How sad is this?

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

When I heard that director Joe Mankiewicz was adapting the well- known, pre-war German play, "Dr. Pratorius", into a movie, I wondered who he was going to cast as Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson. Basil Rathbone had been off the screen since 1946, but I certainly hoped Mankiewicz could induce him to return. When I heard that Finlay Currie had been signed, I assumed he would play Holmes, whilst Walter Slezak essayed Dr. Watson. (Their accents were all wrong for the parts, but they would have made a great Holmes-Watson combo all the same). Instead, Holmes and Watson have been completely eliminated — as they were by playwright Goetz himself (incidentally, the name is pronounced: "Gets") in his own 1949 movie adaptation. Finlay Currie — giving one of the finest performances of his ultra-distinguished career — plays an entirely new yet fascinating character, a brilliant Mankiewicz creation; whilst Walter Slezak has a cleverly expanded role as the lead character's warmly amusing friend and loyal confidant.Unappreciated in its day by many critics. as well as the movie- going public, "People Will Talk" has yet to find the niche it deserves in any popular appreciation of Mankiewicz's work. More astringent than "All About Eve", more engaging than "A Letter to Three Wives", more satirical than "Million Dollar Legs", and far more dramatic than "The Barefoot Contessa", this impassioned, intense, quirky, captivating, wittily unconventional, ingeniously crowded-with-good-things "Pratorious", is the cinematic high-point of Mankiewicz's career. AVAILABLE on an excellent Fox DVD.

A very nice movie, indeed. I enjoyed it as a Morality Play. But I feel constrained to point out that Grant should have been better-coached in orchestral conducting. This should have been caught and fixed by any top editor with an ounce of musical perspicacity. It is painfully obvious to any experienced musician that, in his conducting scene, he is not leading the orchestra, rather the orchestra is leading him. I found this scene very uncomfortable to watch, since Grant is supposed to be a seasoned conductor, and instead looks very amateurish. I would describe his performance as "Conductorial Lip-Synching." Sorry, but it ruined the movie for me.

If you love black & white movies and Cary Grant movies with either slap stick or witty dialogue then skip this movie. I was so excited to see it but that quickly fades. There are three story lines in one movie and all of them are a mess. There is no chemistry between Grant and Crain. There is no reason for their characters to even like each other much less fall in love in a couple days. The model train scene isn't funny and I think it intended to be. There is a weird surprise ending out of no where. (BTW Cary Grant isn't close to performing correct moves while conducting the orchestra) I liked a few minutes of the informal hearing near the end plus Cary Grant is wonderful to look at :) Because of this I gave it four stars. Would be unwatchable without him in it. If you are curious then watch it but don't watch it if you are looking for a great movie. (Try Grant in Philadelphia Story, Notorious, Bringing Up Baby etc)

This 1951 film directed by Joseph L. Mankiewicz has more promise than it fulfilled. The problem is the character of Noah Praetorius, too good to believable. The movie stars Cary Grant as the noble Noah, Jeanne Crain as his love interest, and it has able performances by Finlay Currie, Walter Slezak, and Hume Cronyn.The gist of the plot is that Professor Elwell (Cronyn) is investigating fellow teacher Dr. Praetorius for reasons that I am unclear about. Elwll is really digging up dirt, however. Noah ignores Elwell for as long as he can, concentrating on his personal clinic where he preaches and practices treating patients as human beings, not as their maladies. Noah also conducts the student symphony orchestra, and all his female patients fall in love with him, including Deborah Higgins (Crain).Boy meets girl, boy marries girl, they have a spat, boy has a hearing to determine his fitness as a doctor, boy wins trial, boy conducts symphony orchestra.There are several problems with the movie. Elwell is never given a motive for his investigation of Noah; we have no clue if it's professional jealousy or whether there's some reasonable basis for looking into Noah's fitness to continue as an instructor at the college where both teach. Second, Noah is just too good to be true. He's so good the character lacks credibility. I laughed out loud at several scenes not because they were funny but because the situations were laughably ridiculous. Hagiography comes to mind.The movie had promise that it failed. The movie was released in 1951 at the beginning of the McCarthy era, so my wild guess is that the investigation of Noah Praetorius is somewhat related to the witch hunt for commie spies. It may also be that Mankiewicz is skewering doctors - Noah gets off several zingers, including a comparison of the professions of butchers and doctors. But nothing really is made of the hypocrisy of the investigation. Another serious issue is that Deborah Higgins is pregnant and unmarried when Noah meets her. Noah nobly marries her and will be the father to her child because he really loves her. The issues of unwed motherhood and abortion rear their heads but are swept under the carpet of witty dialogue.The movie succeeds on its supporting cast. Cronyn is good in his role as inquisitor. Slezak is warm and fuzzy as Noah's good friend. But Finlay Currie stole the movie, in my humble opinion. His Shunderson is a mystery in much of the film, a mystery about which we learn all we need to know during the hearing on Noah's fitness to continue as a professor. Currie gives Shunderson gravitas and dignity, while playing the character with little shown emotion. I liked the way the script dealt with Shunderson and Praetorius. Although Shunderson is shown as a silent hulking man, he's actually an astute observer of the human condition, and Shunderson gives Noah good advice, which by the way is readily accepted. Although Shunderson appears to be a servant of Praetorius, the two are equals. Shunderson's story is absorbing when we finally get to it.Shunderson's analysis of Elwell is where the movie should have ended. Pithy and dead center. It fully applies to McCarthy. Maybe it applies to someone today ... who can tell?