Die letzten Tage des sündigen Rom

Only see this if you're forced by spear point... Nero's a bright ginger-haired fem, Marcus is as wooden as a spanking paddle... they keep showing a model of Rome burning or not, that should have been left on the cutting room floor but favorite is the actors frozen breath... no heated soundstage, costs money!

Extra laugh... at the end, Peter and Paul come out the gate of a medieval castle!

Perhaps because of the success of his earlier film REVOLT OF THE SLAVES, Lang Jeffries was cast again as a man fighting for the persecuted Christians against the Roman Empire in this film made two years later. While in the first film Jeffries was a slave, here he is a Roman military leader who loses his commission and is taken into custody for his defense of Christians who are tortured and persecuted by Nero and his henchmen. Jeffries is not featured particularly well in this film and he is not allowed to dub his own (very distinctive!) voice. His hairstyle also is not particularly flattering. Still, he plays the role convincingly and looks concerned, although he disappears for stretches of time throughout the film. Nero is once again depicted as an over-the-top yet effeminate dictator-clown. While he does not fiddle as Rome burns, he does pluck his lyre while Rome burns! I don't have a problem with the cheesy animation/model depiction of the fires--after all, this is a low budget film. One interesting detail is that in the indoor scenes shot on soundstages (and there are few exteriors here), the steam from the actors' mouths is visible when they talk! Some of the apostles are also worked into the plot of this film as is God, but you'll have to see it yourself to see how. Overall, this is a slightly above average "persecuted Christians" Roman empire costume drama and features an above average American star, Lang Jeffries, who is unfortunately not used that well in the film. It's probably only for the serious peplum (and by the way, Jeffries keeps his shirt on for virtually the whole film) and Italian historical-adventure fan.

After successfully campaigning in Gaul for several years, Consul Marcus Valerius arrived back in Rome with his legion. He and his men were looking forward to celebrating their return with their families and friends. The fearless warrior expected his Emperor to be pleased with his conquests, but Nero showed little interest. Other priorities were far more important. Nero ordered Marcus to assist Menecrate, the hated leader of the Praetorian Guards, in cleansing the city of its Christian presence but he refused and resigned as Consul in protest. He was immediately sentenced to death and his legion disbanded. Marcus Valerius is a valiant soldier and the killing of innocent people goes against all his principles. The former hero is now the hunted.

Fire over Rome is a smaller scale Quo Vadis, obviously on a much lower budget, but despite this, it's a neat little peplum with good performances from Lang Jeffries as the consul who realises that Nero is a Christian killing nut job and other actors, too. It moves briskly, wastes no time in over padding and its focus is more on the conflict than the romance (Quo Vadis lingered on this). There's some good swordplay. Yes, the overview of Rome burning is obviously models, but the fire scene within city is well-done, as well as can be for a B-picture.

Lang Jeffries looks good in this ambitious tale of a Roman Centurion returning to the Eternal City only to find himself at odds with his mad emperor Nero's persecution of the Christians. To his horror, Marcus eventually learns that both his mother and his fiancee are numbered among those Christians destined to become Nero's human torches and resulting in Fire Over Rome. This glossy spectacle looks good and is well acted until it reveals its budget constraints with laughable burning models supposed to represent Rome burning. (Stock footage from the same sequence in "Quo Vadis? would have answered better) If the viewer overlooks this flaw the film is otherwise admirable.

This movie was given a rough ride by historians and we find little fault with their opinions: the persecutions began AFTER the great fire ;Nero needed scapegoats to calm things down among the plebs,and the Christian were ideal .Anyway ,he was not in Rome when the fire started.

The lack of means is obvious and the great fire is not impressive at all:the town which's burning looks like a model .The screenplay is incredibly poor,even for an Italian sword and sandals ;it consists of murders,tortures,orgies and stakes ,without a firm narrative line; Lang Jeffries ,later secret agent Coplan in Riccardo Freda's spy thriller (1967)),does not seem to care about the situation,even about his mom's fate,a cardboard character ;and the heroine's hairdo is horrible.

Historic figures are featured and they easily steal the show from the principals (but is there anything to steal?):the pagans ,Petronius and Seneca ,the latter showing himself to be a wise philosopher;Peter and Paul,preaching in the catacombs;Peter tells about his denial and he urges his flock to return good for evil:which is not easy to do in those troubled times.