Reviews

That is correct. i deem this film to be the worst I've ever seen in my life. and im not a new comer on the scene. i am also an ardent tchaikovskyite. so i would have been more than glad to give this movie high praise if indeed it was worthy of it. what makes a good movie? it moves. it makes you want to see what happens next. it has a cohesive narrative that is logical and persuasive. i have never relegated a movie to be the worst ever till now. the cinematography is terrible. the story line is an unlikely jumble. there is little veracity here. its music making and performances are nil. i was barely able to watch this movie once a year ago. there is nothing in it that would want me to see it again. so it sits on the shelf. the portrayals were wooden and unlifelike. by golly, "the music lovers" was a cinematic masterpiece next to this, travesty of tchaikovsky's life as it was. it still was entertaining. i don't know where these Russian directors get their training but i can tell you that any American or English director would have done a much better job. in reading some of the other reviews i felt that i was living on another planet. give this movie high praise and extol it to the skies? beats me thats for sure. i relegate this one to the trash bin. a complete and total disappointment.

I saw this film when it first came out in 1947. at that time i was still learning to appreciate the great classical tradition. so this movie was an eye opener for me. i couldn't afford to go to concerts so here was an opportunity to see as well as hear some of the great icons of the classic world ie stokowski, walter, rodzinski, Rubinstein, heifetz, piatigorsky et al. yes it was a big thrill for me at the time. no less thrilling was to see Tchaikovsky himself in the opening scene, (as played by an actor of course.) the story line was purely secondary and was not to be taken seriously. this was the era ie the thirties and forties when you would occasionally hear some classical music in the movies. nelson eddy and Jeannette MacDonald for example would give some tid bits etc. it was also the time when the lives of composers such as Brahms, Schumann and Chopin were also being portrayed. a time when classical music was part of the everyday vocabulary albeit in somewhat truncated and simplified form. that now has all changed for some time and classical music is relegated to the limbos of the hoary past and is no longer part of our everyday. so this is a movie for classical music lovers or aspiring lovers of this seemingly defunct art.

First of all i have not seen this film. i have seen coming attractions and have heard a lot of pro and contra in its regard. i did see the movie as an illustrated book form however. nonetheless here is my take on all movies on biblical or religious subjects. i have been brought up as a Christian. however at this point in my life i see religion as concerning itself with the mythical and not the factual. religion portrays the world as we would like it to be. ie a place of meaning where all the injustices will one day be ironed out. since this to me is preposterous i must take all religions as a falsification of life. let us return to the passion of Christ. how is it possible that the one who claims universal love and forgiveness has as its centerpiece the accusation of deicide for the Jews. indeed it says in Matthew, when Pilate (protrayed in a sympathetic light due to the fact that the gospels were being written and addressed to the pagans chiefly) Pilate said "i find no fault with this man and addressing the Jews he said what would you that i do to this man" and the Jews responded, "crucify him, crucify him may his blood be upon us and upon our children". do you know how much suffering this has caused countless generations of Jews especially leading up to the holocaust? i would like all Christians who see movies like the passion of Christ to meditate on this awful indictment. Mankind has been blest or cursed with an overripe imagination, at times we believe as factual that which is merely the product of our own imaginings.

I saw this film when it first came out in 1956 and have seen in many times since. It had a profound effect then and still does. Indeed i may indeed call it my favorite film. it is my favorite because it deals with a true historical figure. and it does so with great sensitivity and finesse. this is truly spectacular considering this is a Hollywood bio. to me it remains unequaled in film bios of great artists or whatever. Douglas does a convincing job as the troubled van Gogh and the rest of the production is notable for its historical accuracy. its ambiance, mood and color. the believability of its many personages as they march across the screen. this is a true cinematic masterpiece, moving and deeply affecting and recreates the mood and life of the time with great precision and believability. the whole cast was superb as was of course Anthony Quinn as Gauguin.

Admittingly this is a highly entertaining film. the historical accuracy is poor however. salieri as everyone should know by now was not Mozart's assassin. this was a tale that was bruited about for sometime without foundation. turning perhaps the greatest musical genius that has ever lived into a buffoon however is an even greater travesty. however once you have jumped this hurdle the movie offers much entertainment in its showing of scenes from some of his most famous operas. costumes and sets are superb of course and very life like. still it is many miles ahead of the pablum that was offered back in the 1940's in terms of bios of great composers. Mozart was a man of many moods. childlike in some ways. and naive of the ways of the world in others perhaps. scatological jokes were rampant however in the lives of the southern Germans (mozarts father) and Austrians (mozarts mother). you would have to read of the letters these two sent each other to know that bodily functions in the 18th century were much more out in the open than in todays much greater privacy. that would help explain Mozart's sometimes out of the norm tom foolery. it was part of the patois of the time. still you have occasion to hear some of the most beautiful music written and i suppose be grateful for that. when will we ever have a lifelike portrayal of the great composers? a brilliant spectacle non the less.

Regrettably or not, (ha, ha) i have never seen this film. i was 12 years old when this movie came out and all i remember is that this very exciting piece called "chopinspolonaise" was the rage at the time. thats right pronounced as one word. well i got to hear it and it was probably the first piece of instrumental classical music that i became aware of and really thrilled to. it sold at least a million copies as a single. shortly thereafter i received my first piano lesson and I've been a classic music buff ever since. yes it was made into a pop hit in the song "till the end of time" (title also of the movie by name.) it was very much part of my upbringing in the 1940's. this was a time when classical music was still part of our everyday life. the world has changed drastically since then. the classics now seem like some dessicated hoary remnant of a distant age. (at least to some.) the world of classical music has become ever more distant as the more recent renderings of the twentieth century alienate ever more the musical public.

I saw this movie several times when it first came out. And tho it is a free fantasy on the the composers life, still there were some stirring scenes in it where Tchaikovsky's vehement dramatic music accompanies the narrative. well there is a lot thats brilliant about this errant film and is enjoyable in spite of its many foibles. those of us who have followed Tchaikovsky's life will see much in this film that is purely ridiculous. by the way Tchaikovsky did not take his own life. (i recommend poznansky's "the last days of Tchaikovsky" to put that canard to rest.) the fictionalized biography "beloved friend" on which this is based is not a reliable source. it also came out in the 1930's when so much about the man was still hidden. however this might be its a much better effort than "Tchaikovsky" the movie that came out the same year from Russia. indeed "the music lovers" is a cinematic masterpiece next to that offering. so those of us who are Tchaikovsky lovers still await a rendering that would do the subject justice. (the earlier effusion "song of my heart" 1947 was an even greater travesty.)

I saw this movie in 1945 when i was 12. It is possible i may have seen it once since but don't remember much of it. At the time I was very much struck by the strident chords of the piano concerto which is played more than once. It went dun dun, dun dun dun dun, dun dun, dun dun dun dun etc. Up until that time i was not familiar with instrumental classical music. Yes of course i remember cregar carrying darnel to the bon fire and might even remember the flamining ending. at any rate this movie stayed with me and i was very much stirred by it even now after 62 years. A year later i discovered the classical music stations and was introduced to such works as rachmaninoff's second piano concerto etc. Later that year i received my first piano lessons and have been a classical music buff ever since. Is it available on VHS or DVD? I would like to get a copy of it and see if its excitement still holds. Strange that my fascination with classical music began from such humble beginnings.