Die geliebten Schwestern

SO disappointed in this film. I had high hopes. I saw this film (the almost 3 hour version) at a recent film festival in Los Angeles. The editing was terrible and choppy. The use of zoom-in's was odd as the feel of the story did not support such a harsh visual choice. As other reviewers have mentioned, this film looks beautiful: the sets are amazingly detailed, the costumes and the lighting are perfect for the time period but the film is VERY SLOW in its telling of the story. I'm left wondering what was the point of showing the sister's mother's carriage breaking down? No plot point here. I would like the 3 hours of my life back but instead I will write this review. Lots of editing needed and then the film may be acceptable as a TV movie, not Germany's submission as a contender for the foreign film Oscar. Germany can do better than this.

Rushes along. Interesting times but doesn't settle into a rhythm. Don't like narration. Was the story based on fact? Didn't finish watching.

A failed love affair with an idea. Although the casting of the three principle parts was perfect, the personalities alone could not sustain this film. The writing was all over the place. The voice over narration had no identity and seemed a bad substitution for good editing and for writing scenes that would speak for themselves. The cinematography was beautiful, as were the venues which were chosen from Schiller's life. In my opinion, Dominik Graf feel in love with a fantasy, a faint impression (from one letter) of a relationship that is not supported by literary or historical facts, which he tried to conjure up from an illusion but which never really took form. I understand there is a shorter version of this (I watched the three hour director's cut on DVD) but it really was a long, hot mess. I give this film a 4 (poor) out of 10. {Period Romantic Drama}

Two cuts of the movie that is. There is the shorter cinema version and the Directors cut, which obviously is longer. And therefor more conclusive, which also makes more sense than. If you only watched the shorter version you probably won't get that. Not that this means it's a sure thing you will like the longer version.

One thing is for sure, there went a lot of thought into the design(s) of the movie. Again you might not like what you see, but the effort is there. Also our male lead has a way of speaking that fits more with a period piece like this than contemporary cinema. If you see it favorable you'll call it sophisticated. Acting in general is good, though not up to par with things Natalie Portman did of course. Still a refreshing look (with some artistic freedom/choices) back at time/history

I wish IMDb.com allowed "Likes" and "Comments" the way social media allows these days. Although there were some beautiful scenes, most of the outdoor shots were stunning (I'd love to know where it was all shot, as it seems to be an idyllic land to visit), and the lead actors are all gorgeous and obviously very talented -- these riches were all just wasted on this much-too-long film. Kudos to the Casting Director, those two lead actresses could definitely pass for sisters with their mesmerizing blue eyes, and the "Schiller" character was played by a very hunky and charming actor. I didn't really need to write a movie review, because the review posted by "Trivial Tapestry" says it all. As did all the other user reviewers who agreed that "Beloved Sisters" was simply boring overall with a practically non-existent musical score.