cliché and the screenplay is a little one dimensional bur it's easy tio follow and not pretentious. On the other hand , I've never seen a gladiator movie with a natural disaster before. That's something new. And the special effects are beautiful, must be spectacular in 3D. I enjoyed watching the movie as popcorn flick nothing more. 6/10 for the sword fights and special effects. 2/10 for story

Pompeii is probably the one city of the ancient Roman era we know the most about thanks to the fact that the eruption froze the city in time - we know what people talked about, what they worked with, what their concerns were.And yet, the one movie about the destruction of Pompeii unfortunately focuses more on a gladiator than any one else in the city. And that is so unfortunate, since with Spartacus, Gladiator and a few other features, it seems Hollywood has locked itself up with a gladiator that refuses to let them out. So instead of a movie about the actual retired Syrian marine (for example) who worked as a bronze maker and his day to day, we get another hack n' slash. it's lazy, but even worse it's plain cowardice, that Hollywood couldn't make this movie more about the actual people of Pompeii.So it was a disappointment from a script perspective, but the historical accuracy also left a lot to be desired, and the CGI was... abysmal. I'm not one who really notices matte paintings that much in movies, but here it was painfully obvious, and all the damn time.So all in all, what I thought would be a disaster movie set in history, just turned out to be something that should not have been made.Watch Gladiator, Rome or Spartacus instead. It's not about an exploding mountain, but their production values are way higher.