Magnificent Obsession

I saw this movie only one time on AMC during a film renovation special in 1991 or 1992. Its a wonderful movie. It made enough of an impression on me that 12 years later, after only one viewing, I still consider it a favorite.

I know that the later version with Rock Hudson and Jane Wyman is considered to be a good remake by film critics and fans, however, when I tried to watch it, I revolted at the glitzy technicolor melodrama. The magic, the old Hollywood glamour, the passion and the agony I found in watching the original seemed completely lost in the remake. I hope they do restore this movie before it is lost forever. I hope I get to see this movie again some day.

Rich playboy Robert Taylor is indirectly and innocently responsible for the death of Irene Dunne's philanthropic doctor husband, then falls in love with her. He anonymously replaces her vanished fortune. Then she falls blind and he does everything he can and more to help her recover her sight.

It took fourteen writers, director John Stahl, and the usual vast array of actors and technicians to make this piffle hang together, confirm Miss Dunne as an A-list star, and show MGM, Taylor's home studio, that he could stand up to the strain. It was another hit for Stahl in his annual weepie fest for Universal in the 1930s You can see the snipped-off plots from Lloyd Douglas's novel. How did Charles Butterworth wind up married to Betty Furness (gives a decent performance, by the way). What is Sara Haden doing there? Did they try to get Otto Kruger for the Ralph Morgan role?

These and other questions linger in the background of my mind, even as I consider the question of euthanasia. I can admire the practical results as a matter of commercial film making, even though this sort of movie annoys the heck out of me.

I'm SOOOOOO Glad that the 1935 version of Magnificent Obsession is being released along with the 1954 version..The newer version is getting all the hype,etc. but it truly is the 1935 version with Irene Dunne/Robert Taylor which is the understated and much better rendering. I have a poor video quality version,but better than nothing..hope the released version has been improved in restoration.John Stahl's solid directing makes the principal characters more realistic.Robert Taylor shows a palpable presence in his first main screen venture..and of course amongst Irene Dunne's early 1930 films,this simply is one of her very best!1935..classy...1954...somewhat sappy

I have seen both this original version and the Douglas Sirk remake from the 1950s. The two are extremely similar...so similar you might want to only see one of them. While the remake is naturally lacking in originality, it is a bit glossier and prettier due to the Technicolor as well as Sirk's style...he had a real deft hand with romances.

The story begins with the death of a famous and beloved doctor. It seems when the doctor needed life-saving equipment, it was being used on a drunk playboy who has pretty much led a selfish and worthless life. He feels bad about this, at least as much as he can at this point. But later when his actions ALSO cause the widow to become blinded, he suffers a huge crisis and dedicates his life to helping her and others.

Robert Taylor and Irene Dunne are very good here. But I didn't rate fhe film higher simply because while enjoyable, the film certainly seemed far-fetched and a bit schmaltzy. Still, it is worth seeing.

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.