This movie is a decent adaptation of the novel--however, reading the novel is almost necessary in order to get the depth of the characters' struggles throughout the film. I have used this film with students studying Vreeland's novel and they have found it a wonderful aid in comprehending the novel. While I am sure many have read the novel and enjoyed it, there is a deeper subtext that the novel implies that is not captured in the film. In each story there is a child/parent relationship that is pivotal to meaning of the painting to that particular owner. I enjoyed the performances---especially Glenn Close, who truly captured the craziness of the character Cornelius from the novel and the story of Magdelena was well told.

Terrible story, cardboard characters, badly acted overall, but especially by the dutch actors (the guy playing Johannes Vermeer tops it all, the perfect example of 'how-not-to-act-even-in-a-Hallmark-production'). Yes, even Glenn Close (despite the glasses and sweater)delivers a non-performance. Who is waiting for nonsense like this? Go see Girl with a Pearl Earring if you like time-pieces set in rural medieval Holland. The utter experience leaves me with one question: Who decided that this stupid story should be made into a TV-drama, filmed even on location outside the US or Canada? Get the guy sacked! Now! In short: a 'Do-not-see-because-waste-of-time'.

This film is a history of a painting and the people who owned it over 300 years. It is told backwards through flashbacks, from its current owner, an eccentric art professor (Glenn Close) to its origin. Each chapter tells of the price they paid for their love of the painting. The individual stories are all involving, and there is a rather morbid twist at the very end you won't see coming. Two hours well-spent.

I suffered through half this film before I switched to "Dr. Strangelove" on TCM. It is yet more proof that the "Hallmark Hall of Fame" has become hopelessly bad. Glenn Close misleadingly gets top billing, and delivers a magnificent performance, but she is in less than a third of the film. Her performance as an art enthusiast makes everyone else, including the usually reliable Ellyn Burstyn, seem even worse.The film, following the pattern of such films as "The Red Violin", tells the stories of several owners of a beautiful lost Vermeer painting through the centuries. Perhaps the producers of this mawkish telefilm were hoping that lightning would strike twice, but if so, they forgot the need for subtle writing and direction, which are both hopelessly sentimental and hardly above the level of soap opera in this film. Ms. Close, as if sensing this, gives a performance that wipes away everyone else. In fact, the acting, with the exception of Close, is uniformly bad, as if we were watching a bad daytime drama in period costume.The people who made this film obviously thought that by tackling an intellectual, sophisticated subject like a great Vermeer painting they could give the "Hallmark Hall of Fame" the class it once had, but they forgot to leave behind their recent tendency for corny writing and dramatics.