one of my absolute favorites!

Don't listen to the negative reviews

Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

The Pseuds are gonna be falling over themselves to rave about this piece of cheese followed closely by the Academics lining up to 'teach' it. Good luck to both camps. Basically it's a pseudo-intellectual 'director' wallowing in self-indulgence, seemingly willfully - certainly knowingly - miscasting two incompatible leads and seeking in the to temper this by setting the action in an out-of-season Venice and more or less ignoring the 'tourist-picture-postcard elements in favour of a cryptic and virtually meaningless storyline involving two unsympathetic leading characters in the shape of a fraudulent novelist and - we have to take their word for this - an irresistible woman, who is, in fact, as irresistible as a three a.m. rap on the door by the Gestapo. Stanley Baker and Jeanne Moreau don't even try to do anything with this drek and it's yawns all round.

Two distinctly dislike-able characters circle one another amid the nicely photographed Venice and Rome locations; unable to break away, unable to be together it seems, but wrecking the lives of those around them. It's a promising scenario, a glamorous setting, a combination of strong cast, top name director and highly rated cinematographer. One could easily imagine Antonioni at the helm with Monica Vitti and Marcello Mastroianni as the stars. But it's not them and it really doesn't work. In the male lead role Stanley Baker is well cast as an out-of-place writer from the Welsh Valleys who's made it big with one book and now lives on an Island near Venice, the new darling of the in-crowd. He's big, bluff and rugged with undeniable presence and a convincing aura of potential violence. He isn't exactly nice to know, but you get the feeling that the right woman could bring him round. Virna Lisi as his fiancée is that woman. A Beautiful, fragile, extremely desirable character, she clearly loves him despite being well aware of his many flaws. So what on earth Baker's character finds in love-rival Eva is the huge stumbling over which this whole movie falls. Disbelief can only be suspended to a degree. Eva isn't the sort of woman to bring out the best in anyone. She's clearly supposed to be some kind of irresistible sexual predator who the ex coal miner cannot resist but she's portrayed as frankly repellent. A pouting, scornful, self obsessed gold-digger who plays off lovers against pretend-husbands. She treats Baker's character with taunting disdain at every turn and yet he follows her like an eager lap-dog. Her character might, just might, have worked if an actress of spectacular sexual allure had been cast. Instead Eva is played by Jeanne Moreau. She's a fine actress but she has nothing of the Machiavellian Femme Fatale that the role absolutely demands. Take a look at the poster/DVD sleeve photo of her with cigarette dangling from a sour, down-turned mouth. It's clear this is an actress who's screen persona is more Bette Davis than Brigit Bardot - more Rachael Roberts than Julie Christie. She plays the role with conviction but cannot communicate the essential level of sex-appeal to make the story work, even when the demure camera work teases us with extended near- views of her undressing(this is an early 60s film, so explicit it's never going to be, a lot of wardrobe doors and bath taps are strategically positioned) it all just looks more sordid than sexy. It's just not her role and no amount of beautifully filmed scenes of a wintry Venice, or glamorous parties, or stylised interiors or Alfa Romeo sports cars can overcome that. There is also some poor direction of the actors - of Baker in particular, who gets a bit too over- Shakespearian in his emoting at times (early on - the hand clawing at the face...no Stan, you were better than that, much better) and a few scenes which are simply too set-up to be plausible.In the end its not a film that holds the attention, the characters are too unsympathetic to feel any connection with and although there are moments of poetry , as a whole it's a plodding misfire. My apologies to all fans of Miss Moreau - no offence, very few actresses could have made this role work.

The humiliation of a vain playboy at the hands of Eva (or Eve as hewill call her), played by Jeanne Moreau occurs with too muchpredictability & haste, and must in the end drag. The film shouldhave been cast with Burton and Moreau, & the Stanley Baker left ina more British genre - for though Baker plays with greatintelligence, nicely turning our sympathies away as the characterreceives his come-uppance, there is a curious implausibility aboutthe combination. Two incommensurate worlds, sexes, as atheme to be sure, but neither can be appreciated from the other,and so neither is enhanced.

For all the hoopla surrounding Eva during it's re-release in 2000, you'll feel very disapointed after viewing it. Jeanne Moreau is interesting, but not fascinating,as the title femme fatale. The film isn't strong in plot nor characterization. It's a case of a man choosing the wrong woman=as the lovely, soft Virna Lisi is much more appealing than Moreau, in a smaller role.