sasheldon-14-473280 I agree with everything those who love this film have said about Bill Murray. I had trouble with Catherine Hicks at first, feeling she wasn't powerful enough. But with each viewing I find she really captures the shallowness of Isabel.

Zachariah Smith I heard of the book about this movie, and I heard of the 1946 version of the movie. Honestly, it didn't really inspire me. But I do think that this would really please other people. The story did make sense, I am familiar with the actor Bill Murray, and... that was pretty much it. Even though I haven't seen a lot of good reviews about this movie, and that may be because some have seen the original movie and probably have read the book as well, but in my opinion the movie was just alright in my eyes. And this coming from somebody who really isn't into romance and drama. And that is pretty much my gripe with this film. I am not the one for romance and drama. The whole searching for the meaning of life thing was a good taste on the story, but after he comes back, then this movie just takes a huge turn. One that I did not enjoy. Overall, it was OK. But maybe if I read the book, or watched the first movie, then I would probably have a different opinion.

jjnxn-1 Elegant but facile version of the Maugham novel, a passion project for Murray who is good in parts of the film but flat in others. On it's own an okay film hampered by over-length but compared to the Tyrone Power/Gene Tierney original, which has its own problems, it's a pale shadow. A good deal of the fault for that lies in both the direction and the performances. The general ennui of the performances may in fact be laid at the director's feet. All are capable actors as they've shown elsewhere but here be it a mismatch of actor/actress and part or lack of direction most founder. Theresa Russell does the film's best work but even her Sophie is missing the bruised sorrow that made Anne Baxter's take on the part so compelling and won her the Oscar for best supporting actress. James Keach evaporates from the screen in a rather thankless role that John Payne managed to make an impression in with a show of quiet strength. Surprisingly the weakest of the star spots is Catherine Hicks, usually a very fine actress, adrift in her part. She exudes a warm presence on screen totally wrong for the heartless, mindlessly cruel Isabel that Gene Tierney playing with an icy edge made vivid.A good try but only average.

barille This is a horrible take on the book. How could anyone cast Bill Murray in this role. If you have not read the book it would not matter perhaps. If you have read the book then do not waste your time. I really like Bill Murray but NOT in this role. The role of Maughnam is missing and was important to the story. Sophie did not play such a strong role in the book. The movie abbreviated the book and in exchange you wind up with a limp, wrong story. What enlightenment? Line up a bunch of books. I'm wondering if they really read the book or simply did a remake of the original movie.The only enjoyable part of the movie would be the Indian music.