That was an excellent one.

Perfect cast and a good story

Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??

everything you have heard about this movie is true.

David Hamilton may have made his name as a photographer but Laura leaves his writing and directing abilities with a lot of question marks. The plot and characterisations have holes that you could drive an army through.When Paul asks if Laura would pose for his new sculpture Sarah refuses so why does she then say that she will take photos of a naked Laura for Paul to use? It's as if she is saying, "No, Mr Wyler, Laura will not pose naked but I will take lots of photos of Laura in erotic poses so that you can ogle her young naked body at your leisure." This is surely not the action of a responsible parent, especially as she knows him well enough not to let Laura anywhere near him. This is evident at a party given by Paul. Sarah, her husband Richard and Laura are invited to the party but Laura is left at home. There are other unanswered questions such as what did the woman at the party want to talk to Paul about and why was Paul allowed access to the ballet school? There is more but it would take too long to go into it all here.As this is an erotic film centred around art, there is obviously a certain amount of nudity. David Hamilton shows his photographic background by having the ballet students adopting various poses and so looking like living tableaux. There was too much use of fade-to-black and the permanent soft-focus was annoying. This film does not warrant more than 2 stars.

I have read several technical critiques of this movie over the years, but it they all miss the mark for me, because this film provides something that very few films ever do - a gentle, poignant and tranquil approach into a world where the artistic, feminine and erotic merge in a manner that is generally well conceived and often breathtakingly beautiful.David Hamilton is first and foremost a fine art photographer, and whilst there may be cinematic errors here, the visual content of the film allows one to pause and consider the wonder of the female form. I am delighted to own a copy of this visual hymn to some of the most delightful aspects of human life.Howard Nowlan Fine Art Photographer, Cornwall, UK.

David Hamilton established his name as a fashion photographer through the still, dreamy soft focus images of young girls, usually portrayed in muted colours, for which he has become famous. At some point he appears to have decided that this experience was all he needed to produce great movies, and he started to direct films that characteristically show all the same features as his fashion images. Unfortunately these were not generally well received and some critics have suggested that he has only a rudimentary appreciation of how to blend successive still images into an ongoing movie sequence. Personally I greatly enjoy his still fashion photography and this enjoyment is sufficient for me to also appreciate his films - overlooking any faults in their dynamics. His best known film is probably "Bilitis", a study of a young girl coming of age, but my preference is for "Laura", a film about a young girl modeling for a sculptor who is blinded in a fire. We can, I hope, ignore comments on the IMDb database which suggest that there is something sinister in Hamilton's preference for models and actresses who appear very young. In his films his objective is to create a story which has a strong emotional appeal but which is also visually beautiful to watch. My judgment is that Laura achieves this objective superbly. One sequence which haunts my memory as much as any other film sequence I have ever seen; comes towards the end of this film. It shows the sculptor, nearly blinded by the fire, returning to his almost finished sculpture whilst he explores the torso of his model with an extended finger trying to recreate in his mind the beauty that he can no longer see.My recommendation would be to watch this film, which is not readily obtainable today, as soon as any opportunity arises.POSTSCRIPT - added January 2005This film has - to my surprise - now been released as a DVD. If these various very different assessments intrigue you in any way, why not buy a copy and add your comments to those already here?

I've often wondered why David Hamilton hasn't been arrested! The world's dirtiest old man - and he gets PAID for it! Considered soft-core pornography when released, Hamilton quickly sprang to his age-old defence.."But this art chaps!" It sure IS! Pre-pubescent wannabe ballet dancer Laura - she must be all of 14, stripping off, for her MOTHER for God's sakes! - and performing multiple er, dance moves? gymnastic workouts? whatever...for the camera....and most every other paedophile in the Western world! The "plotline" such that it isn't, has James Mitchell as sculptor Paul Wyler, obviously playing out Hamilton's own fantasies, who wants to sculpt Laura, as he did her mother (OCTOPUSSY Bond girl Maud Adams, can you believe?) 20 years earlier.All the Hamilton trademark shots - soft focus, young rear ends, girls drying each other off in the showers, skipping down the boardwalk, teenage nudity viewed every which way. God, no wonder I like this flick! Seriously folks...art house fodder? supposedly....but in the upshot, just sexploitation of very young girls - and ALL in the name of "art" he did it with BILITIS I'm SURE he did it here...pretty often too!