Cubussoli Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

BootDigest Such a frustrating disappointment

VividSimon Simply Perfect

Console best movie i've ever seen.

JohnHowardReid Copyright 15 December 1967 by Red Lion Productions. Released through 20th Century-Fox Film Corp. New York opening simultaneously at the Criterion and the Festival: 15 December 1967. U.S. release: 15 December 1967. U.K. release: 11 February 1968. Australian release: 1 August 1968. Sydney opening at the Plaza. 11,086 feet. 123 minutes. Censored by approximately 90 seconds in Australia.SYNOPSIS: Filled with innocent enthusiasm, Anne Welles arrives in New York from New England and lands a secretarial job with a leading theatrical law firm. On her first day, she is present at a Broadway rehearsal when a hard-boiled musical comedy star, Helen Lawson, sacks a talented newcomer named Neely O'Hara because she threatens to steal the show from her. Although disillusioned, Anne stays with her job because of Lyon Burke, an associate in the law firm. Lyon gets Neely a spot on a TV show which catapults her to instant stardom in Hollywood. NOTES: Location scenes filmed in New York and New England. On 21 July 1967, shortly after shooting on "Valley of the Dolls" was completed, producer David Weisbart, 52, died of a stroke he suffered while playing golf with Mark Robson, the film's director.The role of Helen Lawson was originally slated for Judy Garland. After 20th Century-Fox claimed that she "withdrew for personal reasons" (a statement denied by Miss Garland), both Bette Davis and Tammy Grimes were announced as her replacement. When Susan Hayward was ultimately signed for the part, arrangements were made for Margaret Whiting to do the dubbing for Miss Hayward's one song number.With gross rentals of $20 million, this movie was equal 4th at U.S./Canadian ticket-windows for 1968. On the other hand, the movie did not figure on either British or Australian top-success lists at all!COMMENT: The womenfolk may dote on this slickly-produced parade of souped-up emotions and super-charged clichés. For us men, however, it's a somewhat disappointing affair. We see almost nothing of Hollywood at work. The book was a sensational best-seller because it reputedly lifted the lid off the private lives of some well-known stars. But all this has been deleted in the film. There is some resemblance between the Patty Duke character and Judy Garland, between Barbara Parkins and Suzy Parker, while Sharon Tate's Jennifer North seems to have originally been a combination of Marilyn Monroe and Anita Ekberg.Alas, even these superficial resemblances in the original novel scarcely exist any more in the film version. All we are left with is a soap-opera plot straight out of a daytime television serial. True, the direction is slick, and the acting very capable (with the one exception of Miss Parkins, who is unable to surmount some very unattractive hair styles).Other assets include lavish production values (though Daniels' color photography, as usual, looks washed-out); exciting special effects incorporating a slice of a French "art" film and an incredibly tasteless TV commercial — evidently intended as a satire, it was taken perfectly straight by the predominantly female audience at the session I attended, — and a few excellent montages of the New England countryside (accompanied by the pleasant singing of Dionne Warwick).

Wuchak Released in 1967 and based on Jacqueline Susann's novel, "Valley of the Dolls" is a soap opera about the negative side of showbiz in the mid-60s. Barbara Parkins stars as the ingénue from small town New England who moves to New York City and swiftly lands a job as a secretary at theatrical agency that represents an arrogant, aging performer (Susan Hayward). Paul Burke plays the suave agency son who takes interest in her while Patty Duke appears as a feisty, talented upstart, the rival of Hayward's character. Sharon Tate plays a statuesque beauty with limited acting aptitude while the sharp Lee Grant and stud-ly Tony Scotti play a sister/brother team. The three main protagonists eventually resort to prescription drugs to relieve their stress, particularly the barbiturates Seconal & Nembutal and various stimulants, which are the eponymous "dolls." The first 25 minutes are great, showcasing wintery New England landscapes and several curvy beauties in the Broadway scene. You can't beat the authentic mid-60's ambiance reflected in everything and everyone. From there, however, the movie settles into a salacious cautionary tale that relies on sentimental twaddle and hints of steamy sex to compensate for a relatively un-compelling story. Fans of soap operas will no doubt enjoy it more than I did.People criticize the movie on the grounds that it's "campy," but this is inaccurate. "Valley" is a totally serious (melo)drama with the occasional overacted histrionics, but it's not campy. If you want camp, see the non-sequel "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls" (1970), which is a satire scripted by none other than Roger Ebert.In an interview Patty Duke said that director Mark Robson treated the female actors like unintelligent bimbos, particularly Sharon Tate. Interestingly, Judy Garland was originally slated to play the roll played by Hayward, but Robson fired Garland for ironically turning up drunk. Duke also said she and her pals would occasionally order pizza and have a "Valley of the Dolls" night where they'd make fun of the movie. Sadly, Sharon Tate would be dead less than two years after the film's release, murdered by the Manson wackos in Los Angeles on August 9, 1969. The movie drives home its message well: Beauty is fleeting, money does not bring true happiness, drugs & drink are a dead end and showbiz fame can be a bitter pill; but one CAN escape if one chooses. I also like how the movie switches from New York City to California at the midway point, which keeps things fresh. Lastly, the entertaining bathroom catfight between Hayward and Duke is worth the price of admission.The film runs 123 minutes and was shot in Redding Center & New Haven, Connecticut; Manhattan & Katonah, New York; and Santa Monica, Malibu & Los Angeles, California.GRADE: B-

dglink 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.

gixmonster Don't watch this movie expecting it to be anything like the book. I decided to watch this movie because I had just finished reading the book - so disappointing!It's obvious right from the beginning that the creators of the movie had no intention of staying true to the book (and not just because they had to condense the story for time). I think one of the only things they kept accurate from the book were the characters' names. Some of the events in the middle were similar, but apart from those, from beginning to end most of the characters and their sentiments, looks, and story-lines were so completely different - it was awful.