Rosemary's Baby (1968)

Okay, before I start the review, I want to make a disclaimer: I do not support the actions of the director of this movie. Although I deeply praise the film for its artistic direction and impact on cinema, I do not, I repeat, DO NOT support the actions of director Roman Polanski and his crime back in 1977. If you want to look it up, just Google it. Without further ado, here's the review of the all-time horror classic Rosemary's Baby. 

Just in time for Halloween, I've decided to check out Rosemary's Baby. It's been 56 years and this movie still holds up, primarily because of its cultural themes surrounding Women's Liberation, Religion, Women's Health rights, and the occult. It was during the early to mid-sixties when the first-wave feminist movement was starting to take heed. The women in this era were straying far away from the confines of the conservative 1950s. No longer did they play the role of the housewife/homemaker, tending to the kids while the husband came home for a five-course meal. These women had agency and a lot more to give to society than just staying in the kitchen and being subservient. 

Author Ira Levin took wind of this and incorporated these themes in his 1967 novel, Rosemary's Baby, and another classic gem, The Stepford Wives. Regarding Rosemary's Baby, the film is mostly faithful to the novel, beat for beat. But the novel gives more development to Rosemary's backstory. For starters, Rosemary comes from a large family in a small town in Omaha with a catholic upbringing. It's implied that she doesn't get along with most of her family members and has recently become agnostic due to the strict rules of her religion. When one of her siblings gives her enough money to get out of dodge, Rosemary moves to New York City. In this case, Rosemary is in the same league as Anne from Valley of the Dolls. A small-town girl who wants to break out of the traditions of said small town and goes on a journey of self-discovery in New York City. I also get the feeling that Rosemary is an artsy type as there is mention of her going to a sculpting class and gaining an interest in interior design. Now the most important part of the novel is, of course, the ending. We get into Rosemary's thoughts and her contemplating on whether she should kill herself and the baby or raise it as her own. But given her motherly instincts, Rosemary chooses the latter, seeing how frightened the baby looked despite his demonic appearance. However, there is one part of the ending that stands out for me: I like how Rosemary stands up to cult leader Roman Castevet (Steven Marcato is his real name, more on that later) and says that she chooses the name Andrew for the baby while Roman wants to name the baby after his father, Adrian. Rosemary wins by a long shot and she has the say so on how to raise her son. Although it's basically a downer ending, It's good that Rosemary gains a backbone and there might be hope for Andrew to become a decent person. 

Now, let's focus on the film:

Most of the focus is centered around Rosemary and Guy's relationship. It was actually the main topic in my film writing class. At the start of the film, they're sort of in their honeymoon phase. Young, fresh, bright-eyed, and hopeful, Rosemary and Guy set their sights on building a home and eventually building a family. You can see why Rosemary is drawn to Guy. He's naturally charismatic, an actor (which makes him an artsy type just like Rosemary), and promises her a life much greater than her own. There are hints of how self-absorbed Guy is but it's not too bad. But once we get to the second act, that's where things get a little fucked up. 

It all starts with a chocolate mousse made by their next-door neighbor Minnie. Rosemary finds it delicious at first but then there's a chalky undertaste, indicating that the mousse might be drugged. Rosemary follows her instincts and discards it right away but Guy is the one who insists and eventually guilt trips into finishing the mousse. Rightfully, Rosemary dumps some of the mousse into the napkin and pretends to eat it. However, the aftereffects have already kicked in and Rosemary passes out into a deep psychosis while Guy undresses her for some reason.

Things start to become sinister when, just as Rosemary breaks out of her psychosis, she sees the eyes of the devil himself, realizing that this is definitely not a dream, this is really happening! This is downright one of the scariest, most disturbing scenes, not only because Rosemary is literally getting raped by the devil, but because of how she's surrounded by these weird, naked people chanting and watching the act. It's some sick shit, even back in the day.

The next morning, Rosemary tries to recollect what happened the other night. Guy admits that he had his way with her while she was unconscious because he didn't want to miss "baby night. This is the moment that ends their honeymoon phase. What's so fucked up about this is how nonchalant Guy is about the situation while Rosemary is deeply disturbed. The topic of marital rape was uncommon, but looking at it in a modern lens, what Guy did was a total violation. Just because you're married to someone doesn't give you the right to own her/his body. This is moreso apparent in the novel as Rosemary justifiably keeps her distance away from Guy by staying at Hutch's cabin. But in the film, although, Rosemary is left shaken, she never contemplates going away to her ease mind though, it would've been appreciated. So this was a huge red flag and showcases how much of a narcasist Guy really is. 

But once the news comes of Rosemary's pregnancy, she and Guy reconcile, however, Rosemary reminds Guy that they should be open with one another. Whether Guy reciprocates this is debatable.

To distract herself from the labor pains, Rosemary gets her a haircut. Guy, of course, is not a fan of it and even says that "it's one of the worst decisions she ever made." It's ironic he says that because it's actually one of the most fashionable hairstyles of the 1960s. Even Tyra Banks famously wanted one of her models to sport the hairstyle in her reality show America's Next Top Model. So that is another red flag for Guy. He obviously sees Rosemary a particular way and believes that longer hair on a woman adds to her feminity. I guess Guy is uncomfortable that Rosemary is adapting so easily to the city life, therefore straying from the naive small-town girl she used to be. 

Guy's gaslighting is on a roll this time even going so far as throwing away a book gifted by her deceased friend, Hutch. This incident is what triggers Rosemary's paranoia, causing an immense mistrust in Guy. 

Well into the third act, she uncovers Guy's conspiracy towards her and his allegiance to the cult. Rosemary was once charmed by Guy's inherited self-absorption, becoming his personal cheerleader and being the dutiful housewife.   

But she finds herself disgusted, knowing now that she and her baby are used as a vessel for his success. 

Guy has shown himself to be a textbook narcist, charming his way to his own gain. To me, it is sort of like if you picture this young Hollywood couple, working their way up to the A-list but the girl has to do certain favors for a Hollywood Producer for the guy to get a role in a major film. But the producer in question is the Devil himself. I can't think of another actor like John Cassavetes who could play a detestable character like Guy and make him likable. There had been other candidates such as Robert Redford and even Jack Nicholson would've been an ideal choice, but Polanski felt that Cassavetes was the right choice, even though Cassavetes was reluctant to take on such a role. But in hindsight, his reluctance is what makes Guy a more interesting character. Although Guy lures his wife to be a vessel for the antichrist, you can tell he's not comfortable with it. And that's the thing, Cassavetes doesn't play him off like an outright jackass, he's very subtle with it, which the role requires. Not to mention, he and Mia Farrow actually have good chemistry, which makes his betrayal more devastating. 

Although the relationship between Rosemary and Guy is the centerpiece of the film, Guy is not actually the antagonist. That honor goes to Minnie and Roman Castevet. Their introduction starts with a tragedy. 

Before Rosemary's arrival, The Castevets takes in a troubled young girl named Terry, who recently kicked a drug habit. While doing the laundry, Rosemary meets up with her and the two become fast friends. 

But it's not until Terry's sudden suicide that Rosemary and Guy meet Minnie and Roman Castevets, weaving them tightly around their web. At first, both Rosemary and Guy object to their invitations, seeing them as just another silly old couple. But once Roman starts stroking Guy's ego, it all goes down here from there. 

Looking into it, Roman/Steven is technically the main antagonist since it's revealed that he is the son of a notorious Satan-worshiper, Adrian Marcato, but he's not the one who drives the story. This leads us to...

Minnie Castevet, played by the amazingly talented Ruth Gordon. What makes the character engaging is that she comes off as a warm and fuzzy grandma who brings cookies and milk and tells stories by the fireplace. Gordon portrays her as a real person and you would never think that she would be a leader of a satanic cult. What I like about the Castevets is that they're dressed in these colorful pastels and not the usual black attire that's usually associated with Satan worshipers. Not only does it fool Rosemary, but it also fools the viewers regarding their perception of them. 

What sets Minnie apart from Roman is that she is a master of persuasion. While Roman impresses Guy with stories of meeting with legendary theater moguls, Minnie, on the other hand, tries to have a genuine connection with Rosemary. Therefore, once the news comes of Rosemary's pregnancy, Minnie suggests that she see Dr. Sarpenstien to do further tests on her. Then Minnie starts making these weird milkshakes for Rosemary to consume and even gives her the necklace she gave to the recently deceased Terry, which freaks Rosemary out. 

Throughout the rest of the film, Minnie constantly smothers and meddles in Rosemary's life, even if she doesn't appear much on screen. This begs the question: What was it really like for Terry to live with her, let alone put up with her. But beside the point, Ruth Gordon did an excellent job of humanizing the character instead of just making her an outright villain. Gordon was actually nominated for an Oscar for this performance and deservingly so. She has natural charisma and such an enchanting presence that makes her all the more captivating. 

The most unsettling aspect of the film is how the majority of the cult consists of nice, gentle elderly people who always know what's best and makes decisions for you before you can even make your own. Particularly when Minnie suggests Dr. Sapirstien.

Dr. Sapirstien represents the medical industry and how women were treated. There's just something about him that seems off. Cold, Clinical, and never by the book, Dr. Sapirstien is one shady character. 

Just when Rosemary starts to have complications from her pregnancy, Dr. Sapirstien just waves her off and never listens to her, which causes Rosemary to be in immense pain for quite some time. She feels that she needs a second opinion but Guy and the cult members keep saying how awesome Dr. Sapirstien is and how he's the most popular doctor in New York, again waving off Rosemary's pain, even if she looks like she withering away. 

Fed up with the constant gaslighting, Rosemary invites her much younger friends to have a bit of a bonding session. When Rosemary confides in them about her situation, the girls are full of her support. I like how the women take the time to actually listen to Rosemary and console her when she breaks down. It's one of the few heartwarming moments of the film and for once, Rosemary finally has friends she can trust. They suggest that Rosemary goes back to her original obstetrician, Dr. Hill. When Guy gets wind of this, he and Rosemary get into a heated argument. I really wanted to wring Guy's neck in this scene because all Rosemary wants to do is get a second opinion from another doctor. But when Rosemary finally stands up for herself, the pain suddenly stops. 

Although Rosemary is relieved from her pain, she still has her suspicions about The Castevets. She soon receives a mysterious book from her good friend Hutch, a novelist and historian who recently died. When she discovers that Roman is in fact the son of a notorious Satan worshiper Adrian Macarto and that the rest of the apartment residents, along with Guy, might be conspiring against her, Rosemary takes action and goes to Dr. Hill for help. 

This leads to one of the most frustrating and heartbreaking scenes in the film. So, Rosemary tells Dr. Hill everything, she even shows him the book Hutch gave to her. And for a second there, he actually believes her and takes what she says into consideration. There is hope after all....until Guy and Dr. Sapirstien show up in his office. Dr. Hill betrays her and it's devastating. However, I wouldn't think that Dr. Hill is one of the cult members, that's up to speculation, but he more or so sees Rosemary as just another hysterical woman because that's just how it was back then. However, it was frustrating that he would lead Rosemary on the way he did, which makes him just as despicable as Dr. Sapirstien. 

So Rosemary is trapped, not knowing which way to go. The scene in the taxi demonstrates Rosemary's fear and uncertainty while placed in the middle of her two oppressors.

 

Try as she might, Rosemary is unable to escape from her perpetrators, therefore, falling into their web of power.

This leads to the film's climax and it's one of the best, if not, terrifying moments on screen. There is no demon or big hairy monster, but just the sheer terror Rosemary displays when she sees her child for the first time. Mia Farrow's acting here is purely phenomenal. You can feel the agony and fear in her eyes. But it's also the build-up of the scene, the anticipation that sets it ablaze. It's in this scene where Mia shows her acting prowess, from shock and terror to sadness and contentment, it's hard to believe that this was her first leading role in a major motion picture. So when it comes to the ending, Rosemary does have power over these weak-minded people, and in her hearts of hearts, there is hope for baby Andrew. It's all registered in Mia Farrow's face.

Polanski originally envisioned Rosemary to be a robust, full-figured, girl-next-door type and there were many actresses considered before the casting of Farrow. These include:

Tuesday Weld

Jane Fonda

Goldie Hawn

Patty Duke (who ironically co-starred with Polanski's wife Sharon Tate in Valley of the Dolls)

And of course, Roman Polanski's own wife, Sharon Tate.

When Mia Farrow was eventually cast, she was the star of the prime-time soap opera Peyton Place, which co-starred Barbara Parkins who also starred in Valley of the Dolls, which also Roman Polanski's wife Sharon Tate, which was also directed by Mark Robson, who also directed the film version of Peyton Place. Man! The Peyton Place connections are wild! 

Although Farrow was booked and ready, her casting process wasn't exactly easy. She was married to Frank Sinatra at the time, who objected to the idea of Farrow being the lead of her first film. I guess this was a case of art imitating life on Mia Farrow's part. However, she stood her ground and proceeded with the film, and the rest is history.

This was a role of a lifetime and I'm surprised Farrow wasn't nominated for an Oscar. It's hard to picture any of the actresses mentioned to take on such a role and make it believable as Farrow did. Not only is she very captivating on screen, she displays all the attributes of her character. She's vulnerable, eager, humble, and most of all, human. Mia Farrow is what makes Rosemary so enaging and she carries the film on her shoulders.

It's just the way she emotes that gets it for me, and that comes to fruition in the final moments of the film. That is definitely her Oscar moment, not in terms of being a scream queen but a dramatic actress as well. Mia Farrow is, by far, the best thing about this film, and since then, she has become a legendary actress in her own right.

Now when it comes to the writing and the directing, there's nothing to be said because it's already been said. It's incredibly masterful! Now I know there's a saying that terrible people make great art, which is the case here. Roman Polanski captured the feel and tone of the book brilliantly, which focuses on the psychosis of Rosemary and her struggles of adjusting to the city and its inhabitants, being a supportive wife, and eventually an expectant mom, which goes beyond the supernatural circumstances.

Rosemary's Baby is a textbook example of a great horror film.

1. It relies on anticiaption, tension and suspense. Rosemary's Baby is one of the films that doesn't focus on practical effects or gore to make it scary. It's all about the paranoia, the sense of dread that trickles throughout the film.

2. It has a character you care about. I feel like the most scariest of horror films is when they have characters you feel scared for. And Rosemary is one of the those characters. This was at a time where women didn't have much agency and that's a very scary situation to be in. Rosemary feels trapped, with no way out and that's what makes the film suspensful. Not only is it horrifying but it's also heartbreaking. 

3. It has an engaging plot with perfect execution. What sets Rosemary's Baby apart from other films at the time is that it has a "real world" setting with characters who act like real people. Sure, a story about a woman who carries a demonic child might sound ludicrous on paper but the outcome is magnificent. It's a very visceral and visual film that focuses on anticipation as the plot thickens. And the beauty of it is that you never see what the baby looks like and with horror movies like these, your imagination is what makes it scary. 

Let me not forget the haunting film score by Krzysztof Komeda called Sleep Safe and Warm, which sets the tone of the film. It's a sweet, soft lullaby sung by a mother to her baby but it also brings a chill down your spine. It's creepy yet beautiful at the same time.

Since the release of Rosemary's Baby, unbeknownst to me, there has been a made-for-tv sequel, a novel sequel, a remake, and most recently a prequel. So let's get into it:

There's the 1976 made-for-tv sequel titled Look What's Happened to Rosemary's Baby which starred Patty Duke, who was once considered for the role of Rosemary in the original, but now plays her here. I haven't heard good things about it but I did see that Ruth Gordon reprises her role as Minnie Castevet. However, I'm not too keen on checking it out. The title alone gives off a cheesy low-budget vibe that doesn't sit right well with me. 

Then there was a sequel to the novel titled, Son of Rosemary, released in 1997. Its plot is very much similar to Look What's Happened to Rosemary's Baby but kind of different. It starts with Rosemary waking up in a coma in 1999 after an escape attempt with Andrew when he was seven years old. Apparently, the cult members put a spell on Rosemary, rendering her into a coma that lasted for two decades. A little far-fetched but whatever. So Andrew is now thirty-three years old and is the charismatic leader of an international charitable organization. Eventually, mother and son reunite while on the run from the cult members who want to bring forth the apocalypse during The Turn of the Millenium. I haven't heard good things about this book and from what I read, it's pretty nonscensical. But the most baffling thing about the novel is its ending. It turns out that it was all a DREAM and Rosemary finds herself back in 1965 where the original story started. Holy crap, Ira Levin really lost his touch with this one. Nope, I will not be reading this anytime soon.

In 2014, NBC produced a miniseries starring Zoe Saldana as the titular Rosemary. I've watched at least 30 minutes of this and, I have to be honest, I wasn't impressed. There's something about it that seemed stale, predictable, and quite boring. First of all, they changed the setting from New York to Paris. That's interesting enough I guess, but nothing about the setting impressed me as much as the setting in New York. This time Guy is an English professor and aspiring writer. Not as exciting as a working actor but okay. And from what we know about Rosemary, she is a former dancer. Then there's the execution of the plot, which is changed entirely. Okay, so here's how Rosemary meets The Castevets: A hoodlum steals Rosemary's purse and when she catches him, she just so happens to find Margaux's (who is the Minnie equivalent) I.D. in her purse. Coincidence? I think not. Anywho, Rosemary arrives in this big, fancy, smacy mansion and that's where we meet Margaux, who right off the bat, invites her to a party. From what I can tell, the script is kind of rushed. I feel like the inciting incident in the original film was more organic whereas, in this version, it felt too forced. So, Rosemary and Guy arrive at the party and we're introduced to Margaux (Minnie) and her husband, Roman. In this version, The Castevets are this sauve, sophisticated, middle-aged rich couple. Again, this just doesn't work for me. What I liked about the original was how unassuming The Castevets were. They came off like this sweet, gentle elderly couple and in no way you would suspect that they would be part of some Satanic cult. But in the 2014 version, it's WAY too obvious and, for me, they come off like James Bond villains more than anything. Speaking of the party, it's not like your usual get-together with small festivities like in the '68 version, oh no, it's an ELITE party. There might even be a freak-off during the afterparty, who knows. And Speaking of freak-offs, Rosemary sees a man (who might be the devil in human form) in the middle of a threesome. This catches Rosemary in a trance and she gets slightly aroused but Guy catches her just in time. I guess this is supposed to be a foreshadowing of what's to come but again, this. just. doesn't. work. for. me. After that, The Castevets use their charm over Rosemary and Guy, and...you know what happens. I just sort of stopped watching because I was so unimpressed. Come to find out, not only was this an adaptation of the first book but also Son of Rosemary? If the plot alone turned me off from reading the book, what makes you think that this might be a good adaptation? So yeah, I might check this out but not right now, I just wasn't invested enough, and again, it was very, very boring. 

Lastly, we have the prequel film, Apartment 7A, starring Dianne West as Minnie Castevet, Kevin McNally as Roman Castevet, and introducing lead actress Julie Garner in the role of the unlucky Terry Gionoffrio. I don't know about this one. Some part of me feel that it's a bit unnecessary to expand on the character of Terry Gionoffrio. The mystery surrounding her character is what made the original palpable and it's the imagination that hooks you in. Just what happened between her and The Castevets that made her want to commit suicide? But nowadays we're plagued with these prequel and remakes that wants to explain EVERYTHING about the original when it really doesn't need explaining. Maybe I'll check this one out but it's not gonna be anytime soon. 

Rosemary's Baby works best as a stand-alone story. I can see why Hollywood would want to expand on the Rosemary mythos because it's a classic story that still holds up today. It's one of those movies that was ahead of its time and wasn't afraid to just go there. It's terrifying, frustrating, haunting, beautiful, and bittersweet.

Rosemary's Baby will forever be held as the crowning jewel of classic horror.

My Last Word: Yes! Go watch it right now!

 

Valley Of The Dolls (1967), (1981)

 

For the first time ever, I have watched Valley of the Dolls in its entirety, and...it was an experience. Just like Mommie Dearest, it has very serious subject matter about how women were and still are treated in Hollywood, Drug addiction, Mental Illness, and Suicide but the final result of the film comes off like an unintentional comedy. But first, let's talk about the book that started it all:

I have a confession: I thought the Valley of the Dolls novel was a decent read. Now I'm not saying it was some literary masterpiece or the greatest written book of all time, it was just fairly decent. My favorite aspect of the novel is how the entertainment industry changes over 20 years and how the three main protagonists cope with those changes. I like how detailed the book is regarding the trends of Old Hollywood. From the movie musical of the 1940s, The dawning age of Television of the 1950s, The eventful fall of Old Hollywood, and the rise of New Hollywood of the 1960s. Jacqueline Susann was quite the expert since she was part of the Hollywood game but never achieved the same success as her peers. She based the three main protagonists on real-life starlets that she knew such as Neely O' Hara who is a stand-in for Judy Garland and possibly Barbara Streisand, Jennifer North who is a stand-in for Carol Landis and possibly Marylin Monroe, and Anne Welles who is stand-in in for Jacqueline herself and possibly Grace Kelly. You see the dolls in the title is a code name for pills (the uppers and downers kind). This was a common thing for young starlets to get hooked on because of the amount of pressure the studio would put on them. It is in fact the studios that would prescribe these special pills to keep them floating. One notorious example is how the head of MGM got Judy Garland hooked on weight loss and speed pills on the set of The Wizard of Oz when she was a mere sixteen. So yeah, Jacqueline Susann does not hold back on what goes on behind the scenes of Hollywood, which is all too relevant today. Another controversial element of the novel is homosexuality. This is rather tame by today's standards but since the novel came out in the 1960s, this was quite a scandalous topic, even though, homosexuality was basically an open secret in Hollywood. Even Jacqueline Susann had a love affair with Carol Landis. Speaking of, Carol Landis is a real-life tragic heroine who oddly shares similarities to Marylin Monroe, both sharing the same, complicated quest for love and acceptance, despite being the most memorable Hollywood bombshells of their time. Sadly, just like her character Jennifer, Landis commits suicide after suffering from yet another short-lived love affair. So, Jacqueline wrote this in her memory to solidify her as the kind, caring person she was and not what she was known to be. Finally, we have our central protagonist Anne Welles who shares a few similarities to Jacqueline Susann. As described in the novel, she does have a natural elegance and humility much like Grace Kelly but not too glamorous, which is why she was chosen as a spokesmodel for Gillian. Susann herself was a cosmetic spokesmodel once her acting career died down and that's where the similarities end. 

But just like Mildred Pierce, the novel also has a rather, downbeat depressing ending: So Anne has been hopelessly devoted to a man named Lyon Burke. After all, she did lose her virginity to him. At first glance, you can see why Anne would fall for Lyon Burke. He comes off as a chivalrous, charismatic Englishman but the thing is, he's a notorious ladies' man, so much so that even Anne's co-workers warn her. Before Lyon, there was another suitor named Allen (sir does not appear in the film), a mild-mannered salesman who turns out to be a millionaire. Allen even goes so far as to propose to her though Anne is less than interested, fixing her eyes on Lyon. Anne and Lyon finally do get together once Anne breaks off the engagement with Allen. Everything seems swell until Anne's mother dies. Now, in the novel, Anne loved her mother but never really liked her....it's complicated. So, Anne's emotions are a bit numb at the moment, and on top of that, Lyon has dreams of becoming a novelist. He asked Anne if they could settle down in Lawrenceville while working on his upcoming novel. Anne openly despises her hometown and refuses to go back. This, however, causes Lyon to retreat and write a freakin' Dear John to Anne, announcing their breakup where he would reside in London. This should be a warning sign right here and there because when things don't go Lyon's way, he leaves you in the dust. So a couple months pass by, and Anne is still working as a secretary for Entertainment Lawyer Henry Bellamy when an old acquaintance of Henry's appears. Kevin Gilmore, founder of the popular cosmetics brand Gillian, gives Anne an offer she just couldn't refuse: Becoming the spokesmodel for Gillian. Kevin starts to have feelings for Anne and after some time, they begin a loving but passionless relationship. For a few years, Anne had been waiting for Kevin to marry her but since he was already a married man in his early to mid-fifties, he kept brushing it off. Then as fate would have it, Lyon comes back into her life. With a few unsuccessful books under his belt, Lyon works as an entertainment journalist crossing paths with Anne while she does her infomercial special. Spark flies and before you know it, Anne and Lyon begin an affair. Kevin eventually confronts Anne, thus ending their long-term relationship. So Anne and Lyon get married but not without a little scheming on Anne's part. She works with Henry to set up a loan from him to Lyon that was secretly sent from her for Lyon to give up his mediocre writing career to marry her. Talk about some heavy stuff. So Lyon is the new owner of the agency and seems to cross paths with Neely, whose career has gone down in the dumps and isn't in the best shape. When Neely's career is on the upswing, with the help of Lyon, Anne starts to become suspicious about Lyon and Neely's working relationship, insinuating that the two must be having an affair. It turns out that Anne's suspicions were right.

Not only that, Neely is the one who reveals to Lyon about Anne's secret loan which he confronts her about. He claims he feels emasculated by what Anne did. To punish her, he carelessly flaunts his affair with Neely, living a double life. What adds more salt to Anne's wound is that Neely is a close friend. Lyon could've chosen anybody in the world but Neely? How fucked up could he be? This causes Anne to go into a spiral of addiction, trying out the dolls (pills) everyone's so crazy about. Not to mention, this all happens when Anne gives birth to her daughter, Jennifer. Lyon eventually ends the affair with Neely but this doesn't stop him from seeing other women, his most recent one is a girl that old enough to be his daughter. However, Anne numbs the pain by the dawn of New Year's Eve with a bottle of her precious, precious dolls. Holy shit...this ending pissed me off so much. Lyon is a grade-A narcissistic asshole and I can't help but feel bad for Anne, who clearly made a mistake by settling down with him. Yes, she has the money. Yes, she has a husband. And yes, she has a child. But at what cost? Since this was around the 1960s, this was a sort of thing women were facing with. Yes, really messed up but those are the facts. 

It was a year later when film executives were clamoring for a film adaptation. As you may know, this was a challenging process. The first of many issues was the conflicting visions between producer Darryl F. Zanuck and his son Richard. Darryl wanted a cool, stylish 1950s melodrama while Richard wanted something more hip and contemporary. This was the battle between Old and Young Hollywood, which most likely caused the production of the Frankenstein mess, Valley of the Dolls. However, the major cause of the issues surrounding this film is director Mark Robson. The thing about Mark Robson is that he has an "old school" way of directing and would give all three of the actresses a tough time. You see, Mark Robson would have this stopwatch, and every time he films a scene, he stops it by pressing the pocket watch. It was a very annoying thing that would irritate the cast and crew and although Robson was a lauded director of his time, he was challenging to work with. 

Okay so talk about the cast and characters:

I just want to say that all three of the actresses have a star quality about them but first and foremost, I want to focus on the ultimate scene stealer. The one, the only...

Patty Duke as Neely O'Hara. In a strange twist, the filmmakers actually considered Barbra Streisand in the world but thankfully, she decided to go for Funny Girl, for which she won an Oscar. However, nobody does it like Patty Duke. It's a performance for the ages, though it does come from experience. Patty Duke was institutionalized when she accepted the role of Neely. And just like Judy Garland, Duke experienced a pretty rough childhood while growing up in the spotlight and winning an Oscar at age 16. She eventually became a teen sensation starring in her very own sitcom, The Patty Duke Show. After the show's cancellation, Duke wanted to break into more mature roles and Valley of the Dolls was just it. Although this seemed like a meaty role for her, Patty had no idea how the movie would eventually turn out, so she had to do the best she could and to me, I think she did an okay job. Sure, she was over-the-top in some scenes but I didn't think it was that bad. Besides, I want to get into the depth of the Neely O'Hara character and how she was portrayed in both mediums. In the novel, Neely is a bright, ambitious young girl of 17 who's part of a sibling Vaudeville troupe and gets a small part in a popular Broadway musical called Hit The Sky. However, the lead star, Helen Lawson, gets Neely and her vaudeville troupe out of the show for Helen to get more screen time. But with a bit of push and pull from Lyon Burke, Neely can secure her role and becomes a sensation much to Helen's dismay. Until then, Neely marries an agent named Mel, moves to California, and becomes a star of movie musicals. At this point, Neely becomes increasingly unsympathetic. She begins cheating on her husband with her costume designer, is heavily reliant on drugs (which are called "dolls" in the book), and is an overall entitled, egocentric diva. It's not to say that book Neely has her sympathetic moments when she marries her costume designer Ted Casablanca and becomes a young mom at age 22 all the while Ted is having affairs with both men and women without a care in the world. Therefore, the bright-eyed young girl at the start of the novel becomes a jaded sellout at just 28 years old, delving more heavingly into a drug-induced state. She goes to rehab, gains and loses weight, and gets a career comeback. Unfortunately, it's at the cost of her own morals. She soon has an affair with Lyon Burke, who is now married to Anne. Of course, Neely is way beyond entitled at this point and she just doesn't give a damn. But what comes around comes back around and karma bites Neely in the ass where this time a young starlet (who's also having an affair with Lyon) takes the spotlight. 

Neely in the film version is a bit tame. She is still rambunctious and full of herself but not as callous. There are only little bits and pieces of her life, which are usually done in quick montages. This time she is not part of a Vaudeville troupe because...well it's the sixties (or is it the sixties?) and Vaudeville acts at the time would be pretty outdated. So, Neely is a young upstart, maybe around 19 or 20, I'm not sure, and she's already in a relationship with Mel, who's her agent. So right off the bat, Neely gets her part cut from the Broadway play but in turn, gets a TV gig that showcases her singing talents. Thus begins Neely's rise to stardom...through a montage. The film is only 2 hours and a half so it's somewhat understandable. But during this time, Neely marries Mel, becomes a movie musical star, develops a dependency on dolls, and is already having an affair with Ted Casablanca. So yeah, the film never really recounts what year it is or what's trending in Hollywood, her career just sort of comes and goes. There is a mention of her being 26 one time, so I would think by the end of the film, she's in her late 20s or early 30s, I'm not really sure. 

Anyways, Patty Duke gave all for what she's got and she wasn't terrible, it's just the script really didn't do her any favors. I can see there is an earnesty to her performance and she really did try her best with what she's given. 

Then we have Sharon Tate as Jennifer North, who was quite good actually. Just like Patty Duke's Neely, you can see the earnesty in her performance and I can see that it came from something eternal. Mark Robson was really hard on her, which plagued her insecurities as a serious actress. But through it all, she came out golden and you really feel for her character. Raquel Welch was a runner-up for the role and she was an ideal choice but she backed out of it because she didn't want to be typecasted as a sex symbol, even though that was the grievances that her character was going through and it could've at least showed through her performance but I feel like Sharon Tate was the right actress to give Jennifer a whole new dimension. 

In the book, Jennifer is a nice girl with a lot of emotional baggage. She's a 25-year-old masquerading as a 19-year-old at the behest of her agent, has a greedy selfish mother who constantly asks her for money, and has to deal with her immature, pompous, and sex-obsessed fiance Tony Polar, and his controlling nag of a sister, Miriam. What the film left out was, that before she met Tony, Jennifer was in a romantic relationship with a schoolmate named Maria. Now given that this was the 1960s, the producers of the film weren't too keen about having a bisexual as one of the main characters. After her love affair with Maria, Jennifer gets into modeling which eventually leads her to do acting roles. She gets cast in the hit Broadway show Hit The Sky, not for her talent but for her body. So Jennifer is pressured into becoming this wide-eyed starlet who soon gets molded into a sex symbol overnight. Her agents even came up with a fake story to make her seem more exciting, which was kind of a thing in Old Hollywood. When Jennifer decides to leave showbiz behind and marry Tony, the marriage isn't quite as ideal as she imagined. Besides being unfaithful and immature, Tony also has a debilitating mental disorder that might affect Jennifer's baby. Miram urges Jennifer to get an abortion and Jennifer reluctantly obliges. After divorcing Tony, she gets involved with a French director named Claude. Claude's specialty is basically softcore erotic films with a plot and Jennifer seems to be the perfect candidate. So eventually she becomes a sensation in Europe, which leads her to get offers in Hollywood again. But to keep her appearance younger, Claude gets her hooked on plastic surgery and a certain treatment that involves some unorthodox sleep therapy. Tired of Claude's controlling ways, Jennifer moves on to date Senator Winston Adams and soon gets engaged to him. But unfortunately, Jennifer finds out that she's diagnosed with breast cancer. Thinking that Winston only wanted to marry her for her body, Jennifer sneaks out of the hospital and, in probably one of the book's saddest moments, commits suicide by sleeping pills. What makes this even sadder is that Winston genuinely loves her and is ultimately devastated by her death. 

When it comes the movie version of Jennifer, there are not that many changes except for the relationship between her and Tony. The filmmakers decided to turn it into a tragic love story, which makes the Tony Polar character much more sympathetic. 

The animosity between Jennifer and Miriam is also toned down. Yes, there is tension at first but when Tony's health worsens, they stick through the thick of it and make amends. It's one of the changes from the book that I really like, and just to mention, Lee Grant was a stand-out in her small role as well. So, Jennifer finds herself completely devoted to Tony, even going so far as to do "nudie films" (as Neely would like to call it) to support his medical bills. 

Jennifer goes through her own health crisis when she is diagnosed with breast cancer. After being Hollywood's bathing beauty and Tony's number-one girl, Jennifer feels that she has nothing left to offer. So she takes one last look in the mirror and swallows a bottle of pills. And I just have to say, Sharon Tate really sells this scene. You can't help but feel for her. 

Sharon Tate was defintely an underrated actress and she was indeed a star in the making. I mean sure, Valley of the Dolls isn't a perfect movie but this showcases her talents as a great dramatic actress and, it's that one final shot, with tears in her eyes, both longing and pleading, that is just so...haunting. It's an image that sticks with you and moves you. May she be missed. 

Last but not least, we have Barbara Parkins as Anne Welles, our lead protagonist in the film. Now, Anne isn't given much to do to be honest but at least Barbara Parkins gave what she got and she does capture the look of eloquence and sophistication that Anne embodies in the novel. There were plenty of actresses in the role of Anne such as Cancance Bergin and Julie Christie, but Natalie Wood seemed like an interesting choice. Just like Patty Duke, Wood grew up in the spotlight and became a teen sensation herself with the smash hit Rebel Without Cause. By then, she became one of the most sought-after actresses in Hollywood starring in classics such as Splendor in the Grass, West Side Story, Gypsy, and Love with the Proper Stranger. Wood could've been a perfect candidate for Neely if you look into her performance in Inside Daisy Clover but I think she would easily hold her own as the cool, sophisticated Anne. But Candance Bergin was also the go-to choice because she represented the cool blonde type and could easily mirror Grace Kelly. But the filmmakers ultimately decided on newcomer Barabra Parkins, the breakout star of the popular prime-time soap Peyton Place, in which Mark Robson ironically directed the film version. This was where Parkins was going to make her mark and show the world that she was more than just a TV actress. Well...the problem is, she's not given much to do in the movie and it's not a fault of her own, Barbara Parkins is a capable actress, however, the movie version of Anne comes off more bland than her book counterpart. 

In the novel, Anne strives to be an independent woman and desperately wants to escape her boring small town. So off she goes to New York to start a new life and eventually gets a job as a law secretary at an entertainment law firm. Anne was all about not wanting to be tied down, and although she wanted to be married with kids, Anne would rather build herself up and focus on a career. I mean she is 20 years old at the start of the novel. But then again, it was very common for women that age to get married and Anne refuses to be part of that norm. But somehow, the arrival of Lyon Burke changes everything. You see, Lyon represents the passion that Anne yearns for and very much well gives it to her...and then some.

The chemistry between Barbara Parkins and Paul Burke is very lacking and Lyon in the film version just comes off as another generic love interest. Although he was incredibly unlikable in the novel, at least Lyon had dreams and goals the same as Anne did. There is a mention of him wanting to write but it's never expanded upon. We never know if he's unhappy at his job or wants to explore new avenues in his life, he just...comes and goes. 

Anne doesn't fare much better either. Sure, she's seen as the film's protagonist but she seems bland and uninteresting compared to the more dynamic personalities of Jennifer and Neely. Anne just sticks out like a sore thumb. All we know of her is that she's a small-town girl at heart who loves her family, got good grades, is very sufficient, blah, blah, blah, blah. Anne in the novel actually had some baggage, probably more emotional baggage than Jennifer and Neely, and she wasn't this perfect cookie-cutter girl; she actually made some irrational decisions that often affected her. Anne in the book came off like a human being where as this version is so...vanilla, at least for the 1960s.

There aren't a lot of specifics on Anne's career as a Gillian girl spokesmodel nor her relationship with Kevin Gilmore. After her breakup with Lyon, the scene starts with her walking into the room while Henry has a meeting with Kevin. Kevin notices her and decides to hire her as his model. It just happens out of nowhere. Anne's start as a spokesmodel is put through montages, which means that she's a natural at what she does. I would've very much preferred her to be a bit nervous at first and then gradually get the hang of it once she started filming her commercials. Instead, we get a full array of montages, which I actually don't mind this sequence, it's very hypnotic and colorful, but, I wish there was more time spent on Anne's development as a model and feeling the pressures of fame. Kevin in this version is nothing more than a minor character and there's no buildup to his and Anne's relationship. He has a crush on her, but she doesn't reciprocate. Plain and simple. And wouldn't you know it, Lyon comes crawling back to her life. 

Once Anne and Lyon get back together, it doesn't explain if they're married or not, they're just living together. Also, Lyon's affair with Neely was very sudden and not fully explained. Neely just makes a phone call to meet up with Lyon and she has a sly look in her eye. Again, there is no buildup to this. During this time, Anne starts to develop a pill addiction. Once again, there is no buildup to this. Anne just starts to develop a pill addiction out of nowhere. I wish we got a scene of her catching Lyon and Neely in the act. Then once runs home, she would probably freak out and go searching for the pills to calm herself down. That would've been way more effective, and since this movie is so latched onto time and pacing, this scene would telegraphed everything so confusing in the final few moments of the movie. 

So by the end, Anne has hit rock bottom, drowning in a sea of addiction but once she stumbles out into the ocean and feels the water splash her face, then, all of a sudden...she's cured. Anne is cured of her drug addiction. Okay, nothing about this is realistic, especially compared to Neely who's having a really rough time recovering from her own addiction. I guess this was done on the filmmakers' part for Anne to have her happy ending.

Speaking of, Anne decides to go back to her hometown, which Anne in the novel will never ever do. Lyon suddenly pops back into her life again and wants to marry Anne, but she kindly rejects him and goes for a nice stroll in the woods, feeling like a kid again. The End. 

Even though I don't mind the happy ending, I love it for Anne, I just wish it would've gone a different way. Everything seemed too rushed, too sudden and there wasn't much development on the situation before Anne's addiction and after. 

However, Barbara Parkins did a great job. Sure, she had to work with a lot of stiff, bland dialogue, but that's not her fault. Barbara would hold her own as a leading lady if she was in a better movie. And in my opinion, Barbara Parkins is an underrated actress who has what it takes.

Finally, we have Judy Garland as Helen Lawson...I mean, Susan Hayward as Helen Lawson. Yeah, this is when things get complicated...and sad. First of all, Helen Lawson was based on Broadway star Ethel Merman who had a bit of a reputation of being a diva. When I look into this, it would be kind of odd for Judy Garland to play this type of role because she's not a diva type. Judy Garland was always the girl-next-door and even in her older age, she still played sympathetic characters. So for an unsympathetic role like Helen Lawson, it was definitely going to be a challenge for her.

I don't think Judy Garland was even a fan of the book or the script, but she was willing to take on the role because she needed the money badly at the time. But what made this even worse was how she was treated by Mark Robson. Just imagine if somebody like Meryl Streep, Cher, Glen Close, or Kathy Bates was treated the same way. Yes, I'm putting Judy Garland on that pedestal and she should be regarded as such. Sure, she was going through a rough time at this point but, still, she deserved better. 

First of all, this was a stunt casting attempt and the filmmakers only wanted Judy Garland on the film for her name only. Plus, since she was based on Neely in the novel, they said, "Why not?" But just like the screenplay, they really didn't look into how she would portray this character and whether or not, she would fulfill the challenge. On top of that, Mark Robson was a complete and utter jackass. One of the stunts he pulled involved a scheduling conflict. He asked Mrs. Garland to come in at 6 in the morning but the filming of her scene started at 4 in the afternoon. Judy was eager to come on time but Robson pulled a fast one on her, causing her to break down. What an evil dickwad. Incidents like this led Judy Garland to be pulled out of the film, which is heartbreaking because this was her last attempt at the spotlight. 

So in comes Susan Hayward, who starred in a few musicals and can sing, but since she didn't have the showy Broadway voice that Helen possessed, the filmmakers dubbed her instead. Hayward came straight out of retirement, whether or not she wanted the role was up for debate, but it was explained by the studio giving her a generous fee. There were other potential casting choices for Helen such as Ginger Rogers and Lucille Ball but Jacquline Susann was adamant about casting Bette Davis, however, I feel like Lucille Ball would've been the perfect candidate because of her natural stage presence and her experience with musicals and comedies, including her very own sitcom, I Love Lucy. But at last, Susan Hayward cemented the role. She reportedly became a Helen Lawson in real life, causing a growing tension between her and Patty Duke, strangely mirroring the rivalry between Helen and Neely.

Now there are some slight changes to her character in the book, such as when we get to figure out why Helen is the way she is. Just like Jennifer, Helen yearns for love and acceptance as she went through several marriages and had ups and downs in her career but, unlike Jennifer, Helen has talent and leeway in the industry. There is an infamous scene in the novel where Helen gets another actress fired from her show, seemingly because she's more beautiful and talented and has more scenes than normal. This was based on an incident where Ethel Merman had Betty Hutton fired from one of her shows. When Helen meets Anne, she becomes rather friendly with her...at first. You see, this is when Anne was engaged to Allen, and Allen just so happens to be the son of a notorious Playboy millionaire named Gino who Helen has an eye for. Anne is oblivious to this, seeing how vulnerable Helen came off to her. But as soon as Anne breaks it off with Allen, Helen suddenly turns on her, besides the fact that Gino wasn't even interested in her in the first place. Since there is no Allen or Gino in the movie, Helen is rude to Anne right off the bat, which establishes her nasty diva streak. The actress that she gets fired from her show turns out to be Neely, which also establishes the tension between them.

By the middle of the movie, we get the hilarious epic catfight between Helen and Neely. Neely eventually wins by grabbing off Helen's wig, revealing her silver-gray hair (in the novel, she's bald from chemotherapy).

She actually doesn't look half-bad and is quite striking with the silver-gray hair but I guess this is the moment where we get to see Helen's "vulnerable" side and just for a while her pride is a bit shattered. But Helen puts her wig back on and spouts out her sharp tongue, she's back to being the "barracuda" she's known to be. Unlike the other girls, she doesn't need pills to keep her afloat, all she has is her sheer willpower. 

Although many would consider her role to be on the hammy side, Susan Hayward handled the role in spades. Sure, she doesn't have the same singing vocals as Ethel Merman but her presence alone is what sets her character alight. Each of her dialogue is a like sledgehammer and she can even go toe to toe with Patty Duke, spitting out jabs and quips without a wink or nod to the camera. Two thumbs up.

Now, there is without a doubt that the screenplay is one of the worst aspects of the film. Most issues stem from the really confusing time frame. It would've helped if the movie started out in the early to mid-50s with our main protagonists starting out in their late teens and early twenties, all bright-eyed and hopeful, and once they reach the end of the late 60s, they become jaded and disillusioned.

There is one huge positive about the movie, however, which is the gorgeous cinematography by William H. Daniels. It has this cool, pop art feel that is distinctly 60s, giving the film a personality. The cinematography enhances the three main actresses' model-ready looks and stylishly dramatic costumes. Although Mark Robson was a competent director, I just don't think he was the right fit for this movie. I feel like a more in-touch director who has knowledge of the 60s counter-culture movement would've been a better choice, somebody who wasn't afraid to take risks and who could actually say something with their art. Therefore, the movie would capture the "feeling" that the novel was trying to convey. 

Despite the critical lashing, the film was a box office hit and still became popular through the years. A sequel was in the works called Beyond the Valley of the Dolls featuring Anne and her teenage daughter written by Jacquline Susann but was rejected in favor of a more tongue-in-cheek satirical parody that's unrelated to the previous movie but with similar themes. I might check out this movie for another day because it's quite the oddity. 

Then there was a 1981 miniseries produced by Jacquline Susann's widower Irving Mansfield. I thought I take a look at it since it was available on YouTube and...I was unimpressed. It wasn't bad or anything, I was just so bored and disengaged. Say what you will about the original, but at least the cinematography, costumes, and set designs gave it this fantastical pop-art feel while the TV miniseries fell flat. There have been some slight changes from the book and film. Of course, this is now set in modern times and the miniseries goes out of its way to reflect that with the addition of some cheesy 70s/80s soft rock. Anne and Neely are now childhood friends and since there was no backstory given to Neely in the '67 film, it's been mentioned that Neely bounced from foster home to foster home all her life, which would probably explain Neely's dependency issues. Helen Lawson is more resentful of Jennifer, a change that I found interesting since Helen Lawson is an aging starlet while Jennifer is an up-and-coming beauty. Instead of a secretary, Anne is now an entertainment lawyer and a little less naive than her book and movie counterparts. That's where I stop there. I just...I just couldn't finish it. I was so bored. I think it was trying to emulate those hit soap operas at the time such as Dynasty and Falcon Crest but this was at the time when they were still trying to get their feet wet and didn't they didn't achieve the widespread popularity they would soon gain in their later seasons. So yeah, this miniseries is kind of mediocre. It's not fun nor campy, just meh. I might return to this one day to give a full review but for right now, it's a pass.

Then there was this really obscure 1994 adaptation that was turned into a daytime soap opera. This only lasted one season and it's really hard to find now but, from what I heard about it, it's not really all that great and it's probably cheesy and not the good kind of cheesy. 

So yeah, nothing beats the original, and part of is that it's totally, unapologetically 60s. it's one of those "bad films' that has a lasting impact and when you look into it retroactively, it eerily mirrors the actresses' lives after the release of the film.

Sure, it may not be perfect but there's something about the movie that makes it a captivating, beautiful mess.