Valley of the Dolls
December. 27,1967 PG-13In New York City, bright but naive New Englander Anne Welles becomes a secretary at a theatrical law firm, where she falls in love with attorney Lyon Burke. Anne befriends up-and-coming singer Neely O'Hara, whose dynamic talent threatens aging star Helen Lawson and beautiful but talentless actress Jennifer North. The women experience success and failure in love and work, leading to heartbreak, addiction and tragedy.
Similar titles
You May Also Like
Reviews
Absolutely Fantastic
It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional
The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.
Blistering performances.
Fire up Netflix. C'mon, you have nothing better to do, right? Look for The Valley of the Dolls, easily one of the 2 or 3 worst movies I've ever seen. It's the story of three women who find out that show business is mean and nasty.There, that's it. The rest of the movie is a compendium of some of the worst acting and dialogue I've ever witnessed. I use the word witnessed with the idea that watching The Valley of the Dolls is very much like watching a film of that ocean liner that sank off the southern end of Chile about 25 years ago. It lost power in heavy seas, and it seemed like a week before the waves and the flooding just made the big hunk of steel go under. Nauseating, but fascinating to watch.Almost like The Valley of the Dolls, only without the "fascinating to watch" part.
Among the most legendary of trashy movies, "Valley of the Dolls" is also compulsively entertaining. Anne Welles leaves the pristine snow-covered village of Lawrenceville for the savage Broadway jungle in Manhattan. Based on the lurid best-selling novel by Jacqueline Susann, the film chronicles the rise and fall of three young women: Welles, played by Barbara Parkins; Neely O'Hara, played by Patty Duke; and Jennifer North, played by Sharon Tate. Evidently, life is easy street in New York, at least at first, because opportunities are thrown at their feet; secretaries with scant shorthand skills become hair-spray models, mediocre singers become sensations, and women with bodies become stars of French art films.Reportedly a roman-a-clef drawn from well known show business personalities, "Valley of the Dolls" is glossy, big-budget nonsense from director Mark Robson, who previously directed such decent films as "Von Ryan's Express," "Peyton Place," and "The Bridges at Toko-ri." Perhaps Robson thought lightening would strike twice, and he could fashion another critical hit like "Peyton Place" from another trashy novel like Grace Metalious's 1950's scandalous best seller. However, "Valley of the Dolls" is no "Peyton Place." While Robson drew excellent performances from Lana Turner and a distinguished cast in his earlier soap opera, he unleashes his cast, and they go over the top in "Valley of the Dolls." Although directing three Oscar-winning actresses (Susan Hayward, Lee Grant, and Patty Duke), Robson let them chew the scenery shamelessly. While the bitchy performances provide guilty entertainment, they are often risible. Hayward is Helen Lawson, a tough Broadway veteran, who leaves no survivors; Hayward's badly staged musical number pits her against an out-of-control mobile, and her wig-pulling duel with Duke is justifiably famous for campy hilarity. Duke overplays the bitchiness throughout, and her final scene is a histrionic masterpiece of bad acting. The flashbacks of Duke in a sanitarium will have viewers rolling, especially when her toe cuts through a sheet. Only Lee Grant retains her dignity and under-plays a small, thankless role. Meanwhile, Sharon Tate is lovely, but wooden, and Barbara Parkins and Paul Burke do little with what little they are given by the script.The film's budget was obviously generous, and the now-dated 1960's fashions, make-up, and hair styles could be studied and copied for period films set in that decade. Also dated and offensive are repeated references to gays as queers, fags, and faggots; but, in fairness, the all-white cast lacks other minorities to denigrate. Except for the title song sung by Dionne Warwick, the tunes are instantly forgettable, although a duet between recovering addict Duke and wheel-chair bound Tony Scotti is like something out of "Airplane." The dialogue is either intentionally or unintentionally funny at times, and the use of "dolls" to refer to pills sounds forced. Although Robson likely entertained fantasies of producing another soap opera masterpiece on the order of "Peyton Place" or "Imitation of Life," he instead left a camp classic that is a guilty pleasure for many.
Rather than it actually being representational of what 1967 was, to me anyway. I think 67 was a big year for The Beatles & The Rolling Stones-the space race was very in the news as was The Vietnam war. None of those things makes the slightest appearance in this film and thats why I think it is representational of someones wishes about what was 1967-or 1966 for that matter since Valley of the Dolls was first published in 1966.It was an important book because it was-I am told-the first time a woman had even published a large novel (442 pages long) in the USA. Sounds kinda odd since women had been writing books for quite some time-the Bronte sisters wrote Wuthering Heights & Mary Shelly wrote Frankenstein when she was 19, well before 1966. Go figure. The only thing that seems to be representational of 1967 in this film is the repeated references to popping pills. The soundtrack was done by Dionne Warwick and is not bad in stark contrast to the genuinely skin crawling numbers done by the cast members but not by actress Sharon Tate who is good in this film, as a daughter who sends money home to her mother but who ultimately kills herself when she is diagnosed with cancer. Sharon Tate was the best part of this otherwise silly movie.
I didn't really know what to expect from this movie because I had not read the book. It started off a bit slow but I found myself getting hooked into the characters lives. Annie was lovely and the actress that played her was really gorgeous. I was glad the end turned out like that for Annie because he did not deserve her. Susan Hayward was a delight as the aging stage star. Neely made me angry but then I felt sorry for her in the end, Patty played the nasty drug addicted star really well. Then there was the beautiful Sharon Tate, I found myself tearing up at Jennifer's fate but I think I was crying for Sharon too. I really enjoyed the film and would definitely watch it again. It was a good melodrama.