Some things I liked some I did not.

It's no definitive masterpiece but it's damn close.

There is just so much movie here. For some it may be too much. But in the same secretly sarcastic way most telemarketers say the phrase, the title of this one is particularly apt.

One of those movie experiences that is so good it makes you realize you've been grading everything else on a curve.

Andreotti was a man who never showed any emotions, if not a caustic sense of humour. He was powerful, but he was the head of a minority faction of the Christian Democrats. His power was hidden, but he always stood up to help his friends. Vatican, Mafia, Secrets Services and Dirty Money. But not for him. Although I was always disgusted as an Italian by what he represented, I always felt that he was serving a purpose and that his acts fitted Machiavelli's quote "The end justifies the means". Just a feeling, because I never knew what "the end" actually was. Surely this man was the anti-Berlusconi. Andeotti didn't like how he was portrayed, and kept a grudge. The film is great, because it captures the essence of the man and of the politician and Sorrentino's technique is one of a kind. But it's not just about Giulio. His men are such strong characters. Paolo Cirino Pomicino always introduced by a samba is pure genius, unfortunately non-Italians will not be able to appreciate. Salvo Lima's dark presage of the Mafia closing in on promises that could not be delivered counters that. And Franco Evangelisti, who took care of his electoral stronghold in non-urban Lazio, could only be portrayed as colourless as he was. And then the highlight: the kiss with Toto' Riina, the savage and cruel head of Mafia, on which the Italian media have focused so much and for so long. It was not easy to make such film, but Sorrentino's ability to mix different genres, the use of music and photography, and the much needed dose of laughs have delivered a masterpiece.

Whether or not you appreciate the masterful, almost flashy direction, it certainly turns what could be an absolute dirge of a political lecture into a cinematic tour de force. That makes it fashionable, hip - and popular. And the difference between a two star TV movie and a 5 star, internationally known cinematic hit. I know which I prefer.Many have suggested watching 'Il Divo' more than once - and so I've just finished my second viewing. The first time has you in a swirling grip as it grabs you by the short and curlies and bombards you with unfolding image after another, a legion of facts and then a metaphorical close-up. It's nigh on impossible to make sense of it all, especially, if like me, your grasp on Italian political history is near nil.But, I didn't watch Il Divo for a history lesson, so does it matter that if I took a test on its facts and dates, my score would still be poor? Perhaps, but as others too have said, a wealth of information is on-line for any that want those details.I first came across both director Paolo Sorrentino and actor Toni Servillo, like many, through the hypnotic "Consequences Of Love", which I must have seen five times now. Servillo, playing the flawed mega politician Giulio Andreotti in this and the enigmatic fallen Mafia mogul in 'Consequences Of' is spellbinding in his portrayal of men who are guarded, cunning and deeply, deeply flawed. These foibles are picked up superbly by Sorrentino's camera.Il Divo doesn't have the simplistic beauty of Consequences.. and ultimately isn't as satisfying but you are left in no doubt that not only have we seen a compelling and colourful portrayal of a life but we have seen the cinematic equivalent of that, too.

Giulio Andreotti can be seen as both the precursor to, and the antithesis of, Silvio Belusconi: an Italian politician with his fingers on every lever that led to power, accused of everything but convicted of nothing, and yet peculiarly devoid of conventional charisma. A sense of a particularity, of a man who had become nothing beyond a carefully constructed defence of his own behaviour, was nicely captured in Tim Parks' fictional work 'Destiny'; and we get the same feeling in 'Il Divo', a biopic with an extraordinary performance Toni Sevillo by in the lead role. What neither offer is definitive, or even speculative, resolution of the enigma and his actions; just a chilling yet plausible portrait of the man. Yet without providing clear answers, something else must provide the story. In Parks' book, Andreotti was a bit part; in the film, there's no other narrative, and sometimes the direction feels a little too heavy, overdone perhaps because there isn't a smooth tale holding things together. And the music on the soundtrack seems deliberately incongruous, thrown into the mix to provide some variation in tone that would otherwise have been lacking. But Servillo's performance more than compensates; it will lead you wanting the same answers, one suspects, that everyone has wanted from Andreotti for a long long time.

The cinematography is/was excellent. I have to admit that this movie, because of my lack of familiarity with the subject was a hard thing to watch. It's like a thick heavy piece of dark multi-grain bread. You know it has a lot of substance but it's hard to enjoy.I'm one of those people at the movie rental places that the clerk is always telling, "you know....this is subtitled." As if I'm going to drop it on the counter- realizing, suddenly (oh my God) that this is A FOREIGN FILM- and, realizing my mistake, thanks to that warning, run back down the aisle to grab a copy of "Police Academy 12".But, that's not me. I really do enjoy foreign cinema- most of it is incredibly rich and fulfilling. I just want to give everyone a little 'heads-up' without revealing any 'spoilers', that this baby is thick, it's dark, and like the aforementioned bread, nutritious but not very enjoyable to digest.