Hadrina
The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful
Portia Hilton
Blistering performances.
Guillelmina
The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.
howardmorley
I only voted this film 3/10.I agreed with James Hitchcock's above user review which is accurate and to the point.I suppose (unlike today) if you had survived WW11 in 1945 you did not have much choice when going to the cinema for some needed light relief.This film is supposedly set in Florence/Italy yet it is a place where everyone speaks perfect English and as another user humorously put it in their comments, sound as if they are all at the Hunt Ball in Cheltenham!Not a word of "Parliamo Italiano" was heard throughout even by the "peasant locals".Most farcical casting was the mother - Phyllis Calvert who looked and was the same age as her grown daughter - Patricia Roc (a point made by other reviewers).Yet again we have a claustrophobically studio bound set with no relief of exterior shots and where the whole of Florence seems to be traversed in a 50 sq.yard of studio area and where characters suddenly appear in 5mins from one scene to another!A typical example was when Stewart Granger, in a comical fiesta outfit, appeared in the same bedroom as Phyllis Calvert (whose character had just died).Who let him into the villa? - I did not see how he gained entry! Normally I enjoy the Gainsborough melodramas as long as they have some credulity, e.g. "Love Story" (1944), "The Man in Grey" (1943) and of course "The Wicked Lady" (1945) but this film was one of Gainsborough's duds, war or no war.The screenwriter/producer in my opinion have a lot to answer for producing this travesty.
writers_reign
Ah, those dear dead days beyond naivety ... when no one found it even a smidgen strange that in a film set entirely in Rome and Florence the entire cast spoke as if at the Hunt Ball in Cheltenham, when the make-up department didn't think it necessary to make Phyliis Calvert at least SEEM old enough to be the mother of Patricia Roc rather than her kid sister (there was, in fact, less than a year between them)when it didn't occur to anyone involved that berets are worn by men in France rather than Italy and ... oh well you get the picture. Poor Phyllis Calvert is so out of her depth as a feral knife-wielding, cigarette smoking gypsy-type wanton that the waters are above her head but probably Margaret Lockwood was working that week and Jean Kent was thought only fit for support. Stewart Granger is on hand doing his usual 'it's all about ME, screw the picture' bit and a bemused time is had by all.
csatorsky
I saw this movie when it first came out and have yet to figure out why it was such a popular success. Its surely one of the silliest movies ever made with a a cast of English actors in operatic style Gypsy get-up -seems everyone wore jangly earing's and swaggered around while Phyllis Calvert (God rest her) one of the most English of actresses portrayed an Italian girl possessed by wayward uncontrollable passions (usually portrayed in those days by the luscious Gina Lollobrigida) Its really a trip through the costume wardrobe of an Italian opera. See it strictly for laughs. It would have only needed the Ritz brothers to appear half way though to get the whole thing together
Neil-117
You're best to go into this one absolutely blind, as any knowledge of the plot will spoil it for you. For the first 15 minutes or so the audience is kept completely in the dark as to what this movie is even about. Gradually a mystery begins to take shape and then the rest of the movie draws us in to see where it leads.The early scenes have a somewhat over-the-top Gothic quality which could put some viewers right off, but patience pays; the mood changes and the rest of the movie becomes quite intriguing.Here's a slight hint – readers of romantic novels will definitely enjoy it, but that should not deter anyone else.
