Rome, Open City

Really incredible achievement, filmed as I understand it while WW2 was still taking place. Heartbreaking finales to both of the movie’s two acts. This is more in the category of “historically important” more than “rip-roaring entertainment”, but I still recommend watching for the performances of Pina and Don Pietro–both will stick with me for a long time.

It's very chilling that the intensity of this film still exists almost 60 years later. Rossellini captures almost everything about that particular time period, all the struggles with the war and occupation and such very well. This for anyone studying neorealist cinema is both the best place to start and the most definitive example of it.

Three films that form Rosselini's “Neorealist Trilogy”:
Roma, città aperta (1945) Rome Open City https://trakt.tv/movies/rome-open-city-1945
Paisà (1946) Paisan https://trakt.tv/movies/paisan-1946
Germania, anno zero (1948) Germany Year Zero https://trakt.tv/movies/germany-year-zero-1948

Vederlo prima del 25 aprile è sempre qualcosa di speciale. Considerando che fu girato a pochissimo tempo dalla liberazione di Roma, in una città ferita e in ricostruzione, *Roma città aperta* è un miracolo cinematografico.
Le difficoltà produttive, la scelta di girare in esterni reali e negli studi di Cinecittà devastati, non fanno che rendere ancora più potente questo film, che non è solo un simbolo del neorealismo, ma un documento vivo, urgente, necessario.

-

Watching this before April 25th (Italy’s Liberation Day) always hits differently. Shot just weeks after the liberation of Rome, in a city still scarred and rebuilding, *Rome, Open City* is nothing short of a cinematic miracle.
Given the production challenges, the use of real locations, and the damaged Cinecittà studios, the film feels even more powerful. It’s not just a neorealist masterpiece — it’s a living, breathing piece of history.

“Rome, Open City” is an Italian neorealism film by one of the co-creators of the neo-realism, Roberto Rossellini. Neo-realism is a filming style that portrays the world as it is, usually shot on location with non-professional actors. The fact that this film was produced during World War II, with Italy’s economy in collapse, makes it even more astounding. So, what’s it about? In 1944, the Nazis in Rome are hunting Giorgio Manfredi, a fictional Italian resistance leader. Amid curfews and food shortages, the resistance fights the Nazis from the shadows with help from the Italian citizens. The Nazis decide to cut off the head of the snake by targeting Manfredi. He seeks refuge at his friend Francesco’s house, as Francesco is preparing to marry. Francesco’s fiancee, Pina, and their priest, Don Pietro Pellegrini, attempt to help Manfredi escape Rome. However, there is a Nazi collaborator in their midst, complicating matters. The clock is ticking, and the Nazis closing in. Will Manfredi escape or will they get caught?

Overall, I thought it was an interesting, enjoyable film. Even though it was one of the first neo-realistic films, the depiction felt realistic with documentary-style filming. Rossellini, an influential filmmaker, inspired later directors, who improved and took the neo-realism filming style to new heights. The atmosphere felt natural, with non-professional actors, authentic sets in Rome, and attention to details like clothing and lighting. However, I noticed some negatives. A few scenes, especially early in the film, felt like they dragged a bit, and the character development could have been better. Non-professional actors make the film feel natural, but the untrained acting may leave you wanting more. It wasn’t poor acting at all, though, but shallow backstories on the characters. It made it difficult to feel the characters. Since the focus is on the natural aspects of the story and tragedy, Rossellini can get away with the characters as they are. A few interesting tidbits. Rossellini used a few actual German POWs to add to the realism. Nazis had left Rome just two months before Rossellini began filming this. Other studios refused to pick up this film because it felt too much like a documentary.

Would I recommend this? It’s a decent film, but I don’t think it’s a must-watch. If you enjoy learning about film history, I think this is worth watching.