This film is hard to review, it is actually a good story and good to watch but unfortunately the actors and acting is poor. The present day part at beginning and end is truly awful with some of the worst acting I have seen in a while and adds no relevance to the film; it should be taken out the film. the main film I liked the characters the story was good. the main hero character was a terrible actor though. The dialogue between the characters border lined on stupidity and bizarre. All in all this would be a good film if it was directed by someone else and replaced half the cast. I would give this film 5/10 which is a shame because it could have been so much better.

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.

In general an entertaining movie, though definitely not great. However a strange feeling of deja vu possessed me when watching. It seemed to me like some story parts have been borrowed from great titles like Spartacus and Ben Hur.Also to obvious sometimes the city parts (like the arena for example) look a bit fake. The acting is average, sometimes below average. The relationships between slaves and Romans sometimes look a bit unhistorical.However, the great pictures of the Vesuvius volcano lift things back to a more entertaining level. This movie is nice for an evening of uncomplicated watching. If you don't expect too much, you may appreciate this one.

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