Siempre te amaré

I give this a 6/10 because it is not boring and because I am an easy grader. I was so confounded by the script I could not be bored.

First off, why is Rossano Brazzi playing a Frenchman? But that is the least of this film's problems. At first I thought I was watching a movie about a war ravaged romance (Kerr as an English woman and Brazzi as a French officer during WWII). Then I thought I was watching a movie about a British woman forced to deal with the stresses of surviving a war alone while raising her young fatherless son. After that I thought I was watching a movie about a reunited culturally blended family attempting to make a go of it after nine years of estrangement. I couldn't be more wrong.

This turned out to be a movie about hypocritical counseling from one French philanderer about another. As the "wise" uncle-counselor, Maurice Chevalier rationalizes to the despondent and confused Miss Kerr about her husband, his nephew; "you married a Frenchman. You cannot make him into an Englishman or an American . . . If you want to be happy you have to think like a Frenchwoman". With that Deborah Kerr responds with the only logical response in the movie; "we'll it seems as if I'm expected to do all the changing. It's a bit one sided don't you think? And why can't marriage change both husband and wife? . . ." And the scene that sums it all up; as his son watches on, Rossano Brazzi unapologetically ogles Parisian beauties for his offspring to observe.

What is Brazzi doing? At first it seems like he may be maintaining multiple households with multiple wives. But then in one scene with one of them he is just having them take dictation. Is he a bigamist? Is he part of some secret business deal he cannot let his wife in on? Nope, he is just a philanderer on a grand scale. Also it seems like Brazzi and Kerr's characters only have anything in common in the bedroom. They bicker the rest of the time. And the son? Is Kerr sure the dad is not an American? Because the son turns out to be a capitalist extraordinaire. He tries to keep them apart when they separate so that they do not reconcile since he can get much more stuff when they are in a bidding war for his affections.

Recommended for the weirdness of it all. I blame "Around the World in 80 Days". After that film won the Best Picture Oscar in 1956 in spite of just being one long travelogue, lots of films emerged whose producers and directors seemed to think that they could just shoot on location in Europe and put up any kind of drivel as a plot and succeed. This seems to be one of those films.

I count my blessings that I have learned to stay away from Deborah Kerr movies except out of morbid fascination with what moviegoers could possibly have seen in her.

I count my blessing that the PVR makes it possible to record bad movies, zip through the terrible parts, stop, delete, and then move on to better movies, most not starring Deborah Kerr.

I count my blessings that for all its failings, Hollywood has consistently made far, far better movies than the British.

Oh, the movie: Kerr is a frigid soccer mom, from what I can see. Some Italian guy I've never heard of plays the French husband. They have all the chemistry of oil and vinegar. He goes away. He comes back. They find out they hate each other, or something. I think I fell into an irreversible coma.

Grace Allingham (Deborah Kerr) is an English woman struggling on the home front during WWII. French officer Charles Edouard de Valhubert (Rossano Brazzi) has a message for her from her boyfriend Hugh Palgrave. The message is nothing much and the French man is terribly rude and aggressive. It's a short romance and a quickie marriage after only 3 days.

Negging is a way of enticing gorgeous females by praising them with little put-downs. Apparently, it works on some women. It definitely does not work for romantic movies especially rom-coms. I simply don't understand the theory of it as movie writing. It's a horrible meet-cute. There is nothing funny about it although again, it may work on some people. The female in question should be uppity and bringing her down could be funny. That's not the case for Deborah Kerr. None of this is funny. Nor is it romantic. I don't get them as a movie pairing.

There are two things that were really good about this movie: Deborah Kerr was in it and her wardrobe was absolutely stunning. I wasn't all that impressed with Rossano Brazzi. In the first scene, he came across as pompous and arrogant, but I did warm up a tad by the end of the film. Maurice Chavalier always seems to be playing himself in films which is okay because I really enjoy just listening to him talk. Martin Stephens was adorable, but I couldn't shake the image of him saying "Miss Giddons dear" as Myles in "The Innocents". I'll bet that he nor Deborah Kerr could have imagined that they would engage in one of the most inappropriate and creepy kisses in movie history just a few years later.

The plot was one that was hard to believe, but, look, movies are supposed to entertain. If they were true to life, we probably wouldn't watch them because there would be no escaping real life. This movie had some fun elements that made me laugh out loud a couple of times. Grace's reaction the morning after meeting Charles' "friend", Albertine, had me howling as well as Charles' reaction the Grace's handmade rug.

Someone wrote about the lack of chemistry between the two leads and I would have to agree with that to a certain degree. Both were very attractive, but together, their chemistry seemed forced. But you could attribute it to the fact that the characters really didn't know each other at all and the awkwardness comes from that.

I really watched this movie for Deborah Kerr and, in that regard, it was worth the effort. She was luminous in everything she did--just so beautiful and graceful. What this film didn't give her in content, the wardrobe department certainly made up for it. The evening gowns were absolutely spectacular and she wore them beautifully. I'm a die hard fan and would watch her read the newspaper if that's all that was available.

All in all, this movie was an okay way to kill 90 minutes.

Sometimes you watch films for others, and this was one of them. I thought it might lighten darker days, but it had the effect of making me very depressed. Not about its content but about why it was made at all. Deborah Kerr in her most true blue way was terrible to watch, filled with empty mannerisms and surrounded by greed and wealth. She could be a good actress and a mediocre one, and this performance was truly bad. She marries a very rich Frenchman played by Rossano Brazzi ( the Italian accent made this nonsense ) and they have a young son who should never have been let out of the playpen!!! He complicates their lives and plays with a small Guillotine ( don't even think about it ) and the one good actor, Patricia Medina is given a rotten role of no consequence. There is also Maurice Chevalier being as always himself, and seemingly incapable of doing anything else as Brazzi's father. Accents clash again, even topping Kerr's excruciating high-pitched and immitating badly the Queen of England's voice. Negulesco directed some stinkers at the end of his career and this is one of them. Snobbish and unendurable this film grinds to a halt in one of the most absurd scenes I have ever seen in what is sometimes laughingly called the cinema. I recommed it to all those who kick expensive furniture ( as Kerr does ) and who say, " I am not French!! I am English, English, English ", and let them endure this travesty of cinematic self-indulgence.