Jewelle, your topic has brought up (again) my favorite movie. Immortal Beloved does have its faults, but all the good things about it far outweigh the bad. <P>I have the DVD version, too, like Jason. The director's commentary throughout the picture is fascinating to listen to because he digs deeper into where and what his inspirations were for the filming of the movie. Bernard Rose did not just throw off this movie; he spent lots of time and lots of money to make it (BTW, he was lucky to get this thing off the ground in the first place, I think. Thank God Sony [Columbia Pictures] is recognized as a charitable studio for arty and otherwise not-too-profitable pictures. You'd never have seen this movie produced by Warner Bros. or Disney.).<P>The thing that got me about the whole movie was the idea that Rose did not want to make a film for the Beethoven-appreciative public who may or may not paint the man in purple prose. He knew, as I do, that Ludwig was not an infallible shortchanged nobleman. He was far more gifted and more endowed than his noble peers, certainly, but he was never really one of them. Rose made a film that spoke of a person we could all relate to, I think. Ludwig was an emotionally-complex man who likely had lots of sex (at various times...) and composed knowing he was the start of something better. We can see that very clearly in the movie. There can be no way, really, to watch IM and not feel inspired or elevated unless you are determined from the start to pick apart the movie. The faults do exist: Ludwig goes deaf too quickly, the pieces that are played not as mood music but as plot development are usually anachronistic, and the idea that Schindler would actually bother to help find the immortal beloved is laughable considering in real life he only helped B. for the vicarious esteem it would earn him and his bio about the composer was a tissue of lies. But almost everything else about the movie is accurate enough: the women involved in the story, the whole legal battle for Karl, the tutelage of Karl and the eventual suicide attempt, the events at the premiere of the 9th, the suspected truth about B.'s youth, the general progress of B. career in Vienna, the patrons he had, the places he premiered at and the people who performed them... in fact, if you really think about it, the things that are arguable in the movie (Karl's parentage, Ludwig's degree of involvement with women, the truth of his childhood) will never be resolved with any finality. There's simply no way to prove one way or the other what actually occurred. And I cannot think of another truly glaring error or inconsistency in the movie.<P>So, assuming that my logic is correct in claiming the movie only got the age of deafness and pieces played in the movie "unforgivably" incorrect, and allowing that a certain degree of dramatic freedom must be allowed for to make up for the lack of hard facts in the ambiguous areas, then we can safely determine that IM got more of Beethoven's life right than most other biopic movies ever did--especially more than what Amadeus got right of Mozart's life.<P>Rose said that he felt that his film got more bad review than it deserved, and I completely agree. I do hope you like the movie, Jewelle.