Pompeii

This weekend at the theaters I had the opportunity to see either

A) what critics were calling a generic, but somewhat fun action flick with 3 Days to Kill

B) what critics were calling a heartless, but somewhat entertaining romance-disaster movie with Pompeii

C) The Lego Movie again

Being that I try to force myself to see new movies, I sadly had to forego option C, although that would have been my first choice. And given that I really dislike generic action films (and already saw one this year with Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit) I decided to pass on option B.

So all that was left was to go see Pompeii, which in all honesty I was somewhat interested to see. The tale of a city caught almost entirely off guard and frozen in time by the savage power of Mount Vesuvius all those years ago has always intrigued me. It's heart wrenching to see the bodies of people mummified by a combination of gases, ash, and lava while they were in the midst of protecting a loved one, or running away from the carnage. As far as the annals of history go, Pompeii is fairly unique being that the results of the vicious explosion are still in tact centuries later.

The movie version of this historic natural disaster is currently getting [mostly] ripped apart by the critics which doesn't surprise me. It's by no means a "bad" movie and I begin to question some of the more extreme scores of 0/10, 1/10 and so on and so forth as to whether or not those critics have actually ever seen a painfully bad movie.

Don't say I never did nothing for ya, ladies!

The biggest problem with Pompeii is it's just too scared to be anything unique on its own. By copy and pasting from romance-disaster films from the past two decades it comes out utterly lifeless; merely a film that you are watching, but never feeling. That's hard to avoid in this genre, and it's certainly hard to come out from under the shadows of that one little indie film called "Titanic", but at times it doesn't even seem like Pompeii makes the effort. It's script is the utter definition of the word cliché, as is the plot. Many times in films like these, life-long relationships are formed in mere minutes and when the time comes for the film to pack an emotional punch it comes across as nothing more than a soft "But-I-don't-want-to-hurt-you" slap. Boy sees girl and has a thirty second interaction with her? Oh my God we are in love for all eternity! Two gladiators joke about killing each other in the arena for a few minutes? Oh my God it's like we are brothers from another mother! Whereas the previously mentioned film about a sinking ship took time to craft its relationship and focused solely on it for nearly 2/3rds of the film, Pompeii expects us to be attached to these characters...why? I never could quite figure it out.

I was half expecting a digital clock to appear
and start counting down to the explosion

Given the fact that I have seen almost all of these actors be better in other roles, it's certainly not their fault. I just think that all around the casting was a bit off. Kiefer Sutherland does good enough as the Roman enemy but I couldn't stop thinking to myself, "Wow, Jack Bauer has a really weird accent right now." Same goes for Carrie Anne Moss as Cassia's mother. I was distracted by the fact that Trinity was in my movie. Kit Harington and Emily Browning are both attractive leads and talented in real life, but their chemistry is lacking in this one and the clichéd ending really makes it obvious that we, as the audience, couldn't have cared less about these two. Again, for most of these actors it was a poor choice of casting, or the script, or both...but either way it just kind of doesn't work.

It became readily apparent to me throughout the course of the film, particularly during action scenes, that I have been spoiled rotten by the uber-graphic and brilliantly choreographed TV show, Spartacus. Pompeii takes many cues from this show, but leaves all the gore at home. You ask me (and I know I say this probably more than I should) but Pompeii would have been pretty great as an R-rated flick. There is just no weight to the fighting...it's choreographed really well and there are moments of gorgeous cinematography, but when I see someone get a sword across their face with no blood or trace of it on their skin what so ever it bugs me. In Spartacus that fool would have been showing bone. It might just be me with this issue, but we are talking gladiators here. They were vicious beasts...PG-13 constrictions not only don't do them justice, but it distracts from the film. Just my opinion.

Some really impressive visual effects.

But for all my complaining, somewhere along the way I did have a decent amount of fun with Pompeii. The first half of the film is a Roman-gladiator genre film that is average, but competent. There is a really well-shot fight scene in the Pompeii arena that was exciting and somewhat unique (although still hindered by the PG-13 rating). Once the volcano goes off, it's a pretty impressive spectacle of destruction that has some fantastic visuals. Not all the visuals are superb as sometimes it is very obvious when an actor is on green screen or when people are computer animations, but by and large, the destruction is pretty sweet. I also appreciate that it's a short movie by romance disaster genre standards. I think everyone on board knew that they weren't making the next Titanic here so they kept it relatively short and sweet. Rather than going all Michael Bay on us and making the volcano eruption last one to two hours, director Anderson gives us a solid 30-45 minutes of destruction and knows when enough is enough.

At the end of the day, seeing any of the movies that I review is really up to you. I just try to give you my best opinions. Pompeii is not something that you need to rush out to theaters and see. If you come across it on TV some years from now, you could definitely do worse.

But let's be honest. The only movie you should be seeing in theaters right around now is either The Lego Movie for your first time or The Lego Movie for your second time.

Pompeii and all of it's mummified citizens can wait...they've got all the time in the world.

CONS:

• Just about as generic and cliché as you could be. The script is like a mashup of once-epic-but-now-overused Roman gladiator lines and is easily the worst part of the film. The clichés extend to the set pieces, the plot, the costumes, etc.
• Poorly chosen cast. Too many of the bigger stars are distracting and our two leads, while fantastic in other roles, are almost dead on arrival here
• A healthy dose of an R-rating would have helped the movie to stand out more. I like my gladiator battles intense and bloody
• Some spotty visual effects
• Life-long relationships happen faster than you can make a bowl of Ramen
• The key to a romance disaster film is that the audience has to be connected in order to deliver the emotion that goes with a catastrophic event like this. Pompeii didn't affect a single nerve in my body

PROS:

• A decent enough original score
• A film that, despite all the generic tropes and clichéd happenings, still is fairly entertaining to watch
• Once the volcano explodes the movie improves considerably
• Some really impressive visual effects
• Moments of fantastic cinematography
• Well choreographed fight scenes, particularly one in the Pompeii arena with chains
• Short and sweet. Not exactly the norm in this genre but I appreciated the fact that Anderson didn't carried away with himself and make a three hour film, which he easily could have done

Rath's Review Score: 6/10