Titreenp SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

Konterr Brilliant and touching

Freeman This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

Marva It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

mysterv I am a fan of Irene Dunne and was looking forward to seeing this movie. Unfortunately it felt a little out of touch with the events, especially in the first half of the movie. After the initial shock of learning that her husband had suddenly died, the wife displayed little grief. In fact she seemed somewhat interested in a young man (Robert Taylor) she met when her car broke down. Of course, she didn't know that he had indirectly contributed to her late husband's death but she seemed a little too carefree for the situation. This movie is of some interested because it is the original version of the story. I have not seen the updated version yet so am interested in comparing the two movies.

Minerva Breanne Meybridge Magnificent Obsession concerns a reckless playboy named Merrick, who drowns and is resuscitated with equipment that might have saved the elderly doctor to whom it belonged. Falling in love with the doctor's beautiful young wife, who hates the very thought of him, he learns the reason for her love of the man who died...a philosophy of helping other people, without ever letting them know. When the women loses her sight in a car accident, Merrick takes advantage of her blindness by befriending her. Pretending to be a doctor, he determines to become a surgeon to restore her vision at the risk of losing her love.

jlanders13 This is one of Irene Dunne's better pictures. She once said she enjoyed the character she played, and it is apparent in this movie. In fact, this would be a good movie to watch if you wish to view Irene Dunne's native charm and mystery. She was a wonderful actress and this was a good example of her performance style in a serious role.

dbdumonteil The Sirk excellent remake has overshadowed Stahl's version nowadays.That's certainly unfair,because the latter was a pioneer of the melodrama who would peak with "leave her to heaven" ,ten years later.Stahl 's version,in stark black and white is certainly not as palatable as the 1953 movie and its gaudy technicolor.Randolph's character seems more important in Stahl's version.His theory is certainly moving:You've only got what you give and you should not expect any award.Merrick tries to apply this theory,first because he wants to seduce the wife of the philanthropist/doctor who indirectly died because of him,because he was an alcoholic playboy.He has not really understood what Randolph tried to explain to him.The scene with the hobo comes as a comic relief,which is terribly needed in such a dark yarn.When ,as leaving the poor man,Merrick thinks he's got some divine reward,he's completely mistaken.A Christian movie,"magnificent obsession" sure is,as Randolph,in his second scene ,mentions the Christ. After all,his theory is not that much far from that of James Stewart's guardian angel in "it's a wonderful life".Unlikelihoods are here there and everywhere,but it's the rules of melodrama.The story ,which includes death,blindness,moral and physical redemption,is not more far-fetched than westerns and thrillers plots.And life is so strange that it can turn sometimes into the most implausible melodrama;and like it or not,not necessarily with a happy end.