Sorry, but I find it a little hard to believe that Richard Attenborough directed this film. This is the same director who directed the wonderful underrated Cry Freedom, the extraordinarily touching Shadowlands and the magnificent Gandhi. What happened? Now I am not saying this is the worst musical ever made, that dishonour for me goes to The Wiz(I haven't yet seen Mame but I've heard it's worse),though that did have moments, but as an adaptation of a stage musical this is the most disappointing one I have seen, considering how superb the stage musical is.

A Chorus Line does have its good moments though. The cinematography, costumes and sets are nice to look at, the songs and score are great, Michael Douglas is good as the show's producer and Alyson Reed is touching as Cassie.

However, the story loses its dynamic intensity and captivity with the flashbacks and becomes disjointed as a consequence. The dialogue that remains is largely uneven and no longer humorous or touching, while the choreography is lacking as a consequence of being changed- why change the original choreography when it was so good? Attenborough's direction isn't great either, I love Attenborough as a director, but his heart didn't seem to be in it here. And personally I didn't like Audrey Landers, she was pretty yes but her dancing and such left you feeling someone else could have done the role and better. Finally, the pacing is very uneven. Crucial parts are rushed while the not-so-essential parts drag.

Overall, has its moments but a huge disappointment. 4/10 Bethany Cox

SYNOPSIS: A crowd of young hopefuls try out for a Broadway chorus line. But only eight of them are to be selected.

COMMENT: Following their joint success on "Gandhi" (1982),director Richard Attenborough and photographer Ron Taylor again collaborated three years later on "A Chorus Line", this time with considerably less critical success. Although Attenborough copped all the blame, the fault (if there was indeed a fault) in transferring this mighty stage success to the screen should have been sheeted home to Arnold Shulman instead. It was Schulman who made all the alterations that inflame most people who compare the two productions. All Attenborough did was to direct, and very competently (and at times quite inventively) too.

True, Michael Douglas does hand in a rather abrasive performance that tends to throw the movie off-center, but that's the way the movie was obviously written and cast. I do agree that too much attention in the movie script is given to the Mike Douglas/Alyson Reed plot and that this swings the audience's attention away from other hopefuls in the chorus line, but nonetheless, Miss Reed (here making her screen debut) is a charming lass and fully deserves this extra attention. I'm more concerned that the singing (with a couple of notable exceptions) was at best mediocre. But it's rare to find a performer who is equally deft in both fields (no-one would claim that either Gene Kelly or Fred Astaire were great vocalists). This movie rightly focuses on the dancing – and that is consistently superb! In fact, "electrifying" is the word!

Michael Bennett and Nicholas Dante's Broadway show ran for years, but evidence of its power and charisma is lost in this movie adaptation, which most likely stems from the choice of director (Richard Attenborough, as far from B-way as you could get) and lead actor (Michael Douglas, who plays a director-choreographer like a slimy corporate lawyer). The slim story, about a grueling audition for a Broadway show which turns into a therapy session for the actor-dancer-singers, is pushed right up on us, with loud, brassy talents playing to the rafters. Nothing is modulated or subtle, particularly a laughable subplot about a ex-dancer returning to the theater and butting heads with old-flame Douglas. The over-eager hopefuls are filled with promise and heartache, but their personal stories of angst are a little embarrassing; this, matched with Attenborough's sluggish pacing, spells disaster, and even the now-famous songs fail to break through the artificial wrapping. *1/2 from ****