SpecialsTarget Disturbing yet enthralling

SpunkySelfTwitter It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

Aedonerre I gave this film a 9 out of 10, because it was exactly what I expected it to be.

DipitySkillful an ambitious but ultimately ineffective debut endeavor.

Rob-120 "Three Coins in the Fountain" is a typical 1950's "Women's Picture." Back then, Hollywood studio executives were sure that the only thing a woman ever wanted to do with her life was find a husband and get married.Today, this film would be called a "chick flick." Modern feminists will probably hate it, because the three female leads seem to have marriage on their minds...and not much else.In the movie, three secretaries share an apartment at the "Villa Eden" in Rome. It's one of those overly-spacious apartments that looks like it was decorated by a Hollywood set designer. How can they afford such a luxurious apartment? "Oh, the rate of exchange in Rome is very favorable for Americans." Uh huh.Miss s (Dorothy McGuire) has been serving as secretary for John Frederick Shandwell (Clifton Webb), a snooty American writer, who has been living in Rome for the past 15 years. (As other reviewers have pointed out, this skips over the fact that they would have been living in Rome before and during World War II, an event that nobody ever mentions in the film.) He proposes marriage to her on the day before his doctor tells him he has only a year to live.s' roommates, Anita Hutchins (Jean Peters) and Maria Willaims (Maggie McNamara), are working as secretaries at the United States Distribution Agency, one of those Hollywood "government agencies" with an eagle emblem on the door. Anita is about to return to America, because she can't find a man to marry in Rome. But then she finds love with Giorgio Binachi (Rossano Brassi), an Italian translator who works at the USDA. Unfortunately, Giorgio is immediately fired from his job for violating the USDA's policy against employees dating other employees, set in place by Mr. Burgoyne (Howard St. John), the doofus boss who runs the agency.Meanwhile, Maria decides to ensnare Prince Dino di Cessi (Louis Jourdan), an Italian prince known as "the predatory prince." Maria pretends to like all the things the prince likes (Italian opera, playing the piccolo), to trick him into marrying her, but of course, she falls in love with him instead.The movie's major strength is its outstanding cinematography, featuring beautiful views of Rome and Venice. But the story itself is dated and trite. The point of throwing "three coins in the fountain" is to ensure that you'll return to Rome. I don't think I'll return to *this* Rome.

Blueghost This film used to be a big ratings draw when it aired on TV. I would hear about discussed among the female of the households, and eventually the film would get seen. It was in fact the subject of a few news' reports, and several hit songs.Me, I never got it. What? No phasers? No Captain Kirk or Mister Spock? No lasers or guns ablazing? What the heck? Oh... it's a romance.Okay, after the initial boyish knee jerk reaction, I would try to take in the film, get bored, and go watch something else on the small portable black and white. Well, eventually I would watch the whole thing (under protest) but found a fondness for it after a while.It's one of the great old fashioned romances of all time. Not being Italian, nor European of any sort, I see an old fashioned romanticism with the old world, and in a healthy way. We see a kind of sanitized rendition of the young Italian males aggressively going after the female travelers in search of fortune of love. They eventually overcome fears and apprehensions about social class and ideals of what they want and think they want.It's part of what good romances are all about and do. It is of course a fantasy, and like all good fantasies we see the twists and renditions of hearts' dreams fulfilled. In films like this we're presented with characters who have lofty ideals and expectations of what they want and think they want. The story unfolds and shows us and them that what it was they were searching for may not be what they thought they wanted. In real life this is often the case, but not always. Technically; shot using the three stripe process, the colors are marginally muted (a bit of a surprise) but also gives pretty clear imagery. The film, because it is from the 50s, uses primarily master shots to get the story across, and the one action sequence in the film uses maybe two dozen cutaways at most (and like a lot of action sequences, defies some common logic, but hey, it's Hollywood). The composite shots are actually well blended together, but like a lot of composites from the time, the master and background plates don't mesh because of the different lighting schemes. Spectacular interiors, some scenic exteriors, a good slow watch for a Sunday afternoon.An event film that created a splash among the romantically inclined. I can't find any real flaws in it, but again, it's not really my cup of tea. Give it a chance. You might like it.

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.

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 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.