I've just come back from seeing this rather spectacular but also slightly dull new film. The spectacle consists of lots of CGI eruptions and earthquakes and pyroclastic flows. There was a considerable amount of jeopardy - mostly from the volcano, but also endless threats from the baddie - an evil senator and his minions. The plot was plotty - all sorts of twists and turns - every time one got weary of volcano jeopardy there would be another outbreak of hand to hand fighting.
The reason it was dull was because one had, if one has seen Gladiator and Spartacus , seen it all before. Better special effects - of course. In fact there was an intriguing scene in which a speculator tries to interest the senator in a deal to invest in new buildings in Pompeii - the magnificent maquettes could easily have come from the Effects department of a film company, used in some stirring finale in an age where there was no CGI.
The plot consists of several factors which have been seen before, namely: a gladiator with a past, and a grudge, a gladiator who has to fight for manumission, a slave (gladiator) falling in love with a rich man's daughter, an evil senator with designs on the heroine (Quo Vadis - that one), a cruel, cold-hearted killer in league with the senator, an idle self-indulgent owner of gladiators, a rufty-tufty gladiator trainer (lanator), a loyal servant, a decent Roman, two gladiators becoming friends (see above). In addition to this they added a great deal of multi-ethnicity - which was probably right, but they may have overdone it a tad... It was a pity they did not include Nero or some Christians - then they would have been playing with the full deck of Roman film stereotypes.
M and I amused ourselves with guesses about plot and character - he predicted "senator's daughter" early on, almost right, and I predicted "this will not have a happy ending" - the ending was lifted from Robert Harris's Pompeii - to an extent, from an original idea based on some Pompeiian body casts.
I am sorry to say that to date I have failed to read Edward Bulwer (Lord) Lytton's "Last Days of Pompeii" but I have a feeling that it contains several of the above elements. I kick myself repeatedly, it would be so easy to write this tripe, why am I failing to do so... And why haven't I managed to read Lytton's book? I have started several times but lost interest in the first chapter. If memory serves, it is not very well written, it may even be quite badly written, possibly it has become dated without becoming a classic, possibly it contains a cast of what are now stereotypical characters but were then relatively fresh and original. In an age when educated boys got "a thorough grounding in the classics" Lytton's book was a sort of "classical civilisation" option, for girls and the lower orders. I wouldn't be surprised if it was pretty bad - after all it was Lytton who wrote the original opening line "It was a dark and stormy night...." I have never quite seen why it is so derided, yes, it's not very interesting, but it sets the scene..."and I dreamed I went to Manderly again" "and the clocks were striking thirteen" - many more celebrated opening lines could be grafted on to it.
Pompeii itself was interestingly represented, a lot of aerial shots - easier perhaps because we have so many plans of the city. No longer do we have huge sets of Ancient Rome created in Cinecitta (a pity) but presumably extras running through narrow corridors that will subsequently be draped with falling masonry, flaming timbers and exploding pyroclastic bombs. Set the scene by having the heroine taken in a carriage through the bustling city streets at the Venalia (sic?) festival - see the happy smiling Pompeiians etc etc. Then show us a few shots of the forum, with that statue we all recognise, and some gateways (and all the archaeologists in the audience start muttering "That doesn't look like the Porta Capuana" etc.) and of course, Vesuvius rearing majestically above it all - not very far away at all - I'm sure it's a bit further away than that. But perhaps it's because it's covered with plants, whereas nowadays the vegetation doesn't go all the way up (did it then?). And what is this "venalia" (sic?) festival. I must have misheard, or maybe they made it up. Or do they mean Vinalia - a wine festival - and not as I had thought a festival of venality (though I'm sure the Romans could have had one of those too).
Is it worth seeing? Meh, depends what you like. Yeah, if you enjoy demos of fighting and lots of jeopardy - and it would be a good one to take your kids to impress upon them what happened, although you should point out that in fact the eruption happened over 6 days - not the afternoon/evening that the film shows. But friends, Pompeiians, countrymen, I come to be nice about this film, not to bury it - so lets' rejoice in this, there are two facts in the film, firstly it happened in AD 79, secondly it occurred when Titus was emperor - just try to remember that Titus was not the venal and corrupt one, that was his younger brother Domitian who succeeded him. Other facts can be verified with reference to Wikipedia or the letters of Pliny!
The reason it was dull was because one had, if one has seen Gladiator and Spartacus , seen it all before. Better special effects - of course. In fact there was an intriguing scene in which a speculator tries to interest the senator in a deal to invest in new buildings in Pompeii - the magnificent maquettes could easily have come from the Effects department of a film company, used in some stirring finale in an age where there was no CGI.
The plot consists of several factors which have been seen before, namely: a gladiator with a past, and a grudge, a gladiator who has to fight for manumission, a slave (gladiator) falling in love with a rich man's daughter, an evil senator with designs on the heroine (Quo Vadis - that one), a cruel, cold-hearted killer in league with the senator, an idle self-indulgent owner of gladiators, a rufty-tufty gladiator trainer (lanator), a loyal servant, a decent Roman, two gladiators becoming friends (see above). In addition to this they added a great deal of multi-ethnicity - which was probably right, but they may have overdone it a tad... It was a pity they did not include Nero or some Christians - then they would have been playing with the full deck of Roman film stereotypes.
M and I amused ourselves with guesses about plot and character - he predicted "senator's daughter" early on, almost right, and I predicted "this will not have a happy ending" - the ending was lifted from Robert Harris's Pompeii - to an extent, from an original idea based on some Pompeiian body casts.
I am sorry to say that to date I have failed to read Edward Bulwer (Lord) Lytton's "Last Days of Pompeii" but I have a feeling that it contains several of the above elements. I kick myself repeatedly, it would be so easy to write this tripe, why am I failing to do so... And why haven't I managed to read Lytton's book? I have started several times but lost interest in the first chapter. If memory serves, it is not very well written, it may even be quite badly written, possibly it has become dated without becoming a classic, possibly it contains a cast of what are now stereotypical characters but were then relatively fresh and original. In an age when educated boys got "a thorough grounding in the classics" Lytton's book was a sort of "classical civilisation" option, for girls and the lower orders. I wouldn't be surprised if it was pretty bad - after all it was Lytton who wrote the original opening line "It was a dark and stormy night...." I have never quite seen why it is so derided, yes, it's not very interesting, but it sets the scene..."and I dreamed I went to Manderly again" "and the clocks were striking thirteen" - many more celebrated opening lines could be grafted on to it.
Pompeii itself was interestingly represented, a lot of aerial shots - easier perhaps because we have so many plans of the city. No longer do we have huge sets of Ancient Rome created in Cinecitta (a pity) but presumably extras running through narrow corridors that will subsequently be draped with falling masonry, flaming timbers and exploding pyroclastic bombs. Set the scene by having the heroine taken in a carriage through the bustling city streets at the Venalia (sic?) festival - see the happy smiling Pompeiians etc etc. Then show us a few shots of the forum, with that statue we all recognise, and some gateways (and all the archaeologists in the audience start muttering "That doesn't look like the Porta Capuana" etc.) and of course, Vesuvius rearing majestically above it all - not very far away at all - I'm sure it's a bit further away than that. But perhaps it's because it's covered with plants, whereas nowadays the vegetation doesn't go all the way up (did it then?). And what is this "venalia" (sic?) festival. I must have misheard, or maybe they made it up. Or do they mean Vinalia - a wine festival - and not as I had thought a festival of venality (though I'm sure the Romans could have had one of those too).
Is it worth seeing? Meh, depends what you like. Yeah, if you enjoy demos of fighting and lots of jeopardy - and it would be a good one to take your kids to impress upon them what happened, although you should point out that in fact the eruption happened over 6 days - not the afternoon/evening that the film shows. But friends, Pompeiians, countrymen, I come to be nice about this film, not to bury it - so lets' rejoice in this, there are two facts in the film, firstly it happened in AD 79, secondly it occurred when Titus was emperor - just try to remember that Titus was not the venal and corrupt one, that was his younger brother Domitian who succeeded him. Other facts can be verified with reference to Wikipedia or the letters of Pliny!
No comments:
Post a Comment