star_in_the_zenith_79 I was honestly surprised someone said Loves Music Loves to Dance was one of Clarke's weaker novels. I thought it was one of her best. The who done it cliffhanger was executed to perfection, there are plenty enough curveballs thrown to keep you guessing. The characters are much more believable and compelling.However, this movie was far inferior. Key characters who made the plot much more interesting were left out, most notably a couple of men who could have easily been the killer themselves, along with the man who it actually turns out to be. Its not nearly as obvious who the killer is in the book. Even many of the characters who were included were changed from the novel, sometimes in unappealing ways. Even the villain himself is far more compelling and far more dangerous in the novel.I won't go into all the differences between the novel and the movie, there is no room or time. But don't let this third rate film discourage you from reading the book if you haven't. Its much better. Pass the film up.All of Clarke's books with the possible exception of While My Pretty One Sleeps were done poorly on the screen. Its ashame because I feel all of them could have been good box office films in competent hands, including Loves Music Loves To Dance. I would like to see them redone someday by more competent directors and screenwriters. Doubt it though.

Theo Robertson LOVES MUSIC LOVES TO DANCE is a good example not to make a murder mystery . From the outset we're , if not shown who the murderer is , then who it probably isn't . This means when we build up to a scene featuring a man like the dodgy handyman in the flat then the audience are fairly sure it's not him meaning the movie loses any suspense or tension This fundamental clumsy genre storytelling clearly manifests itself with the first murder . The victim Anne Sheridan is at a nighttime garden party where she meets the murderer . It's clear from the dialogue they both know each other well . " Are you all right " asks an out of view party goer . Anne replies yes then continues talking to the murderer who then goes on to to strangle her . This leads to all sorts of problems involving plausibility . Didn't the party goer see the murderer ? Why didn't Annne scream since the party is only a few yards away and since the murderer is an associate of Anne wouldn't he be questioned ? Even more unbelievable is that the audience know that the murderer has left his fingerprints at the scene . When you're watching a film and you're more knowledgeable about police procedures than the cops in the story you're know you're watching rubbish Patsy Kensit must have a really poor agent . She tried to swap a rather mediocre music career for a mediocre acting one but found herself starring in nonsense like BAD KARMA and this . That said LOVES MUSIC , LOVES TO DANCE is fairly amusing even if that wasn't the producers intention . The lifestyle of a murderer who is in to ballroom dancing with corpses isn't something you see everyday and does lead to laugh out loud moments

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU A serial killer has gone unnoticed for many years in New York City till the disappearance of a TV journalist working on Internet dating. He is suspected then to have killed seven women and the bodies disappeared and apparently the profiling of the murders that all had some important common points did not bring them together and attract the attention of the police. Then the story is well executed and designed and the final identity of the killer is not a total surprise but it is quite logically introduced in the film, the way he is introduced from the very start. But of course that kind of antagonistic presentation of the killer as the most innocent person possible, actually friendly and helpful, is naive because it has been used hundreds of times. But this film, even if it is not the detective story of the century that is going to get ten Oscars, is decent enough entertainment to be watched with some enjoyment.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine & University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne

whpratt1 Missed reading this Mary Higgins Clark book and decided to view the TV film and was very disappointed with the entire film from beginning to end. Patsy Kensit,(Darcy Scott) gave a great performance in trying to locate her very close friend who all of a sudden went missing. However, this close friend was doing an assignment for Darcy's TV program which involved going out with guys she connected with on the Internet. You see the apparent murderer dancing around his apartment with a gal who is limp in his arms and having a mixed pair of shoes on her feet. This was a very poorly produced film and you will almost know immediately who the killer is going to turn out to be. I am sure reading the book would have been a better choice.