Holstra Boring, long, and too preachy.

Maidexpl Entertaining from beginning to end, it maintains the spirit of the franchise while establishing it's own seal with a fun cast

PiraBit if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

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

Claudio Carvalho Clarissa (Vanessa Redgrave and Natascha McElhone) is a shallow woman, divided between the love of his friend Peter Walsh and Richard Dalloway, a prominent young man from the upper class. Clarissa is showed in two periods: when she was a teenager and as an old lady, worried about parties. There is also a parallel plot of an honored English soldier, Septimus Warren Smith (Rupert Graves), showing the cold and insensible English system. The story is very shallow and boring. The reaction of the bored Peter Walsh, in old Clarissa's party in the end of the movie, when he says, `How boring are the English!' may be extended to `How boring is this movie!'. I never read Virginia Woof's novel and indeed, after watching `The Hours' and `Mrs. Dalloway', I certainly will not. However, there is a beautiful reconstitution of the period from the end of the Nineteenth Century to the after First World War, and a good performance of excellent actors and actress. Recommended only for fans of Virginia Woof and her novels. My vote is five.

suzy q123 I enjoyed this movie very much, although I really loved the novel a bit more, but that's always the case it seems. Vanessa Redgrave and Natasha McElhone make a GREAT older/younger version of each other, and Rupert Graves gives a stellar performance as a young man dealing with the impact of war. This is a gently told tale, but it's done very well. Worth a look.

Peegee-3 While I agree with some of the more perceptive comments made here, I have a few of my own to add. First, the novel on which this film is based is an all-time favorite of mine and I'm happy to have seen it beautifully translated into cinematic form. The contrast between the personal and inner life of an upper class English woman and the horrors produced by war (in this case, symbolized through the experience of one man, brilliantly portrayed) is both moving and exacting. Vanessa Redgrave gives a splendid performance as Clarissa...sensitive, radiant, conservative and uncertain about life decisions as she looks back (nicely depicted in flashback). Michael Kitchen as her would-be lover of old is perfect for the role...quietly romantic, sexy, with just the right British propriety. The troubled young war veteran and his wife are well cast and Marleen Gorris should be credited with graceful directing.

Philby-3 Virginia Woolf is thought of as a high-brow rather than popular novelist yet the novel this film is based on sold well when first published in 1924. It is easy to see why – there is nothing rarefied in the treatment of its themes, making choices and breaking with the past.Clarissa Dalloway, a society matron, played with startled radiance by Vanessa Redgrave, is throwing a party and while making the arrangements she remembers back to the choice she made 30 years ago as a young woman between two men. One, Peter, charming, intelligent, adventurous, is the sort who went out and conquered India, or at least seduced the Major's wife. The other, Richard, good-looking, loving, a bit boofy, devoid of flair, is the sort that gravitates into politics. Naturally, the young Clarissa (played by Natasha Mc Elhone) has chosen the safe one, but Peter, after a chequered career, has turned up in London and pays her a call. She invites him to the party. Parallel to Clarisa's reminiscences is the story of Septimus (Rupert Graves) a returned soldier from World War I, whose wartime experiences are eating into his sanity. Clarisa is put up as a `modern woman' who refuses Peter's love because she sees it as all demanding and all consuming, despite his attractive personality. Yet she accepts Richard, who wants and needs a dutiful, supportive wife. She also passes up the possibility of love with her close friend Sally. Though shaken when she hears of Stephen's fate from his psychiatrist, a guest at the party, and touched when she meets her old lovers again, she sees her life as going on before, safe and unexciting. For a film-maker the amount of interior musing generated by Woolf's `stream of consciousness' writing technique presents a challenge and here Marleen Gorris has effectively used flashback to externalise Clarisa's memories. We get two stories artfully intercut, though there is not much tension in either of them - costumes, but not much drama. One does, however, get the feel of how it might have been to be in the upper class during the Edwardian late summer; as if just being there was enough (we even meet the Prime Minister at the party). Woolf and Gorris have evoked the atmosphere precisely, even if, as Lytton Strachey said, there isn't much of a plot. Even the minor characters sparkle. Robert Hardy as Sewell's psychiatist exudes bonhomie and guile, and Margaret Tyzak as the meddlesome Lady Bruton gives us a fine example of the old-fashioned female power broker at work. Overall, the film is rather slow, especially at the start, and I did wonder whether it would have been made without all the government and foundation money listed in the credits, but the quality of the performances redeem it to some extent.