Afouotos Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Keeley Coleman The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

Aspen Orson There is definitely an excellent idea hidden in the background of the film. Unfortunately, it's difficult to find it.

Billy Ollie Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

Marcin Kukuczka "Do not be afraid. Open wide the doors for Christ"...30 years have passed since that memorable Sunday, the 22nd of October 1978 when the world heard these words said by the new Pope, the Polish Pope, the one "from a faraway country" as he metaphorically called himself. These words, which constitute the basis for the title of the movie by Jeff Bleckner, truly occurred revolutionary, renewing the face of the Church, humanity, the whole earth. The popularity of this unique second the longest pontiff in history went in pairs with the popularity of the Catholic Church, but foremost, emphasized the shining beauty of living in accordance with the Gospel. And naturally, after the death of such eminent figure, there appeared lots of projects for movies. And so far it seems all right. However, the dilemma appears if yet another biopic really occurs to be useful, if yet another interpretation offers anything new in the sea of so many archives left from John Paul II's pontiff? I do not mean to be placed in the view of a severe critic. However, what I notice in this movie are serious inconsistencies, historical changes as well as particular simplifications of Karol Wojtyla's personality. It is true that the film presents to us the major events of pope's life from his historic visit to Jerusalem in the Jubilee 2000 through the fateful events at St Peter's Square in May 1981 to the last days of his suffering and death in dignity. Yet, there is no clear insight into the fact who Karol Wojtyla really was. His suffering is stressed but his sacrifice is not. If you want facts, you will get them in one of many biographies or documentaries. What is needed in such a movie is the heart and heartfelt uniqueness! I can understand that the film was not made by the Pole and there are some simplifications. Yet, Jasna Gora changed into Ostra Brama in Vilnius leaves much to be desired. I was also dissatisfied seeing some of the scenes that are wrong and describe events that never happened, for instance John Paul II never fell before so many people. Moreover, it is the first time I have heard that he looked at family photos so many times. He was perfectly aware what his difficult role was and was strong enough to carry this burden. There is, however, one biographical period highlighted in the movie which, so far, we have not been able to find elsewhere: Lolek's childhood. The screenplay includes the 1920-1929 period when Lolek's mother was still alive and believed that her son would be a great man one day. There is a very touching scene when little Lolek prays at his ill mother's bed. The example of his father - a patriot and a pious man who constituted an example of Christian life for Karol is also showed. Highlighting those aspects is useful because it was at that time when Karol grew to spiritual maturity, when he started to go upward against the commonness and got ready to become the head of the Church and witness the challenging words "Do not be afraid of Christ!" The performances... Someone joked that after the German movie about the head of the Third Reich DER UNTERGANG they cast Bruno Ganz and Thomas Kretschman in the film about the head of the church. Funny as it may seem, their roles are shockingly opposite. Kretschmann attempts at portraying the pope and takes all pains to do it right. Although he leaves much to be desired, the efforts of his are noticeable, particularly at the scene in Jerusalem or the final scenes requiring hard acting. Here, the effects do not pay so much but rather the intentions and we, as viewers, do appreciate that. The rest of the cast, however, are very unsuccessful in their roles. Bruno Ganz, though a terrific actor, does not fit to the role of Cardinal Wyszynski whatsoever! The same can be said about all supporting cast.All in all, the film is worth seeing as yet another look at Karol Wojtyla's life. However, fact after fact may occur useless rather than helpful. Therefore, I think that the movie is more in between great and gray since what movie can equal with the greatness of John Paul II? Yet, all movies that stress spiritual values should be highly appreciated.Yes, the viewer of good says with the late pope: "Do not be afraid. Open wide the doors for Christ. To his saving power, open the boundaries of States, economic and political systems, the vast fields of culture, civilization and development. DO NOT BE AFRAID! Christ knows "what is in man". He alone knows it" Have no fear to open wide the doors for Christ in art and cinema as well!

vchimpanzee I have now seen both the CBS and ABC versions of the story of Karol Wojtyla. After seeing the ABC version, and not even aware yet that CBS had a biography planned, I was ready to say this movie would get Emmy nominations. Now I'm not so sure, but it was still good, even if only a limited number of scenes from the Pope's life are shown.This movie does a much better job than the CBS miniseries in showing us the life of young Karol, or Lolek, as they called him. The boy was effectively portrayed by Jasper Harris and then Ignas Survila. We see his loving parents who were obviously a great influence, and Lolek's special relationship with his brother Edmund. Several events, some tragic, apparently played important roles in shaping the man who became Pope. Paulius Ignatavius did a fine job as Edmund Wojtyla. Inga Sakalauskaité impressed as Emilia (Karol's mother), and Petar Goranov was wonderful as Karol's father.Karol is shown doing theater as an adult, and he has a girlfriend, but he feels God's call and has to make a choice. Menawhile, the Nazis are invading his homeland. Karol has numerous challenges to face and he handles them well. Once he becomes a priest, his superiors see his abilities and take advantage of them, giving him more and more responsibilities. At each stage of advancement, Karol is achieving more than most would at his age. Karol cannot believe what he is being asked to do, yet he accepts all challenges given him. Both movies show what can be described as a Christmas miracle, though there are differences which make me unsure if it was actually the same event. One day, when a new Pope is needed ... well, we all know what's going to happen. Amazingly, though, the death of Paul VI and the election of John Paul I is left out of this movie. John Paul II is shown as a very caring and very moral man who needs to be with the people, a man who stands up to challenges as difficult as the Soviet Union. He is also shown as flawed, believing he has sinned, in an incident not shown in the CBS miniseries. Hard to believe this man sinned, right?This movie also goes into more detail than the CBS version with the Pope's visit with Mehmet Ali Acga. Despite the limited number of scenes from the Pope's life, the ones we do see include outstanding writing and performances. Well, perhaps "outstanding" isn't quite the word to one who has seen the CBS production, but this movie certainly was impressive. We see enough to inspire us to live better and to know what it really means to serve.

diana_west The people at ABC forgot to do their biographical research... so many scenes were just plain wrong! The actor playing JPII was very rigid, there was no personality there. It is very very obvious that this movie was on the bottom of the programming totem poll, the move is so low budget. The script is terrible. Conversations like: "You must follow the rules" "No, the people are starving." Lame. Plus, the movie was jumping like crazy from event to event in order to fit it into the two hours. Terrible! A better use of your time would be to watch a PBS documentary on JPII. Also, CBS put out a miniseries on JPII that is better than ABC by far. JPII was a wonderful man, and it bothers me to think that my grandkids might get a hold of this ABC movie and think that THAT is what he was really like!

dankohner-1 I saw that this movie was coming out and could not wait to see it. I have to say I was very disappointed with it. This would have been better as a mini-series. The whole show seemed very rushed. They did not explain things very clearly. At the end they showed John Paul II, alive and well and the next scene he was dead. Never any explanation as to what happened. (We all know what happened in real life) I think ABC dropped the ball big time on something that could have been great. In all I think this movie was a blur. It seemed like a drunken monkey jumping around from one point in John Paul's life to another point never explaining how or why things happened. Such as when his older brother leaves, it was never explained that his brother was a doctor and that is why he left home. Also when his father dies, all we see is his father lying on the floor and that was that. I was very disappointed with the over all movie.