Smartorhypo Highly Overrated But Still Good

Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

Nayan Gough A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

Maleeha Vincent It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

richard-1787 This is sort of like a poor man's Gentlemen Prefer Blondes or Funny Face. Jean Peters has to pretend that she's Audrey Hepburn. She isn't, which is not her fault.The photography of the rural scenery is beautiful, but other shots are not as good as in some contemporary European-set movies, like An American in Paris (most of which was filmed on the MGM lot), Funny Face (ditto), or The Sun Also Rises.The plot, as such, is not worth paying attention to. The real theme is that truly romantic love is to be found with European men, if you can distinguish the good ones from the cads.Dorothy McGuire may not be Marilyn Monroe, Jane Russell, or Leslie Caron, but she's very good in this.Louis Jourdan is wasted on being a cad. He will be redeemed later in Gigi.And Clifton Webb is very good, and gets some very good lines.Not a great movie, but worth one viewing.

kola1965 Whilst ignoring the glossy subject matter of the film, this is a great satire on how America views Europe, and how that view is perceived by Europeans: the American characters are parochial and surprised whenever another fellow countryman displays any culture, whilst the European characters are all stereotypically over-sexed, over-stylised and painfully cultured. This film is about as European as "Happy Days" relates to the reality of life in America. Everyone lives in huge flats/houses, and the outside scenes look like they were filmed at 6 in the morning... if you've ever been to any European city, then you'll know that it's a lot busier and bustling than depicted here in the superbly photographed location shots. As usual, Europe is seen as living in the past, with all that funny sounding food and affected cultural idiosyncrasies, the buildings are all pre-historic, crumbling and steeped in shadow, the general public are depicted as being wolfish and spending most of their time pinching girls or riding around on scooters. It appears to be a "nouvelle vague" film, made for non-European audiences, as a joke at the expense of that audience. Look under the initial fluff, and there is quite a witty and biting satire on cultural mores.

jotix100 Life in post-war Italy is the basis of this colorful Twentieth Century Fox release of 1954. Of course, this had nothing to do with the problems the country was facing at the time, but in many ways, it was a happier time and the living was easy, for at least, the Americans that happen to be in the story. Where were the masters of neo-realism when we needed them? But then again, it would not have been a Hollywood film that could be enjoyed by the movie going public of those years.Three American women come to Rome to work in different venues. There is Frances, the oldest of the trio, who has been in the country the longest. Then there is Anita, a secretary for a United States agency. Maria is the latest arrival. She has come to work in the same place as Anita. The three women enjoy perks that ordinary people would not have. Working for a US agency gave Anita and Maria access to people and places no ordinary citizen could get.Maria falls for a local prince, a sort of serious playboy who loves to live well, loves opera, plays the piccolo, and loves to eat at good restaurants. Anita has humbler expectations with Giorgio, an aspiring lawyer working at the agency as translator. Frances considers herself a spinster; she works for a writer that is well connected, but who has not written a book for quite some time.Jean Negulesco directed the film with an eye toward the beauty of Rome. The opening sequence where one is taken all over to watch the fountains that are one of the main attractions of Rome. The screenplay is just an excuse to show the magnificence of the 'Eternal City' as it looked in those years. John Patrick adapted the novel by John Secondari with an eye for how it would play in Cinemascope.Dorothy McGuire, Jean Peters and Maggie McNamara are seen as Frances, Anita and Maria. Clifton Webb plays the writer. Louis Jourdan is the prince charming and Rossano Brazzi was the stereotypical Latin Lover that he played to perfection during his American film career.Milton Krasner, the cinematographer, had a field day with all the beautiful natural scenery he captured for the viewer's pleasure. He even gets the opportunity to take us to Venice and to the supposedly country place near Rome where Rossano Brazzi's home was located. In reality, the location is from the Dolomite Mountains, a range in Alto Adige, a location that is quite far from the city. Victor Young's music is perfect for the background musical score.Enjoy, and 'buon appetito'

theowinthrop Let us say this - the film is an eye-filler. Cinemascope was just starting and the use of the city of Rome as a backdrop was an excellent one. One only wishes a more charming and better film (such as ROMAN HOLIDAY) had been the first to use it, but that film was shot in black and white, and not in a big screen format like cinema-scope. Yet that film holds up better.There is an unwritten rule regarding screenplays - keep them relatively simple or the story is stretched beyond acceptable belief. As this is a romantic film we are willing to let it stretch a little, but certain points about it that were acceptable in 1954 are now seen as hard to believe.The plot deals with three women who are Americans and find themselves working in Rome. Two are connected to the American Embassy there, represented by Howard St. John. St. John was a capable, if unexciting, actor. He was the original General Bullmoose in the musical "L'il Abner" (and like Peter Palmer repeated his performance in the film version). He was usually playing professional men (lawyers, bankers, diplomats) many of whom if not crooked were willing to accept a degree of accommodation with unlikeable types for some advantage (in the film of Woody Allen's play DON'T DRINK THE WATER, St. John is willing to allow an innocent American family get smeared by a Communist Regime as spies so he could make headlines about negotiating their release for an upcoming political campaign). He is also recalled as Broderick Crawford's legal adviser in BORN YESTERDAY. St. John fit in well (including his homburg hats) with the style of the Eisenhower years.Here St. John is observing the behavior of two of the woman, Maggie MacNamara and Jean Peters, making sure they toe the line regarding no fraternizing with Italians. But the three woman (the third is Dorothy Maguire) are walking by the Trevi Fountain in Rome, and when discussing the legend that you can get your wish there they throw their coins into the fountain (hence the title of the film) wishing for staying on in Rome or for romance. MacNamara meets a local Prince played by Louis Jordan, and Peters meets a young man working at the Embassy (Rosanno Brazzi) and two romances start up. St. John is not thrilled at this, and ends (or tries to end) the one between Peters and Brazzi by firing Brazzi. He can't do much with MacNamara and Jordan, as the latter is not attached to the Embassy, and is pretty important in Italy itself.Maguire has been already living in Rome for 15 years. Originally working at the embassy, she has become the secretary of a famous novelist played by Clifton Webb. Although she occasionally goes out with St. John, she is frequently in the company of Webb as well. We subsequently learn that she has been carrying the torch for Webb all these years, but he is unaware of it.Now it as been pointed out by other writers on this website that Webb, talented performer that he was in film, was the closest thing that the movies could produce as a closet "Gay" man in the movies of the 1940s and 1950s. Intellectual, sharp tongued, frequently cruel (in his serious roles like Waldo Lydecker or Eliot Templeton) he was amusing (Mr. Belvedere or MR. SCOUTMASTER or DREAMBOAT) and always attention getting. But the thought that he could have any woman quietly carrying a torch for him for 15 years is a stretch - I say this even after seeing him as Frank Gilbreth in CHEAPER BY THE DOZEN, as the ultimate father and husband - aided by Myrna Loy in that role. Yet we find him in such a position here, and playing it as though it all makes sense. He even has a chance to show that he can be noble to Maguire when he learns of an unfortunate turn of events.The other two romances rise and collapse due to economic pressures (Peters and Brazzi) and character failure (MacNamara and Jordan). How does the film end. I will only add that the script writers decided to turn Webb into a noble lover and a deus ex machina at the conclusion.I take it that this was fine in 1954, the year this film was made and the year of my birth. Ike was President only one year, and we had a confidence in our nation having a fairly flawless future if we only listened to the wisdom of the wise and old. And Webb just fit the bill for that in this romantic film.The performances are pretty good, including MacNamara - who a year before had gotten critically good notices (and even an Oscar nomination) in the now dated and abysmal THE MOON IS BLUE. Here her stridency in that role is tone down, and she actually is acceptable in her pursuit of Jordan. Jordan is good as a man who believes in trust as the cornerstone of love. Peters is a practical girl who nearly loses Brazzi due to his relative poverty. And Maguire makes the most of her improbable role, especially in a late drunk scene sequence.For the performances and the cinematography it is a "7". But the story would need real repair work if the film was redone today.