i totally agree that Laurence Olivier and either Merle Oberon or Vivian Leigh were top notch in the looks department.
For my money, nothing beats Montgomery Clift and Elizabeth Taylor in
A Place in the Sun.
The scene where she says "Tell momma all" is amazing

Never say never

Olivier's stable boy was as hot as the aristocrat. What an artist!
Why ain't you at the garden party you heathen?

I had a college professor who said that Laurence Olivier and Merle Oberon, in this film, were the two most beautiful people ever seen together on film
They are both at literal peaks of their looks. I would say Olivier with Vivien Leigh in Fire over England gives this film a run for its money but its close.
It is not our abilities that show who we truly areit is our choices

Laurence Olivier was sexy as hell
I saw this movie 20 to 30 years ago and I don't remember Olivier as being so beautiful. But he was.

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

Keep them coming! I want more examples of your immaturity and stupidity. It adds colour to this board.
Haply I may remember,
And haply may forget.

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

''Doctor'' Julia Hoffman, you have actually confirmed that you do not skip my message, by actually replying to a comment I have actually made. That is too funny! What a complete failure at posting, trolling and life in general.
I was going to ignore you but I have realize that watching you make an (unintentionally hilarious) ass of yourself is amusing and just shows how moronic and childish you actually are. Keep those mentally deficient comeback posts coming, Jules!
Haply I may remember,
And haply may forget.

This message has been deleted.

Yeah, yeah. You didn't ignore my comment, you child. You should probably delete your account again just as you did after Pharaoh showed you to be a bit of an ass before. You are really embarrassing yourself; I hope you realize this.
I do not really have to post anything to show up someone as juvenile as you and to show how idiotic it is to attempt to insult me based on a country that I am not enamored with and a monarchy I neither like or support.
And I note that your use of ''Britainistan'' plays off of xenophobia and Islamophobia. Nice try, racist imbecile. Not everyone thinks like you.
Haply I may remember,
And haply may forget.

This message has been deleted.

I have three words for you too; imbecilic, juvenile and unfunny.
Haply I may remember,
And haply may forget.

This message has been deleted.

''QueenElizabethAngantyr and Pharaoh Unimportant''
Hoho, a keen wit!!!
''don't you both have anything better to do in Britainstan than love on an American TV series?''
Don't you have anything better to do than wallow in ignorance? Perhaps learning to read properly would be more beneficial to your life.
''And get your Elizabeth and her son and grandchildren to eat some too.''
Hahaha, this stupid American actually thinks we care about Queen Elizabeth, Pharaoh, despite the both of us being anti-monarchist socialists. I guess your intention is to try to insult us by mocking our country (which we are not at all fond of), despite the fact that it doesn't work well when we remember that the USA is the most despised country in the entire world, more so than Iran and North Korea. As hated as Britain is, we'll be OK because there is always the USA to make us look more loveable!
Haply I may remember,
And haply may forget.

This message has been deleted.

"Pharaoh Impotent and KingAngantyr, I'm telling you both that I do not read verbose messages on IMDb. I find your wordy messages a real turn off and I refuse to bother myself by reading them."
Aha, I thought you were that annoying and ignorant member who couldn't read any posts more than a few lines and who deleted their messages and account after making a fool of themselves (something you are now repeating) and now I am certain of it.
"You both should learn to say what you want to say in a fewer words; a short amount of text would be fine. When I'm in the mood for a long read, I will settle down with something entertaining like Mitchell's "Gone With the Wind"."
Come on you couldn't read something like 'Gone With The Wind'; a long read to you is 'The Hungry Caterpillar'.
"The game's afoot!"

''QueenElizabethAngantyr''
I see you are still showing your usual maturity
''it's often said that British Royals seem like they need more fiber in their diets''
Being as far from a monarchist as you can probably get, I am not at all interested in them at all.
''Incidentally, I still don't read your messages. Whenever I see your user name, I skip the message.''
That is because you are too childish and stupid to read anything that is more than one paragraph
My advice to you is leaving the internet, try growing up a little more and learn to have some patience for substantial amounts of text.
Haply I may remember,
And haply may forget.

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

''I'm telling you both that I do not read verbose messages on IMDb.''
In other words, you know you are wrong and thus are leaving with a tail between your legs.
''I find your wordy messages a real turn off and I refuse to bother myself by reading them.''
Don't you find that more an example of your ignorance than anything else?
''You both should learn to say what you want to say in a fewer words''
Perhaps you should probably learn to be more attentive? Not being able to read a post that is a little longer than usual is a sign of immaturity. The post I made was long to be sure, but not long enough to not be able to read within a few minutes. Neither of our posts were ''long reads''.
And if you are not willing to read long replies, don't post asinine comments in the first place.
''When I'm in the mood for a long read, I will settle down with something entertaining like Mitchell's "Gone With the Wind".''
'Gone With The Wind', though amusing in some regards, is moderately racist nonsense. I'd suggest reading something better.

This message has been deleted.

I came to reply also, though you have said all that really needs to be said about most things, Pharaoh, so I just find myself agreeing with you in my post! You put the good doctor and her amateurish etymological/''racial'' research in their respective places.
Though I'd like to say that anyone who thinks that there is more than one race of humans - whether you go by the VERY discredited Alpine, Nordic, Negroid, Mongoloid etc. of the fin de siecle or chose to go with other racial categorizations - is not really worth the time of day. Such backward thinking ultimately led to the great tragedy of the holocaust and just isn't scientifically sound. Minor differences in ethnic groups do not constitute a race; it is foolish to think so.
And for the record, I knew Scandinavians who look like Olivier, some fairer (true to stereotype!) and some darker (northern Scandinavians can be, and usually are, naturally tannedmore so than Olivier is). The fact remains, as pointed out, we only know that Olivier is Norman (and, if memory serves, ''English'') as we cannot find much evidence that he is, indeed, ''Romance'' at all. ''Olivieri'' is not the acceptable origin for the Norman Olivier family, as Oliver, the knight of legend whose culture the name is more likely from (though Olafr is the second most likely origin of the Norman nameat least due to the equating of similar sounding names with Frankish ones), undoubtedly has a Frankish derived name as all of Charlemagne's knights do. The Italian surname postdates the French name, as Pharaoh has pointed out, so there is no reason to believe that the name has a Latin or later Italian origin; especially as evidence points against it.
And most Normans do not have Norse derived names, so it being from any Latin name - which it isn't! - wouldn't mean they have ancestors that are Romance speakers. The Normans, being a vastly smaller group than the Franks, Bretons and Gallics (though not as small as many seem to think), adopted the French language (which gained a lot of Norse influence due to the original language of the Normans), much of their culture and customs. They usually intermarried with local groups, but that doesn't mean they were all part Gallic (which are the nearest thing to the ''Latins'' you mentioned) as Frankish make up a bigger percentage of the French upper-class and the Bretons were also a nearby group with a Bretonic upper-class - in fact, Normans often married Bretons. William's mother was a Breton and the Breton royal family would become part Norman before the Normans ever set foot in Great Britain. Bretons are, of course, not that closely related to Latins as they are a Brythonic group closely related to the Welsh and Cornish, and closer related to even the Anglo-Saxons due to the fact that both probably have ''Belgic'' influences in genetics and language. Brythons and Saxons, of course, developed in a closer area than the Latins.
Very few French people were actually descended from any Latins as ''Gauls'' made up the majority of the population of France since the Roman era. Some would descend from Roman legionaries and settlers, but most would not. The fact that French is a Gallo-Romance language (note the ''Gallo'' part, indicating the ''Celtic'' Gallic influence) doesn't mean they belong to the same ethnicity as the Italians, and thus the use of the term ''Latin/Romance race'' is even more absurd than it already would be.
Haply I may remember,
And haply may forget.