Scanialara You won't be disappointed!

Boobirt Stylish but barely mediocre overall

VeteranLight I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

Erica Derrick By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

mallorymay For 7 years I have researched Pope Pius XII's record during WWII, concentrating on the 1943-1944 period of German occupation of Rome. I have translated little-known documents in six foreign languages as well as English. I used that background to write a novella, "Silent Rescue," about what the Pope really did to help rescue the Jews during the Nazi occupation of Rome ("Silent Rescue," volume 1, on Kindle). Then I wrote a long book to show the research behind the novella ("Silent Rescue," volume 2, also on Kindle). The TV movie, "Sotto il Cielo di Roma," is well-intended and shows that the Pope would have made a public protest against the roundup of the Jews, as he threatened to do in the letter that he had Bishop Hudal send to General Stahel. But it is more complicated than that.The Pope and General Stahel had learned from the tragic example of the Dutch bishops in 1942, that such a protest would only provoke Hitler to kill even more Jews. The movie accurately shows the Pope burning his fiery protest against the Nazi extermination of the Jews as a result in 1942. There were three witnesses in the room to that action.What the TV movie leaves out is the fact that General Harster (absent from the TV movie) had been in charge of annihilating all the Dutch Jews in that reprisal in 1942. When the Nazis occupied Rome, Harster was also in charge of carrying out the Final Solution in Italy, to round up the Jews in Rome. It would have been entirely in character for Harster to carry out a savage reprisal if the Pope had made a public denouncement of the Nazi roundup of the Jews, like the Dutch bishops.The Pope had Bishop Hudal send a letter to General Stahel, threatening to make a public outcry anyway unless the roundup in Rome was ended. This alarmed General Stahel, who was aware of General Harster's role in the situation. He told Fr. Pfeiffer that it would be counter productive for the Pope to make any public protest. Instead General Stahel went over Harster's head and got Himmler to call off the roundup. But General Harster wanted revenge, so he met with General Wolff a few days later in Rome, and within a week General Stahel was fired. It cost Stahel his job and he ended up on the front lines in Russia. The Pope had learned his lesson – don't do as the Dutch bishops! 84% of Dutch Jews were killed. 84% of Italian Jews were rescued.

Srosxi Quote of Saint Pio: "Pray, hope, and don't worry. Trust in the infinite goodness of almighty God." So, (SPOILER about 15 minutes into the movie). Little has been seen of Pope Pio, and even less has been said. But one of his top guards (of the Vatican) stated about what will keep the German Nazi scum out of the Vatican was only a "white line." Apparently, if he was truly a believer in Jesus Christ, as I would assume all Vatican guards are, he didn't even consider that his God, the almighty, would protect the Vatican.The movie, listed as historical, has serious flaws. The movie was first made in 1957 (I believe), but some young director considered that historical movie needed modifying. So, which history is correct? The same happens to our young children in the United States of America. I was told that Christopher Columbus discovered America. Yet, the town of St. Augustine in what is now Florida, founded by Spain I believe, was established before 1492. Or, perhaps I'm getting history wrong. Was what would become the United States of America actually discovered by nomads from the higher northern portions of the Earth by crossing from Asia to what is now Alaska? History never was my strong suit. And thus, when I see a "biography" about Pope Pio is based on almost everything but the actual Pope, I stay away.I should have not watched the 30 minutes of this TV blasphemy either.God bless the United States of America, and God bless Texas.

Bob Shank In spite of being a 'foreign films' fan, I hadn't been aware of this 2 episode 2010 release until an old girl-friend brought it to my attention on Netflix live streaming. Dragged kicking and screaming into it, I eventually found myself totally captivated with the history and directing. I've always been a James Cromwell follower, even though he often plays the dirty fellow. But in this release he has absolutely nailed-down a reversal in rolls with a deeply-convincing performance. OK, so there were a few lame efforts from less-than-perfect actors, but the intent was right there in your face. And in my humble-but-most-accurate opinion, all parts were sincere and played well into the story. I thought, in my 6 decades of viewing, some of the scenes were 'world class.' Especially near the end, Part 2, with the Pope face-to-face, alone, with the German officer responsible for many of the atrocities). Up until now, I had been totally unaware of this side of the Catholic efforts during WWII in Rome (I'm a Baptist), and was amazed to find myself fascinated with the depicting of it in this most appreciable movie. I think the history of this film, and its depiction, should be viewed by all serious movie fans and historians. It's worth the kicking and screaming.

dixie-35 OK, where to begin! Talk about milking it and over dramatizing, this film is trying really really hard. The lead actress is so hard to watch and listen to, she's pretty and I guess that's why she was cast, her acting is shallow, wooden, nothing draws me into her character, it feels like she's just saying her lines, but does not embody her character. Maybe with time she'll grow as an actress, that's always the hope. Of course the director must take responsibility in the casting as he has final say and seems intent on casting cute peeps rather then real actors, though many of the actors were fine. Cromwell is always excellent. I can see why they only produced two episodes. The subject matter is always interesting, well mostly,