The Millionairess
October. 18,1960When her father dies, Epifania Parerga, an Italian in London, becomes the world's richest woman. She feels incomplete without a husband and falls in love with a humble, Indian physician, Ahmed el Kabir, much loved by his indigent English patients.
Similar titles
Reviews
the audience applauded
Best movie ever!
It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.
While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.
This is a better movie than I had expected. Peter Sellers did another uncannily dead on imitation of an accent, to go with his many imitations of accents from England and America, and he got to read some actual GBS lines, which was nice. There was more language from the George Bernard Shaw play than I had expected. Dennis Price and Alistair Sim offer nice comic support. I just wish they could have used an actress less concerned with how she looked and more interested in the language of the play.There are obvious flaws in this film. For starters, it suffers from extreme staginess. It's socialist message is not so much delivered but bludgeoned home. I give this film a pass because of the appealing performances by the film's leads, Peter Sellers and Sophia Loren. Sellers gives a terrific low-key turn as the sweet humanistic doctor. Loren is earthy yet manages to humanize the spoiled heiress she plays. As written, her character comes of as unappealing but Loren manages to engender empathy. Good supporting cast that includes Alistair Sim as Loren's barrister, Vittorio De Sica as a sweat shop owner, and Dennis Price as Loren's psychiatrist. Great film, great direction, great actors and actresses (Sofia Loren is amazingly beautiful, and no wonder why Sellers fell in love with her)!Overall rating: 7 out of 10.
Yes, it's true that there is no real chemistry here between the stars: Sellers never had any and Sophia always had too much. Every once and awhile the wit of G.B. Shaw's original play sneaks through this unfortunate 1960's modernization. "Puffin" Asquith's rather fey direction doesn't help much. And yet, there are some added attractions here that go beyond the usual rules of the cinema art. For one, the young Sophia was never more luscious -she's the blooming flower of Italia, as tasty as the mozzarella of Napoli, a veritable Mount Vesuvius overflowing with girlish charm, and, as she spends a great deal of time in this film in various stages of undress, some wet and most dry, there is much to look at here beyond Jack Hildyard's photography, Balmain's clothes and Paul Sheriff's elaborate studio sets. Not for Shavians or Fabians but definitely for connoisseurs of feminine pulchritude. Bo Derek might be a 10, but Sophia is cento per cento!
I've never read the GBS play this is supposedly based on, but I'm sure it had to be better than this movie adaptation. Shaw's influence is evident in the emphasis on class warfare and the evils of capitalists. But the silly plot in which these ideas are presented is tedious and slow- moving.If you read a capsule summary of THE MILLIONAIRESS, you get the impression that it's somehow about a contest between a man and a woman, trying to fulfill the terms of various wills so they can be married. But the actual contest doesn't really come into focus until the movie is more than half over. Before that, it just grinds its gears, showing us how petulant and greedy Sophia Loren's character can be, and how pure and honorable Peter Sellers' Indian doctor can be. Her interest in him doesn't make much sense, and neither does his rejection of her advances. The abrupt ending leaves you wondering if a reel or two have been left out unintentionally. Peter Sellers and Sophia Loren (looking so young and radiant) are always fun to watch. Just imagine what a great comedy they COULD have made if a good screenwriter had developed a proper vehicle for them. Watching them work is the only thing that makes this movie bearable. Great comic actors like Alfie Bass and Alastair Sim are wasted in parts that barely allow them to stretch (although we do get a couple of Sim's trademark giggles). Besides all this, the film looks cheap. The sets are bare-bones; some looking like painted backgrounds from a school play. The scene where they visit the new hospital and Sellers raves about the equipment is a joke in itself: would he really be impressed by a couple of lab tables with a few test tubes and what looks like a Victorian microscope?This film is only for Sellers and/or Loren fans who insist on seeing everything they ever did. Those who are seeking entertainment should look elsewhere.
Let me just start off by saying that George Bernard Shaw is one of my all-time favorite playwrights, and Peter Sellers is one of my all-time favorite comic actors. So naturally I think this is a pretty good movie. I admit the concept is more interesting than the actual execution. But certainly the personality of the leads does compensate. And it is a very intriguing idea.I think the best moments are when Sophia Loren's character gets the good doctor to make a house call, the Doctor trying to give his fortune away on the street and no-one bothering to take it (Would that still be the case today?), as well as Alistair Sims excellent lawyer. And having worked in the medical profession (as a lab clerk), the dry comments on the high-tech lab equipment, and ruthless beurocracy of a large medical institution rang especially true. There are certainly some exceptional social commentary behind the human story, which is the trademark of Shaw's work.But I like this movie especially for being the inspiration of the classic novelty song "Goodness Gracious Me!", which the two leads recorded in order to promote the movie. I actually think the song works better.