TheLittleSongbird As a lifelong fan of classical music and who has liked/loved a fair share of musical/composer biopics ('Amadeus' being one of my all time favourite films), there was a lot of interest seeing this biopic about Edvard Grieg, Norway's greatest composer.It does pain me to say it, but 'Song of Norway' was a huge disappointment. Others have explained very well the numerous big flaws it has, and there is not much to add. As a biographical drama, it is a disaster, one of the worst to exist outside of a few good things. As a film on its own, 'Song of Norway' is also not much better. This is coming from somebody who really wanted to like it and was prepared to go against the grain/general consensus, which has happened before though critics and I are also often in agreement.There are good points about 'Song of Norway'. The scenery is absolutely gorgeous and matched by some lovingly rendered cinematography. Grieg's music, while deserving better treatment being deserving of larger, longer extracts and a less 'The Sound of Music'-esque, except far more cloyingly cutesy (actually love 'The Sound of Music' as a film but that approach sounded wrong here), treatment, is a sheer wonderful delight.Florence Henderson gives the best, and only, good performance. She actually looks engaged and the only person to make a lot of her role.'Song of Norway' has so much wrong with it, however, including the single stiffest, dullest and severely erratically characterised (both over and under) performance of any composer on film, there may have been composers with more colourful personalities and more interesting personal lives, like Mozart, Beethoven, Liszt, Verdi, Wagner and Schumann (four of whom had biopics that did them justice), but Grieg was not this uninteresting.Don't expect Robert Morley, Oskar Homolka or Edward G. Robinson to save things, they are given nothing to do and only Robinson makes effort to bring dignity despite being completely wasted. And how can you have interesting real life figures like Liszt, Andersen and Ibsen and do so little with them? It is the storytelling and direction where 'Song of Norway' most falls down. The film is far too long, easily could have done with being 45 minutes shorter, and goes along at a snail's pace with so much flimsy drama and static staging of musical scenes which makes the film often deadly dull. The direction is amateurishly static.Editing should have been tighter and the dialogue is horrendously stilted.All in all, a deadly dull mess aside from good production values, great music and one good performance. 3/10 Bethany Cox

phillindholm To call this thing ''bad'', is really doing it a disservice. It's actually beyond unbearable-a clear and relentlessly clumsy attempt to cash in on the tremendous success of ''The Sound Of Music''. If that wasn't enough, it features Edward G. Robinson and Florence Henderson in the SAME movie. Kind of like Pat Boone and Ann-Margret in the 1962 remake of ''State Fair''. No, Robinson and Henderson are not paired romantically. But they might as well have been-everything else in this so-called''Biography'' of Edvard Grieg is hilariously over the top, with everyone trying in vain to compete with the gorgeous location photography and substituting acting with simpers and bright, glassy smiles. Lucky for Florence, ''The Brady Bunch'' was just around the corner-because this ridiculous ''epic''pretty much killed her film career.Though the singing is fine, the music is not Grieg's best, and it's simply used as background for the scenery-which, by the second hour of this fiasco, begins to resemble one of those nature films which occasionally show up in small towns, accompanied by the Producer/Director who narrates it in person. One reviewer at the time this was first released stated: ''It seems to have been made by Trolls''. And not very talented ones, at that. Gives poor Norway a bad name.Not to mention Trolls....

Daisy Brambletoes I saw this one when I was in high school. I had been warned ahead of time, but I liked classical music, including Grieg, and ignored the warnings. I remember several things about it that really sum the film up, in my opinion.1. The photography was stunning. Snow, fjords, and Norwegian towns and scenery were really pretty, as were the folk costumes. 2. Grieg's music was nice to listen to, though as in all films about composers, they only give samplings.Those are the good parts. The bad parts were what sank the boat. There wasn't much of a story. Greig's life wasn't as exciting as many other composers lives, and a lot was padded to keep the story going for 2 or 3 hours. I remember a lot of overacting as well. But the worst part of all was the directing. Forever emblazoned upon my memory is the hideously clichéd scene where Grieg, his wife, and someone else spread their arms and run across a green field, stop on a hillock, and spin around to face the audience. Then they do the same thing again - and again! If that's not enough to make you give up, then nothing is.

accitenor Although some of the acting is bland, the movie honestly tells of the struggle of a great musician to be "heard". Postcard cinematography and a good stereo sound add to the ambiance, and the music is so GOOD that one can forgive the lyrics writers for giving words to it, but these are the same people that gave words to the music of Borodin in "Kismet" and we MUST admit that "Stranger in Paradise" HAS become a staple!