Mixed or average reviews - based on 33 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 14 out of 33
  2. Negative: 4 out of 33
  1. Ultimately the ballet performances, and notably the work of Stiefel, a star with American Ballet Theatre, are the only moments that deserve center stage.
User Score

Universal acclaim- based on 50 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 33 out of 33
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 33
  3. Negative: 0 out of 33
  1. AnnaS.
    Apr 9, 2007
    The acting is terrible, the choreography only shines in short slips of Ballanchine or MacMillan, and the cinematography during the dance sequences frequently cuts annoyingly away to reaction shots of the (wooden) actors watching in the wings or the lobby. Nonetheless, the film is well worth watching for one reason, and his name is Ethan Stiefel. Widely regarded as one of the world's foremost technical artists when the film was shot, his dancing is outstanding. He steals every scene in which he appears. Fellow American Ballet Theatre alum Sasha Radetsky, playing a romantic rival, also acquits himself well onstage. Curiously, the female lead dancer is far less technically skilled than the two leading men, which lends the film an odd dynamic. In a picture where so much character exposition relies on dance, it's strange to have two men so blatently steal a number that's supposed to be about female empowerment. The too-brief appearances by Julie Kent (an ABT principal) are the only time that a fellow dancer can keep up with Stiefel, but those scenes are well worth watching. One wishes that Kent had played the female star of the film instead of the utterly unremarkable Amanda Schull, just so that we might see more of the snarky, graceful sense of humor that she brings to her small role. Full Review »
  2. EmilyB.
    Aug 20, 2001
    Fabulous from start to finish!
  3. MollyC.
    Jun 11, 2001
    This is my favorite movie. I've watched it 7 times already this week!