MovieChat Forums > The Roman Spring of Mrs. Stone (1961) Discussion > One of the all time greats!

One of the all time greats!

posted 20 years ago by Cal_Mac
20 replies | jump to latest

I absolutely love the original of this movie. I could watch it over and over again and never tire of it.

However it is only with the death this last week of Anne Bancroft that I realised that a re-make had been made! My first thoughts were that it is a travesty to touch such a classic.

It's quite ironic that Anne should have been cast in this production when the film she's most famous for is that other older woman/younger man classic!

So how does the casting compare?:

Leigh v Mirren
Lenya v Bancroft
Beatty v Martinez

Finally I know this was a TV version but is it commercially available??

MSN Messenger: [email protected]

[–] Jungle_Red 19 years ago

Yes it is available commericially. I haven't seen it yet but I'd like too. If you have netflix it's available there.

"I don't want to live...I want to love first, and live incidentally."

[–] Cal_Mac 19 years ago

Isn't that a US thing?

MSN Messenger: [email protected]

[–] Jungle_Red 19 years ago

yeah it is but I bet you could find it on ebay or amazon if you buy anything from there.

"I don't want to live...I want to love first, and live incidentally."

[–] debsmcc55 19 years ago

Yes it's available in Video Stores, to buy on Amazon, I just rented it at Netflix. It was a Showtime production, so there is nudity and many graphic sex scenes. Helen Mirren was great in this role I thought. I haven't seen the original but have ordered it from the library. No one else seems to carry it to rent. So I am anxious to compare the two.

I do have one question, I don't know how the original was, but the homeless boy the beggar, that was portrayed in Showtime version, followed Mrs. Stone everywhere.....I'm curious what anyone else thinks the symbolism is here. It ended where she finally submitted herself to him, but throwing down her keys to her house. Do you feel he killed or harmed her, or do you feel he was a replament for Paolo? I'm not sure what I think about that ending. Someone please respond, thanks!

[–] babybruno3 19 years ago

Hopefully you haven't given up on waiting for someone to respond to you (debsmcc55). I have just watched the movie and what I think about Mrs.Stone's stalker is that he kills her. By throwing the keys down to him, she is telling him to finally put her out of her misery now that it was obvious that there was no hope left. I'm curious though, does anyone else have another opinion?

[–] andros12 19 years ago

If you enjoyed the original "Roman Spring of Mrs. Stone" it is likely that you will also enjoy the newer release. Each actor brings a part of themselves to their roles. It's somewhat like examining different sides of a similar gemstone.

Leigh and Beatty make a lovely couple as do Mirren and Martinez. Leigh is perhaps more stately as the classic beauty however Mirren is perhaps more effective at using suggestive nuances which underlie Karen Stone's confusion and inability to cope with the life changes resulting from the death of her husband, the abandonment of her career and her now mature age. Most effective is Ms. Mirren's body language and pacing while taking a drink and looking at the clock (i.e. the passage of time over which she has no control) just prior to throwing her keys to the street. Ms. Mirren describes the process in the commentary as having "....gone through a door..into a whole new world which is... confusing and frightening..."

Critics complain of both Beatty's and Martinez' accents and their characterization, but nevertheless, Paolo is supposed to be self-centered, arrogant and manipulative. Ironically, Beatty balances out Ms. Mirren's effective use of physical nuances in his performance in the forty year earlier film. For example, his suggestive posing, his fingers circling the the glass upon his first meeting with Mrs. Stone, and the use of the initimate stare upon having dinner with Leigh as if the whole world revolves around her..."everyone is drifting..." are some of the tools he uses to help to more clearly define the character.

Lenya is possibly more effective at putting forth the viciousness and ruthlessness of her character in dealing with Beatty. Interestingly, at times, there seems to be an undertone of a somewhat deeper, fun loving affection between Bancroft and Martinez.

The big surprise is the homeless man.

[–] ttuullssaa 19 years ago

The homeless man = the angel of death.

[–] liberalcajun 19 years ago

I think that when Karen Stone throws her keys down to the waiting young man that is just another in a long line of her lovers. The original play was dedicated " To Paul, with ten years of affection "....that must have been Tennessee Williams lover around the time he toured around trying to find himself. The Karen Stone part was really Williams . If you notice in the film ,there is a reference to a "chicken hawk". That term is used to describe older guys who liked to trick with much younger dudes....The Contessa was really a man that Williams met in Rome who helped to arrange tricks for the play writer on his Roman trips........

[–] Tech885 19 years ago

The Contessa was really a man that Williams met in Rome who helped to arrange tricks for the play writer on his Roman trips........

I think you've mistaken him for Anna Magnani Tennessee met in Italy.

[–] liberalcajun 19 years ago

No mistakes about Italy......read Tennessee's book 'Memories' published in the 1960' and you can read between those so well written lines........If you look at the book " The Roman Spring of Mrs. Stone" you will find that it is dedicated to "Paul, with ten years of affection"

[–] nubka 18 years ago

I've never felt that Karen Stone threw her keys to the young boy because she thought he would kill her. Mrs. Stone had far too much narcissism in her to ever do that.

Her former life and professional career on the stage were over. She burned all the bridges to her past and with all her old friends (who really did care about her.) Paulo truly humiliated her and then dumped her. Maybe she wasn't sure how many years she had left, but however many there were, she wasn't going to spend them alone. Better to be with a street boy then to be alone. After all, she could always clean him up and have him measured for a new wardrobe...

It wasn't going to be a man that would finally do her in, because she was capable of doing that to herself all on her own. Ending up like Mrs. Coogan and all the sad, lonely women with little to no self-respect or dignity left. A long, sloooooow, downward spiral...

[–] Mayesgwtw39 18 years ago

Perfectly said--very astute. I couldn't agree with you more.

[–] kewlcrueldude 18 years ago

ttuullssaa is correct. The Young Man is the Angel of Death. This symbolism is also used in Williams' play The Milk Train Doesn't Stop Here Any More based on his short story Man Bring This Up Road. The birds-without-legs (who must fly forever without landing) symbolism in Roman Spring is also used by Williams in several other works.

[–] ld-21 18 years ago

I concur. The Young Man is indeed the Angel of Death. This is quite clear as well in the novella. Note that in the film, he puts Karen's keys in his pocket. This is a very final gesture. Then he approaches the camera and the scene fades to black. The intention here is pretty clear. Through the whole film, there has been no squeamish avoidance of sexual innuendo. It's doubtful the director would use this technique to avoid a sexual embrace.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MystMoonstruck 15 years ago

Of course he kills her, and it's what she believes she wants. Why else would there be the recollection of the line about a cut throat? Why have that if the youth is merely another lover? I, too, agree with the Angel of Death interpretation. I've read the novel (which I own a copy of) and have seen both film versions. Karen is not going to allow herself to be degraded further. She would rather be dead than continue on that path. Paolo tells her that he does not think she will be welcome anymore and will not be permitted to stay, that she has been "ruined" in this city.

Actually, I think Jeremy Spenser is so hauntingly beautiful, overshadowing Warren Beatty's slick look. The attitude he projects makes me feel that this youth has been used and cast aside by too many lovers, perhaps embittering him. Either he has killed others or Karen has captured his attention so that he follows her throughout the city. I especially consider the Angel of Death interpretation when she asks him why he's following her, is distracted then looks back to find him gone, as if he simply disappeared.

I just watched the final 15 minutes and always come to the same conclusion: Karen wants to die. But, it would be nice to think that she takes him as her lover and that perhaps they will be good for each other. It's fine to pretend but not very realistic.

~~MystMoonstruck~~

[–] fcalderp 15 years ago

The Angel of Death's interpretation is the only possible interpretation (Beatty's comments about a lady who was killed in Rome is a clue to this). Besides, that young man probably had not taken a bath in months!! He looks a little bit like Sal Mineo. He played Laurence Olivier's son in The Prince and the Showgirl.

Beaty's accent is lazy. He does not sound Italian. The master of foreign accents is, of course, George Hamilton. Compare Beatty's accent with Hamilton's in "Light in the Piazza" and you'll see the difference. When Hamilton appeared as the mystery guest in What's My Line? (some 50 years ago) he answered each question with a different accent!

It is known that this film was not shot in Italy but in the U.K. However, a few shots were actually filmed in Rome (like the glimpse at La Fontana di Trevi.)

Vivien Leigh's friend is played by Coral Browne who was married to Vincent Price. She played the old Alice in "Dreamchild". I always thought, mistakenly, that Coral Browne was the old lady in Family Plot. She was not. That was Cathleen Nesbitt (Cary Grant's grandmother in An Affair to Remember). Just talking nonsenses.

[–] Connie_n_Raymond_Marble 15 years ago

Interesting to see that some consider the homeless man to be the angel of death. I'd never thought of that. I saw his encounter with Mrs. Stone as a sign that she now fully embraced a life of sexual debauchery with strangers because her self-image as being too proper for that sort of thing had been shattered by Paolo.

We'll see whose the filthiest person alive! We'll just see!

[–] fcalderp 15 years ago

The homeless man reminds me of that hitchhiker that Inger Steven kept seeing on the road in a famous episode from The Twilight Zone. That was a real Angel of Death and also homeless-looking. Did you knwo that the Spanish word for hitchhiker is "autoestopista"?

[–] dedoc1967 15 years ago

Interesting to see that some consider the homeless man to be the angel of death. I'd never thought of that. I saw his encounter with Mrs. Stone as a sign that she now fully embraced a life of sexual debauchery with strangers because her self-image as being too proper for that sort of thing had been shattered by Paolo.

Perhaps it's merely the difference between literal and poetic interpretation. When I first viewed this film I had no doubt that he was the Angel of Death (frankly a common device for Williams); however, is there such a great difference between physical death and spiritual death? If Karen was so debased that she was now and forever more going to wallow in filth and debauchery, how much worse would it have been to just be dead? I think we all agree that the Homeless Boy is Death, just some feel it's physical and others metaphysical.

Yes, I killed Yvette. I hated her sooo much. F - flames, on the sides of my face - heaving, breath-