Darling
|
List Price: Our Price: $6.82 You Save: $8.16 (54%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $5.04 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of Darling
Movie Review: Cutting out the charm and character...
Summary: 2 Stars
This MGM Home Video version of Darling (#1005693) is not a full version of the film. It was enjoyable but rings of media puritanism. A number of defining scenes, albe-them mildly risque, are missing. This is cultural and historical bleaching. We must discourage companies from ruining films. Do not buy it. I am now out the money and looking for the full version on DVD.Movie Review: "It was so boring, that I could scream!"
Summary: 1 Stars
This line, spoken by Julie Christie to Dirk Bogarde in "Darling" just about sums up my feelings towards this movie. Although I am halfway done with this movie I think this is one of the most boring films I have ever seen and I am stopping this movie when it gets to the scene where Christie looks at herself in the mirror as she removes her clothing. I am done with this movie (believe it or not) and it only got worse: Christie's character Diana Scott marries an Italian man who hello, is old enough to be father! And oh yes, he's an aging prince (in what had to be a ripoff of what happened to Grace Kelly and what would happen to Jacqueline Kennedy and the announcer in the newsreel that calls her "Princess Diana" almost made me laugh). That nearly made me grab a gun and shoot my TV (a la Elvis Presley) considering that this is the same setup that occurs in "Georgy Girl" and that is spoiled British girl living in Swinging England marries older man (Three words: Anna Nicole Smith). Also, I would like to know what are these reviewers smoking in saying that Christie deserved the Oscar for Best Actress? She didn't at all because it should (and I mean SHOULD) of gone to Julie Andrews for "The Sound of Music" (my pick for the best movie of the 1960's) because not only did she overtake her performance of "Mary Poppins," for which she won the Oscar, she pulverized every performance by a female that year including Christie. And there's a problem with the Academy: They can't seem to pull the trigger in giving back-to-back Oscars to the same person.
I'm not alone in this arugment: In Danny Perry's book "Alternate Oscars" he picks Andrews for Best Actress of 1965 and states that the reason why the AMPAS gave the Oscar to Christie was not because it was 'The British Invasion,' but they saw it as a way to give an Oscar to Christie's other film "Doctor Zhivago" which was T.S.O.M.'s rival and added to the fact that "Zhivago" had no acting nominations. There's another Oscar problem: They don't know when to be hip.
Also, does it seem like Dirk Bogarde and Lawrence Harvey were the two worst actors in film history? Because it seems to me that every movie that I have seen with them are bad; weather it was this movie, or "The Manchurian Candidate" with Harvey, or "Modesty Blaise" with Bogarde.
In conclusion, I think some moviegoers should change their mind about buying this movie because this has to be the worst performance ever to win an Oscar. Or as what Bogarde said to Christie: (a fitting way to close this review since that I end where it begins) "I don't take taxis that are filled with whores!"