If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

An Italian TV miniseries chronicling the life and times of Roman citizens in the brief-run up to Mount Vesuvius erupting. This miniseries is bookended by an absolutely pointless modern-day scenario involving a couple of researchers who fall in love and go to bed together. Parallels are drawn between ancient and modern life but seriously, this junk just needed ejecting in order to focus on the historical stuff.Sadly, TV viewers will have been spoilt by the quality of TV'S ROME which makes POMPEII look like amateur hour by comparison. And, indeed, POMPEII is cheesy indeed; the version I watched has been dubbed into English from the original Italian, dubbed too by the most monotonous and stilted dialogue actors ever. It makes the whole effort a near unwatchable mess, and something impossible to take seriously.Not that the story is good to begin with. The writers make the error of having their historical characters act in completely modern ways which would have been alien to the times. Thus Christian characters are portrayed ultra-sympathetically as are the female characters. The running time is padded out with boring love stories, ultra-cheesy gladiator scenes, and lots of back and forth stuff. The acting is bad, with the main character a gladiator who looks like a male model off the cover of a Mills & Boon book; wooden isn't the word. The cast is Italian with a couple of familiar faces (like Tomas Arana from THE BOURNE SUPREMACY) mixed in. When the volcano finally erupts in the second episode, the viewer is subjected to many dodgy CGI effects which definitely aren't worth the wait.

I'm currently watching this (Sept 24th 2014, 20:26) on the Movies4Men channel; obviously dubbed from Italian with completely unknown cast, but in a way that helps the feeling that it's authentic - you're not watching Kiefer Sutherland or the like dodging volcanic ash; it's as if it's ancient CCTV footage. And very colourful it is too.Essentially the plot doesn't matter, because they're all going to get encased in lava in the end. The stage fighting is awful, the dialogue is drivel, the main drama of love between a slave girl and a gladiator is about as engaging as a Microsoft Help screen, but that big ol' volcano will not be denied. And that saves it.Unconvincing, clunky, laughable, but you can't go wrong with Vesuvius.

The theme of Pompei and its destruction has been filmed by cinema several times. Since the silent era, the most famous Italian film which, like CABIRIA (1914), was considered a "window to epic history" has been THE LAST DAYS OF POMPEI (1913). It was directed by Eleuterio Rodolfi and based upon the novel by Bulwer Lytton (the film was remade a few times, including the late 1950s version). But that is so long ago and, at the beginning of the 21st century when cinema has such marvelous techniques, lovers of the theme have the right to expect something innovative, powerful, perhaps not that great and spectacular as GLADIATOR but a nice epic proportion movie. This one, however, directed recently by Paolo Poeti, does not do a good job. It is based loosely on historical notes, director's vision, and most importantly, badly clichéd upon other epics. Despite its length which would promote a detailed development of characters and events, it is a film that has not satisfied me as a viewer and as an epic fan.The sets leave much to require. They rather win by colors than historical accuracy and artistic interpretation of the times. Having been to Pompei, I must admit that the reconstruction of the city sometimes appears to be impressive, but the use made of it does not work. We do not see the life of these people clearly, the movie hardly constitutes a journey to the past. The performances are also very weak, particularly from the main cast: Victor Alfieri and Linda Battista. They look great but give very poor acting. That focus on good looks of the cast at the cost of good performances is throughout noticeable. Sorry but that is what I felt while watching the movie.But the key facet of its flaws is that the movie appears to attempt at so many things and, consequently, leaves most of them only "touched." Nothing is developed in the right way, not even the plot. What are the things it puts in one basket? Love stories, Christian martyrdom, prophesies unfulfilled, gladiators as no "real persons, real characters" who require development, unimpressive spectacles, finally, the reference to modern times and "in media res" beginning. The action of the film starts in our times when the group of archaeologists research volcanoes. A young couple appears in Pompei and their love affair refers back to Antiguity, that is what they have in common with those people who lived here before A.D. 79. It's all not very appealing, though would probably seem possible.In what way is, in my opinion, the movie a cliché of earlier epics? In its script and characters. Lavinia (Vanessa Gravinia) will remind you of Poppaea in QUO VADIS by her jealousy of the Christian girl; arena sequence will clearly make you think of SPARTACUS or THE SIGN OF THE CROSS; Christian martyrdom is almost identically shot as in A.D. (1985) as well as the fire in Pompei draws your attention to the fire of Rome in QUO VADIS. I know that these events are similar and if someone has seen many epics, he/she can find similarities...but as I said: similarity - not identicalness. I'd welcome similarities that would bring something vivid, appealing. However, I did not find this in the movie.I am aware of the fact that I have strongly criticized the film and my comment will meet negative reactions. I shall be criticized by its lovers (if it has any). Yet, everybody has the right to think their way and express their viewpoints with arguments. As a matter of fact, you may find something good in this movie which I did not notice. One thing, however, is absolutely true: Poeti's film has too many aspects of epic genre and, as a result, leaves too little in the viewer. 3/10

Decent special effects but poorly acting keeps you safely distant from the drama of Pompei. A far cry from the dense and catching atmosphere from ROME which I can barely wait the second season. a 4 out of 10 in my opinion. I'm a Roman Empire, and general history, fan, so I appreciate the effort to recreate the daily life of Pompei, but the prejudices of the present are a little too obvious. They were thinking and acting differently back then and I was kind of disappointed to see a school concept of history movie - as the producers were very carefully not to leave you draw dangerous ideas and conclusions out of it.