Scanialara You won't be disappointed!

Clevercell Very disappointing...

Mjeteconer Just perfect...

MoPoshy Absolutely brilliant

Dunham16 THE ROMAN SPRING OF MRS STONE is the first published work of Tennesee Williams to survive as a hit novel more than once professionally filmed. The ionic 1961 Jose Quintero filming follows the novel exactly focusing on William's thoughts wealth and fame bring the ability to pay for ease and luxury but not the ability to hang on to what you enjoyed in life before changing the public perception of yourself. this 2003 remake has a different focus. The name stars familiar to most are Helen Mirren as the title character and Brian Dennehy who is given more screen time than in most filmings because he is a relatively minor personage in Williams. Williams himself seems to appear on stage in the 2003 made for television film as Christopher saying many of the speeches in the novel representing the author's perceptions though in this case said by the author who is not a named character in the novel merely personified as the fictitious Karen Stone. The homeless streetwalker who is her alter ego is portrayed in the 1961 film more as what Williams had in mind namely needing what Karen has in terms of wealth, security and comfort but possessing what Karen mourns when she lost namely youth joi de vivre and physical attractiveness. In this 2003 remake he is ill and disturbed not behaving socially as someone merely down on his luck.

phd_travel This dark and sad tale of a middle aged lady visiting Rome and getting involved with some questionable people has been made before with Vivien Leigh but this newer version is worth watching for a more modern approach. The cast is top notch and the on location shooting is good.Helen Mirren as Mrs Stone is terrific as always showing all the emotions and insecurities that the role needs. She strikes me as slightly more together than Mrs Stone should be though. It's a pleasure to watch Anne Bancroft in one of her last roles.Olivier Martinez is a strange choice being French Spanish. His accent is a bit off. Couldn't an Italian have been cast instead? Rodrigo Santoro is good in his small role.Overall worth watching even if you are familiar with the story.

Brian Bagnall (brianberwyn) Having waited many years for the DVD to finally appear I've now watched this movie for the third time. How could one not enjoy the gorgeous photography and scenery combined with marvelous actors and a lush music score? Sure, some of the final scenes were a bit silly but overall it was a delight to watch. Much better than the original version with Warren Beatty's terrible Italian accent. Helen Mirren's acting was great, as expected, but I also liked Olivier Martinez' performance as the handsome sleazy gigolo. His natural accent was perfect for this role. Rodrigo Santoro's haunting face of the urchin beggar was very intriguing. I felt that Anne Bancroft rather over-acted as the Contessa, however. A lovely DVD to watch with a few friends at home and then discuss afterwards. Not to be taken too seriously, just enjoy it.

standman-1 There's much about this production that is very good. I think Martinez is much better than Warren Beatty, who was dreadfully miscast. Some things are better realized in the recent version, such as the young man who waits in the shadows. The camera work is outstanding and I think Mirren's wardrobe is better than in the earlier film.But I think there's a fatal flaw in the casting of Helen Mirren as Karen Stone, for the reason which I think made Vivien Leigh more suitable to the role. This goes to the heart of a major theme in Tennessee Williams: evil people bent on destroying those who are fragile and vulnerable.For all her greatness as an actress, there's nothing vulnerable about Helen Mirren. She's too strong and formidable a person to play a fragile flower. I always feel a sense of "Don't tread on me" when watching her.