Don't listen to the negative reviews

Disappointment for a huge fan!

Absolutely amazing

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

There is an element of magic to this story, which has a struggling artist (Joseph Cotten) meeting a young girl (Jennifer Jones) in the park by chance one day. It's soon apparent that there is something different about this girl, as she mentions things from decades ago as if they were current, and ages a little each time he subsequently meets her. A romance begins to develop, fueled by artistic inspiration she gives him, as well as mystery – is she a ghost? A muse? Someone only he can see? Meanwhile, tragedy lurks.The film is gorgeous, with beautiful shots of winter in New York City, and artistic effects such as those created by spreading canvas over the camera lens. The performances are reasonably good, and it was fantastic to see Ethel Barrymore and Lillian Gish in supporting roles. There is a dreamy feel to it, as well as philosophical message of the timelessness of art and love. It's intellectual, opening with deep thoughts ("Since time began man has looked into the awesome reaches of infinity and asked the eternal question: What is time? What is life? What is space? What is death?"), quotes from Euripides and Keats, and other profundity ("This was tomorrow once…"). It's also quite romantic ("I know we were meant to be together. The strands of our lives are woven together and neither the world nor time can tear them apart"), and it may be too syrupy or cheesy for some viewers. I have to say that Director William Dieterle does lay it on pretty thick towards the end – but all in all, with aesthetic elements that touch the head and heart, I found it entertaining.

I have a feeling this film was originally much longer and producer David Selznick was forced to abandon some of the sequences, or else cut some of them due to cost overruns and production code/censorship issues. Having Joseph Cotten's character remain alive at the end might have been imposed on Selznick by the production code office.Furthermore, I think PORTRAIT OF JENNIE can be read several ways. I don't consider Jennie to be a ghost, though I can see where people would regard her that way. I see her as a representation of Ethel Barrymore's character when she was younger. The romance is actually between an old woman and this young painter who is tapping into a living part of her past.Cotten and Barrymore previously appeared in THE FARMER'S DAUGHTER with Loretta Young. And there were earlier collaborations between Cotten and star Jennifer Jones (both were under contract to Selznick). They made four films together and PORTRAIT OF JENNIE was the last of those. Watch LOVE LETTERS (1945), because it is very much a movie 'sibling' or close 'cousin' to JENNIE.

Daid O. Selznick struck Hollywood good with his four hour 1939 technicolor GONE WITHE THE WIND and his two hour 1949 black and white RECBECCA. Eight years later he made PORTRAIT OFJENNIE on the parallel dark brooding supernaturally tinged premise to REBECCA which lasts only 86 minutes the first hour in nblack and white the remainder switching from green monochrome to techicolor. Ethel Barrymore in a lead role and Lillian Gish coming out of retirement for a considerable length cameo continue his tradition of producing Hollywood gold. The choice of Joseph Cotten in the central role and Florence Bates in a cameo lends merit to the film. The film was originally shown in a not working well prelude to cinemascope called Cyclorama which was abandoned quickly and is not available in modern cablecasts or DVD. Jennifer Jones was his chosen bride and star of the era who can be beautiful in finery and cosmetics but plays for much of the film a little girl dressed down. Her vocal shortcomings would not be worth stardom today. Her sound track comes out less than satisfactory on modern cablecast and DVD.

This movie takes a romantic notion and makes it creepy. The idea that if two people are meant to be together neither distance nor time can separate them is lovely, but using the adult actress as the young child when the couple first meets is so creepy. That's the word that kept coming to me as I was watching this movie, creepy, creepy, creepy.Jennifer Jones is an adult playing a child when Joseph Cotton's character first meets her and the voice she uses and the song she sings are so creepy. Her being an adult playing a child (not clear on the age but definitely pre-teen years) and having this man be obsessed with her is just disturbing. If they had cast a little girl that looked like her, there still would have been a pedophilia element, I guess, but it would have been easier to believe he didn't have sexual feelings about her than it is when she is obviously an adult on her knees. Ick. Even better, why not have him first meet her when he is a child. The child version of her could have come to him when he was a child. That would have been so much better.Even if you can get past the hints of pedophilia, the movie is still mawkish. The music and the voice-over are so sappy and melodramatic. So, it is both creepy and syrupy.Now, for the good stuff. Ethel Barrymore is excellent. The special effects are fun. I think I jumped at the lightning. The shot of the spiral staircase is lovely and eerie. The canvas effects are fun at first but get tiresome. I always enjoy Joseph Cotten, and I guess I'm glad I watched it.