VeteranLight I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

Rio Hayward All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Nicholas Rhodes I had never heard either of Virginia Wolf nor of Mrs Dalloway but my mum received a free DVD of this film with her daily newspaper ( a very common practice in the UK apparently ) so she gave me this on a recent visit to England and I thought "Why not" as I have always enjoyed Vanessa Redgrave in the films I have seen of her. I think that to appreciate fully this sort of film you need to be English or have lived many years in England. Much attention is given to recreating the period, the accents, the costumes and decors of the 1920's in that country and the result is truly remarkable. I can understand Americans and other foreigners not appreciating this as it is very far removed from their lifestyle. Also, the plot is rather tame ( I would have preferred more sex and passion ) but presumably the novel in question did not include this. I was also confused by the introduction of a "sub plot" whereby a WW1 soldier with shell shock married to an Italian wife commits suicide and couldn't understand the relation between this and Mrs Dalloway. In spite of these misgivings I actually felt pleasure watching the film. The actress who portrayed Clarissa Dalloway young, Natacha something-or-other, had subliminal beauty which reminded me of the great actresses of the 1940's, something you very rarely see nowadays, and I have always liked a great deal Michael Kitchen every time I have seen him in a film. I would therefore recommend the film to all those who like "period pieces" but would warn that the plot is rather tame and subdued and that if you are looking for passion, sex and romance you might be left disappointed, or at least hungering for more, especially as the ending is rather flat and unoriginal. As you can see, my feelings are rather mixed, there is good and bad but globally my appreciation will be positive, hence a rating of 7 !!

beaglesrbest I kept waiting for the film to move me, inspire me, shock me, sadden me in some way but it stirred none of my emotions. It just meandered along to the end. None of the characters seemed very unique or complex, they just seemed like actors reciting their lines. I think it could have been a better movie if the characters expressed more emotion. The only one who did and was believable was the veteran and he probably committed suicide just to get out of the movie as soon as he could. It was a waste of talent, film, their time, and mine. If there is a message or meaning or genius in this story, it certainly is well-hidden or I am very dense, which I doubt.

FilmOtaku Since I was just finishing the book, `Mrs. Dalloway' by Virginia Woolf, I was excited to see that it was on one of the movie channels last weekend. What I encountered, however, is a film that was boring, incomprehensible and non-sensical. One cannot entirely blame the film, it tried the best it could with the material it had, but when the source material is Virginia Woolf, and is almost entirely written in stream-of-conscience style with extended periods of internalizing and little actual dialogue, one would certainly think that there shouldn't be a film made from it just because a film can be made from it. Vanessa Redgrave, who plays the title character, does not deserve any blame for the failure of this film, nor do any of the other actors. It is just simply a film that could not intelligibly be made from the story that Woolfe wrote, and should not have even been attempted. Don't watch the movie, read the book. --Shelly

Philby-3 Virginia Woolf is thought of as a high-brow rather than popular novelist yet the novel this film is based on sold well when first published in 1924. It is easy to see why – there is nothing rarefied in the treatment of its themes, making choices and breaking with the past.Clarissa Dalloway, a society matron, played with startled radiance by Vanessa Redgrave, is throwing a party and while making the arrangements she remembers back to the choice she made 30 years ago as a young woman between two men. One, Peter, charming, intelligent, adventurous, is the sort who went out and conquered India, or at least seduced the Major's wife. The other, Richard, good-looking, loving, a bit boofy, devoid of flair, is the sort that gravitates into politics. Naturally, the young Clarissa (played by Natasha Mc Elhone) has chosen the safe one, but Peter, after a chequered career, has turned up in London and pays her a call. She invites him to the party. Parallel to Clarisa's reminiscences is the story of Septimus (Rupert Graves) a returned soldier from World War I, whose wartime experiences are eating into his sanity. Clarisa is put up as a `modern woman' who refuses Peter's love because she sees it as all demanding and all consuming, despite his attractive personality. Yet she accepts Richard, who wants and needs a dutiful, supportive wife. She also passes up the possibility of love with her close friend Sally. Though shaken when she hears of Stephen's fate from his psychiatrist, a guest at the party, and touched when she meets her old lovers again, she sees her life as going on before, safe and unexciting. For a film-maker the amount of interior musing generated by Woolf's `stream of consciousness' writing technique presents a challenge and here Marleen Gorris has effectively used flashback to externalise Clarisa's memories. We get two stories artfully intercut, though there is not much tension in either of them - costumes, but not much drama. One does, however, get the feel of how it might have been to be in the upper class during the Edwardian late summer; as if just being there was enough (we even meet the Prime Minister at the party). Woolf and Gorris have evoked the atmosphere precisely, even if, as Lytton Strachey said, there isn't much of a plot. Even the minor characters sparkle. Robert Hardy as Sewell's psychiatist exudes bonhomie and guile, and Margaret Tyzak as the meddlesome Lady Bruton gives us a fine example of the old-fashioned female power broker at work. Overall, the film is rather slow, especially at the start, and I did wonder whether it would have been made without all the government and foundation money listed in the credits, but the quality of the performances redeem it to some extent.