Un été à Rome

When In Rome is a definite improvement on Getting There. Getting There I found too predictable, contrived and slow, and to this day I still consider it as the Olsen twins' worst. However, while When In Rome isn't a terrible movie, it's not a great one either. If I had to sum it up in one word, I would say passable. It is good fun for teenagers, but I think adults won't find much to go on.

When In Rome does have its good points. Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen are actually quite decent actresses, certainly very pretty as well. I will admit when I was 10 or so, I really liked them, and in general I kind of like them still. And I have enjoyed some of their movies like Passport To Paris and New York Minute. Back on target, both girls don't do that bad a job, in fact they are very appealing. Plus their outfits are to die for, and the scenery of Rome is absolutely breathtaking. The soundtrack ain't half bad either.

However, where the film is brought down is in the plot and the script. The script is on the most part clichéd and has hints of deja vu. The plot, like most of the Mary Kate and Ashley movies, is very predictable, and anyone familiar with any other of the Olsen twins' work, will find some rather unoriginal elements to it. Most of the characters are cardboard thin, and you don't learn very much about them, and sometimes the pace is uneven. Sadly, the breathtaking scenery is spoilt by rather slapdash camera work, that looked rushed constantly.

All in all, does have its good points, and certainly watchable. However, for my taste, it is harmless and predictable teenage fluff. 4/10 Bethany Cox

I must say that this was one of the worst movies I have ever seen. It was exactly like all of their other movies. They want an internship in Rome, they get it. They get to wear really nice clothes and run into TWO, not one, cute boys. These "movies" are an excuse for MKA to go to a foreign country on someone else's money, do a little "acting" and kiss cute guys. The acting is terrible, you cant forget you are watching a movie. If the Olsen twins are so "great" then why aren't they featured in magazines or make movies that go out in theaters? They've played two ditzy girls with perfect lives in everything they've made since Full House. They need to do more dramatic roles where *gasp* life isn't perfect. Or take on separate roles.

Having vacationed in Rome and longing to see a movie set there, we had high hopes for When in Rome. We weren't disappointed. Many familiar tourist spots figure in the story, most of which -- Piazzi di Spagna, Piazza Navona, the Vatican, etc. -- are identified by name in the dialog. Many of the most familiar and characteristic locations -- such as that islanded boulevard that leads from the Baths of Caracalla back into the city -- are lingered over lovingly. The cinematography rarely fails, and the plot never gets in the way.

Now of course I guess I'm required to say something snide and snotty about Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen, the movie's stars. But I won't, and shame on you if you do. Go pick on somebody your own size. Actually, it's easy to see why the Olsen twins are beloved by their legions of fans. Charming, affable, modest, cute as buttons -- nice kids.

Here's a partial list of movies I don't like nearly as much as I like When in Rome: The Sixth Sense, American Beauty, The Truman Show, Koyaanisqatsi, Eyes Wide Shut, Fight Club, Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me, Gattaca, Gosford Park, and of course Yentl.

Ok I love Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen, they are decent actresses, and are pretty. I loved them since their Full House days. But every movie I see them in, is the same. Flirting with boys, dealing with some bratty girl, and a bigger plot theme, not known till the end. I think they should start taking on more dramatic roles, and do something to show they are more dynamic actresses. Otherwise the movie is ok, but as I said its the same thing over again.

I have seen most of the Olsen films, and in my opinion, the movies they have made when they were younger were better than their later movies. Generally because they were younger then, so the plots looked cuter to the audience. But now, the movies are rather immature and very unrealistic, viewers can't identify the plots with real life.

My comment on When In Rome goes the same for all of their later movies. The characters they portray are almost always 'perfect'-beautiful, smart, trendy, well-off- as if all of us in real life are perfect. Why can't they play more stereotypical roles who fight in life to overcome their flaws? Also, they always meet boys in every place they go who automatically likes them. And what's queer is that, the boys always come in pairs, be they brothers, friends, etc. Also, the conflicts in the plots are solved rather easily and most of the conflicts are lame.

Now that they are older, they might want to make some differences in their movie making, such as starring in separate movies, more intelligent plots, things like that. Honestly, if they continue with their own way of making movies, they're gonna get nowhere. Note: These are my own opinions, and this is a free country.