Pompeii

The main and practically only unusual thing about Pompeii is the effort combine disaster-flick spectacle with antiquity action. The two types of film are melded together through the clever use of melodramatic conventions, as the essence of the genre calls for the extinction of both the gladiator and the individual facing the wrath of nature. Roughly half of the film consists in setting up the narrative background required for the individualistic hero’s effective engagement with external events and it is exceedingly obvious that Anderson does not enjoy directing actors (if anyone is interested how Kit Harington performs, he performs exactly as he does in Game of Thrones). Thanks to this basic arrangement of relationships and motifs, on the other hand, Anderson is able to engage in PG-13 fight scenes and spectacular Emmerich-esque destruction until the end. It’s a satisfactory spectacle, but it’s nothing special even in 3D, which only really works when the action takes place on multiple levels (roughly one or two scenes). The action scenes are muddled due to the quick editing and off-centre compositions (the characters nonsensically fight at the edge of screen multiple times). In addition to that, they are much more grounded and with less video-game stylisation that you would expect from the director of Mortal Kombat, multiple instalments of the Resident Evil franchise and Death Race. The games resemble “bird's-eye-view” shots of the city (as from an RTS), whose main purpose is to prepare us for the aforementioned combining of genres, i.e. for the biblical scale of the impending devastation. The religious subtext or, more precisely, the use of the principle of divine justice is the only instance of reviving the popular leftist story of a man of the people who stands up to a powerful empire personified by a greedy senator (Kiefer Sutherland delivers the only – and probably unintentionally – funny line in the entire film). Pompeii isn’t as blatantly stupid as Need for Speed; I’d even venture to say that it contains a small amount of historical truth, but as with Need for Speed, you will likely walk out of the cinema unsatisfied if you don’t appreciate how exemplarily it fills out the classic Hollywood narrative template and genre formulas. 65% (19/03/2014)

When the love or motivation of the main characters is formed by a single bit of dialogue or a transparent situation, not even excellent casting can help. Kit Harington, Kiefer Sutherland, and Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje can work hard to bring some freshness to their stereotypical characters, but it only lasts until the script inserts another one-word confession into their mouths. After the highly entertaining The Three Musketeers, I expected Paul W.S. Anderson's next journey into history to be a perfect fit, but despite the fights, horses, destruction, or lava of Pompeii, it puts you to sleep more than it entertains you. (17/06/2014)

Pompeii is exactly that kind of movie about which I’ve read bunch of opinions from the self-proclaimed experts that the movie is going to suck before it was even released. It is created by Paul W. S. Anderson and he has never shot a good movie. The local reviewers and know-it-all experts had a clear opinion even before they watched the movie. What else should I expect? For a change, I kept my mouth shut and waited until I actually saw the movie. And I have to say I was surprised by decent filmmaking, which was however not set in the ancient Rome, but in the ancient Rome modified by the Americans. But I can get over that. I liked the actors, I liked the story and most of all I liked the second half of the film, which turned the locations into an absolute hell. So I can’t really find any flaws with Anderson’s work – this is just exactly what I was expecting from him and what I also truly enjoyed. (11/05/2014)

Although Paul W.S. Anderson has made a number of downright stupid films so far, most of them have at least entertained me in some way. Not Pompeii, though. The wait for the special effects frothing was extremely long, and when I got it, I felt that it should end again. I wasn't impressed with the central duo either, but Kiefer Sutherland was clearly having a good time. At least someone was, right? (17/01/2015)

A prequel to Gladiator with embarrassing sets, decent fights, especially considering that it’s PG-13, but there are too many references and similarities that are reproduced too clumsily to be nodded in agreement. The acting is basically nothing and the script is a big pile of pathos and a confusion of all the clichés. All that remains is solid visuals and that's it. (07/09/2014)