Solemplex To me, this movie is perfection.

SmugKitZine Tied for the best movie I have ever seen

Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Bea Swanson This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

laurel21000 I came to this film expecting to see something transcendent. After all, the remake of Scent of a Woman with Al Pacino had been so wonderful. And I had never yet seen a Hollywood remake that even approached the original in quality. They are usually shattering disappointments.So I fully anticipated that Vittorio Gassman's version would far surpass Pacino's.But Surprise, Surprise. Finally. Who would have thought it. A Hollywood Remake that Ruled!!! Yay! It was not even a close contest, in my opinion. This film with Vittorio Gassman was for me flawed beyond redemption. I'm bewildered to read that it was even nominated for an Academy Award and has received other very prestigious awards.True, Gassman got the blind part of his role down. He had obviously done a lot of research and put in long rehearsals. And he had the potential to be great.The trouble was with the script. Gassman's character was a pig. An entertaining pig at times, an interesting pig at other times but never more than a full-fledged PIG.So while the film could engage you in the spectacle sense, it was really difficult to care about what happened to the characters or to root for them. The script just put them in a series of scenes, the common denominator being coarseness and then more coarseness.What was most offensive about this film were the scenes near the end in the Nepalese restaurant. Apparently Gassman had been friends with this family for many years -- since their daughters were children. So he was like a uncle figure.Then when this film catches up with them, the girls have grown into young ladies. And the Gassman character is shown treating them very disrespectfully (to put it mildly), exploiting them and preying on them.Except for the one he apparently loves. But why was it OK for him to exploit the other young girls? This predatory aspect of the film was so beyond offensive that it ruined the entire film and made it irredeemable and indefensible.Go see Al Pacino's Scent of a Woman instead. Pacino is brilliant. And the remake has heart and soul -- both of which are sorely absent from the original. The original has noisy drama but it is a hollow soulless drama.

whfan "Profumo di donna" is a great movie, it makes you laugh and cry, and touches your heart very deeply, and it makes you think. It was made in 1974 by Dino Risi, a great Italian director. It is probably one of his best movies. All the actors are excellent and very talented. Everything is good in the movie : beautiful music, great screenplay, cinematography, it was shot on location on nice Italian cities, etc... Plot summary : Vittorio Gassman (Fausto) plays a man who was a top military officer before an accident left him blind. The movie tells the story of the trip he does from Turino to Napoli via Genova and Rome, with a young boy (Alessandro Momo) who helps him on the trip (helping Fausto is a job the boy has to do as part of his military service). In the movie, we also see what happens when they arrive in Napoli, and what was the goal of the trip, and we see the beautiful girl (Agostina Belli) who loves Fausto. "Profumo di donna" won numerous awards in several countries and was nominated at the Academy Awards for "Best Foreign Picture". If you don't know this movie, you definitely should rent it or even buy it on DVD.

Rex, Regis Only 2 User comments available at the time I decided to write this one and both of them negative. Both of them Typical American reaction to a European movie. A big misunderstanding. Yes, the Remake with Pacino is a good movie and nothing else. The original one, "Profumo di Donna" is a great masterpiece, and it makes a big difference. My piece of advice : do not try to watch "Profumo di Donna" with a Hollywood eye.

Varlaam Like many other people I'm sure, I first became aware of this Oscar nominee when I read the closing credits of its Al Pacino remake. That was in 1992 and I have been trying to locate a copy of the Italian original ever since. According to the critical opinion I've encountered in the interim, the Gassman original was said to be superior, with the Pacino version incorporating its extraneous subplot about Chris O'Donnell's troubles at his private school.Well... I have finally managed to see the illustrious original. It certainly seems far inferior to me. Its potential is all latent and unrealized; the American version takes the unusual blind officer character and does colourful and then dramatic things with him. The Italian original just walks the character through some conventional sex farce situations.The result seems so trivial, and the film is as cheap and ugly to look at as any Italian film of the 1970s. Some credit naturally goes to Vittorio Gassman for originating the character for the screen, but that's about it.