Jacques_Laterre Unfortunately, this swords-and-sandals 60's movie could have been much, much better.The climax of the movie, which is supposed to be the amazon's cavalry charge against the troops besieging Rome, is too naive to be exciting or credible. The amazons are able to destroy the enemy battle ram and catapult too easily. No suspense. No breath taking battle scene. They ride through the battlefield without being annoyed by anyone except some arrows flying into their direction. Only some few girls are hit(performed by a couple of stun actress rolling smoothly off their horses like in the spaghetti western), the amazons are able to regroup out of the battlefield like a bunch cheerleader during a football game after a one minute job.Sylvia Syms is to pretty and delicate (with a "fresh out of the salon" haircut) to be convincing as a cavalry leader and slashing enemy soldiers with her sword. Dialogs are childish, if not stupid. The scenario is simplistic. Do not except diplomatic intrigues between Romans and Etrusquan.Interesting fact: The movie covers the birth of the roman republic, a historical period almost never exploded in Hollywood or elsewhere.The amazons of Rome is a lost opportunity. The lack of special effects available in the 60's and the naive acting style is not an excuse for failure. Let's hope for a remake one day.

poly-nikes You know you might be in for a less than stellar time when a film has more than one screenwriter. There are exceptions, of course, but this one has at least four, and thus is no exception to the rule.My favorite part in this turkey is during the fight at the flimsy wooden bridge at the beginning of the film when one of the extras playing a barbarian puts his hands up to his face and you can clearly see a Band-Aid on his thumb. Once you see something like this, it's hard to take the rest of the film seriously.It's amazing when you think that Sylvia Syms played the female lead in the excellent Dirk Bogarde film, "Victim," in the same year she appeared in "Amazons of Rome."

gridoon2018 The US title of this movie - "Amazons Of Rome" - is rather misleading: the Roman women do occasionally dress up as warriors and carry weapons, but they almost never fight. And since there are so many of them, the accuracy of the original title - "Virgins Of Rome" - cannot be guaranteed, either! Never mind, this film is an above-average sample of its genre, mostly thanks to its cast: instead of having a muscleman who can barely talk as the lead, it has the witty, distinguished Louis Jourdan, who plays a noble barbarian; a contradiction in terms, perhaps, but then again, Jourdan's character describes himself as a "strange bird". He is paired with the very appealing, courageous, smart Sylvia Syms, a great beauty who should be better known: together, they make the thinking man's sword-and-sandal couple. The rest of the cast is also good, and we even get to see Michel Piccoli with hair! The battle scenes are a bit clunky, but you have to admire the authenticity of the stunts - when the women cross a deep river on horseback, it's really them doing it. I watched the US version - the print was quite nice but according to IMDb the original version is 12 minutes longer, which may explain why the narrative feels a bit rushed at some points. **1/2 out of 4.

MARIO GAUCI Amazingly, this is the third "Amazon Women" film I've watched in a month but, unlike the others, this is a relatively serious undertaking and, in any case, the American title is misleading - but, then, probably so is the Italian one, which translates to "THE VIRGINS OF ROME"! When it was shown on late-night Italian TV, I had never heard of it but was willing to give it a try considering the talent involved (director Cottafavi and stars Louis Jourdan, Sylvia Syms and Michel Piccoli) - but also due to the fact that French director Bertrand Tavernier, apparently, considers this one of his favorite films!Distressingly, I came across very few reviews of the film and these were all-too-brief; besides, the only other two comments on the IMDb aren't very favorable! Despite the scratchy print with washed-out colors that was shown on TV, I'm glad I taped it because it turned out to be one of the most satisfying peplums I've ever watched and, consequently, the film ought to be much better known! Besides, it allowed me to understand a bit better Cottafavi's cult reputation (given the type of films he dabbled in!) - though, apparently, he was replaced after 3 weeks by Bragaglia because Cottafavi couldn't see eye to eye with star Jourdan (though the change in director didn't effect the film in any perceptible way).I had only watched four Cottafavi films prior to this: the modern-day melodrama NEL GORGO DEL PECCATO (1954) and the following peplums - GOLIATH AND THE DRAGON (1960), HERCULES AND THE CAPTIVE WOMEN (1961) and I CENTO CAVALIERI (1964; perhaps the director's best work and which I was lucky to watch, along with the hilariously awful GOLIATH, at the 2004 Venice Film Festival with lead Mark Damon in attendance!). Likewise, I had seen four by Bragaglia - three of them starring the popular Italian comic Toto' and, eons ago, HANNIBAL (1960) - another one of his peplums and which was co-directed by Edgar G. Ulmer! The casting of the two leads is surprising, but they certainly number among the most talented ever featured in this type of film: Jourdan is quite amusing as the leader of the barbarian horde who's seen constantly, and nonchalantly, munching on fruit - even when leading his men into battle!; the beautiful Syms adds grace and intelligence to the film - but, apart from Nicole Courcel (who is also pretty good as an unusually sympathetic villainess, sharing a secondary love interest with Piccoli!), is the only female character who is developed in any substantial way. The battle scenes - highlighted by a running duel between Jourdan and a one-eyed Roman general played by genre regular Ettore Manni - are nicely handled, though mainly relegated to the opening and closing moments of the film.