I think that is both cool and weird.
I think it is called retro; combining old style with new technology. I don't believe it is a new idea.

Stunningly beautiful but inside it's junk--it's gas and not electric.

VincentWolf, being "gas" rather than electric does not make it junk. This design would actually use Jet fuel (kerosene) as it uses turbine engines. The FACT is that batteries and/or alternative energy storage methods have a LONG way to go before they can even come close to the energy density of liquid fuel.
We are just now starting to see fully electric aircraft and most are severely lacking in range. There are some with decent range buy they are typical fixed wing aircraft with the advantage of aerodynamic lift, ALL the fully electric aircraft in a "quadcoptor" format have horrible range because they rely almost 100% on thrust to stay in the air.
Bottom line, a design such as this would be useless to the average person if it were fully electric because it would probably only be able to fly for about 5-10 minutes before needing a recharge.

TypicalI Italian design. To call it semi retro is a gag. But gys busy with quad-multi rotor copters, with the props open. Look at this, use the idea. Ducted rotors are more effective anyway.

Creator: Not true. 300 miles range on Tesla is already adequate. 500 miles on their semi truck. 30 minutes charge on their semi truck and 250 miles on model 3 in 45 minutes is fine for trips. Your an ICE lover and stuck in the past. Batteries prices are dropping 40% a year now.

Creator. New technology soon will triple battery ranges with new electroclyte discovery. So many battery technologies about to emerge commercially in next 5 years. Desigining anything that's not 100% electric is fool hardy and a waste of time today. Ships are going electric, Semi trucks, buses, dump trucks, waste trucks, planes, copters, etc. Makes me laugh at all you naysayers sticking with Koch Brothers mentalities.

With both electric batteries mechanically chopping air and fuel burning plus mechanically chopping air we will always see dangerous and inefficient heavy travel. When Atmospheric Ion Propulsion arrives we will we see truly efficient light weight no moving parts propulsion that is silent, safe and pollution free using solar hydrogen fuel cells.

There is an actual vehicle in this format. It is the AV-8/B Harrier jet.

Vincent Wolf, when those new battery and electric technologies become commercially available then and only then, will people have those options to choose from. But till then, it's just another futuristic but as yet, unfulfilled promise, kind of like how electricity from fusion, is always "only 30 years away". And it takes a lot of pollution to create and eventually dispose of all those batteries as well as the pkastick and other toxic materials. And plenty of powerplants from which the power to recharge those batteries, use fossil fuels. It makes me laugh at all you with the George Soros mentality who roboticly repeat the mantra "electricity good, gasoline bad" without any actual critical thought as to all the parameters involved in each.

VincentWolf should reread what Creator typed. It is exactly as Creator said. This Lazzarini design relies on continuous downward THRUST to lift the vehicle up off the ground. That requires lots of energy which today's batteries cannot yet provide and that doesn't even touch on forward or backward propulsion. Creator is NOT an 'ICE lover'. He/she mere states the truth of today's circumstances. Wake up, VincentWolf. Don't go making unnecessary enemies.