BeSummers Funny, strange, confrontational and subversive, this is one of the most interesting experiences you'll have at the cinema this year.

AshUnow This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

Jenna Walter The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

Raymond Sierra The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

mlamar-3 Like stacym said above, I think this was a very good film. While others have complained that the story is mediocre, I found Elizabeth Taylor's subtle eye movements and facial expressions intriguing, and the story changed enough that it kept me wondering what was going to happen next. Gassman and Ericson played their instruments so lifelike you almost thought they were playing them. Louis Calhern again provided a sophisticated performance as her distanced dad. In fact, I thought that the music was not as exceptional as the acting, although the selections were chosen to show off the virtuosity of the performers rather than for their beautiful melodies. (I am a Puccini and Lehar fan.) The actors were all impressive in their roles and should have received more awards than they did for their consummate collaboration.

edwagreen When Elizabeth Taylor made "A Place in the Sun" in 1951, this was supposed to be her entry into more mature roles. In this film, for the first part of it, she sounds like a girl out in the rural areas of "National Velvet." She is churlish at best with a whining, annoying stature.Louis Calhern, as her father, certainly proves again that Father Knows Best but to a certain degree.It is with her attempted suicide in the film that she finds maturity and her performance improves.She goes back and forth in her desires between two notable musicians, the violinist (Vittoria Gassman) and pianist John Ericson, both of whom are excellent in their respective roles. Ironically, Gassman was married to Shelley Winters, the latter being a rival to Taylor in "Place in the Sun."The music here is divine and Tchaikovsky was never better.

quibus Sometimes it is not the movie itself, or the actors, that draw the attention, but rather the photography, or in this case the music. "Concerto #2 In C Minor For Piano And Orchestra" from Sergei Rachmaninoff by the famous French pianist Claudio Arreau and "Concerto In D Major For Violin And Orchestra" from Peter Ilyitch Tschaikowsky by the violinist Michael Rabin from New York. Most directors do not want to spend time for that. The movie is dull, and so is Elizabeth Taylor's acting. Hardly any intrigue or adventure. But it is a tribute to the genius of Michael Rabin. In fact the biography of this genial violinist is worth a movie in itself, not in the least because of his too early, tragic death. So, although this movie is not worth watching twice, it can certainly be listened to, over and over again.

franzfelix Although other reviewers of this movie may dwell on its doggish qualities, I confess I can't let it slide any time TCM shows it. Taylor, at her absolutely most sumptuously gorgeous loves a violin virtuoso while rehabilitating a pianist who has lost his way due to psychological implosion. The scenes when Taylor patiently encourages the musical rehabilitation are like junk food loaded with cancer causing initials...once you start you can't stop.As an interesting aside, the great Claudio Arrau plays the actual piano part. I have been told that in Mel's Dinner in LA, there is a picture of the maestro, in rakish youth, enjoying the splendors of his Hollywood moment.