Wordiezett So much average

MamaGravity good back-story, and good acting

Numerootno A story that's too fascinating to pass by...

Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Kirpianuscus first , as the first Polish adaptation of the novel. than, for the images who defines a lost world in its different aspects. for acting. and for the courage to propose a new version, in contemporary rules, of a great book. sure, it is not a masterpiece. but it has each virtue for impress. costumes and fight and love story and an interesting Nero or a Petronius who preserves the spirit of the book. it is an ambitious show and that detail is the key for understand it. many details are far to be perfect. after other adaptations, it is not surprising to be skeptical about few aspects. but it is a good film. the desire of realistic scenes could be its most important part.

pompierson Having just watched the 1951 "Quo Vadis" (as well as "The Robe" and "Demetrius and the Gladiators") I find this version over all excels the 1951 version, although Ustinov in '51 did make a more memorable Nero. Genn and Linda each make a splendid Petronius. The Polish hero and heroine I liked better, and while I think Hollywood '51 did a nice rewrite, the Polish version is truer to the Sienkiewicz novel. With computers the arena scenes of the 2001 version prove superior, though grislier, and the bull scene with Lygia is remarkable, however they brought that off. While the 255 minutes made for two evenings (actually we watched the '51 version over two evenings also), I highly recommend this one. The bigger your screen the better. While the religiosity gets sensitive treatment, it seems less overbearing than it sometimes gets in the Roman vs Christian epics of the early '50s.

airen Having read several rather unfavorable reviews of the movie, I went to see it with quite low expectations. I was not disappointed: the movie was not a total loss, but left me with a sense of horrible loss of $18 million (the movie's overinflated budget). The movie's very long and it drags on mercilessly. The editing is the worst I have seen in a long time: the wonderful sets were completely underexposed by the shabby cinematography (or the film edit). Cinematography is very "narrow": it constantly focuses on the close-up action and the actors themselves, and with a complete lack of scenic shots and good panning, leaves the viewer with a sense of watching "I, Claudius" on a big screen. In fact, "Quo Vadis" would watch much better as a TV mini-series than as a big screen feature. The sound effects are underwhelming, the music uninspiring. And most visibly, the visual effects are sub-par, even for Polish cinema. The rubber doll of Glaucus on a burning cross was laughable and the lion scene was quite frankly unmoving. Same clip of a woman being tackled by a lion being repeated at least twice and the the lions sometimes looked like they were toying with the Christians. Where exactly did the $18 million go Mr. Kawalerowicz? There is a debate currently in Poland about "old masters" and their recent superproductions. While I believe that anyone has a right to film anything, I do think it's time to stop subsidizing "lifelong dreams" of the "old masters" and devote the money to younger directors with less egos and more original ideas.

pawcio A film which many were looking forward to. Not surprisingly as it is the most expensive film in the history of the Polish film industry ($18 million). Unfortunately, it doesn't pay off. One wonders where all the money went. I watched the film with two friends, one an actor who is a good friend of many of the actors in the film. After ten minutes, he was shaking his head, stating with unbelief at the terrible acting of the lead player Pawel Delag (Vinicjusz). We wanted to like the film, but we felt we were watching a TV play and the film was only saved in moments by the formidable acting of Boguslaw Linda and Jerzsy Trela. I must, however, applaud the excellent lion scene in the arena. With this I don't have qualms - excellent effects - this only saves five minutes of an over long boring 180 minutes. Oh, and one more thing, at times I felt I was watching a soft porn movie - what a shame!! That fact in itself was a big "turn-off", and they have school children watching this. Very sad.