" Inside Daisy Clover"

[joefilmone]

This has to be one of the darkest films ever made by Holllywood about itself.

[FredCDobbs]

Very boring.

 

One of the smallest casts of any movie made about Hollywood. Where is everybody? Hollywood looks like a ghost town in this film.

 

Two or three top actors turned into boring characters. Should have been made as a 30 minute TV show.

 

What is this film about? I don't know.

 

I prefer dozens of other films about Hollywood that are much more interesting.

[bagladymimi]

I remember this movie mainly for one thing - Robert Redford. I was 17 and had gone downtown to the dentist. (Back in the 60's all the dentists were downtown.) Anyway, this movie was playing at one of the theaters and after I went to the dentist, I went to see Inside Daisy Clover. When Redford appeared on the screen I fell in love with him - I even stayed at the end of the movie to see who he was. I had never heard of him. He had been on TV shows with bit parts (like Perry Mason) but I didn't remember him from that.

 

I think another reason he stuck in my mind was because he played a "homosexual." Back in 1965 in Nashville, Tennessee, we didn't even talk about that kind of thing. And I use the word "homosexual" because back then the word "gay" was not associated with any sexual orientation (not in Nashville anyway.)

 

Other than that, the film is very unremarkable. Quite frankly, I haven't been thrilled with any of the films that Illeana Douglas has picked. That's just my opinion.

 

[FredCDobbs]

I agree that Robert Redford is very likeable in this film. I think he is the only character of interest. Natalie Wood is so bland, with no personality. It's as if the director told her, "Ok, I don't want you to do any acting in this film. Just stand there or sit, and say nothing most of the time. Have a blank look on your face. Every now and then you can sing and dance a little, then just go back to doing and saying nothing."

 

A boring story for a 2-hour film with a sparce cast. I've tried to watch it several times, but I can only get about 30 minutes into it before I bail out.

[johnm001]

Every time Christopher Plummer whines about being in THE SOUND OF MUSIC, someone should remind him he was in this turkey, and a lot of others, as well. One of the worst films ever made, imo.

[bagladymimi]

Does Christopher Plummer whine about being in the Sound Of Music?

[Dargo2]

Oh yeah, Mimi. Plummer has been known to derisively refer to that film as "The Sound of Mucus" on more than one occasion.

[johnm001]

Solly Chaplin (associate producer of The Sound of Music), went to his grave disliking Plummer and his haughty disdain for the film. Although, it appears Plummer has, finally, softened on it. Perhaps Plummer was annoyed at some of the bad reviews he got for his performance, at the time of the film's original release? The critics who hated it, really hated it; and, only Julie Andrews received universally positive reviews. The film's phenomenal success put to rest any notion of the power of critics.

[Terrence1]

 

Getting back to Redford, in the original script, his role of the homosexual was quite a bit more explicit (but not graphic). Although he was still sort of a newcomer, he had enough clout to make them soften the character. As I recall, there is only one scene where this subject is addressed, and that is during a phone conversation. Interesting.

 

 

 

 

 

Terrence.

 

 

[joefilmone]

The film is strange and creepy- specially the scenes with Plummer who seems to be playing Dracula. I remenber reading that Redford was not too happy with the way his character's homosexuality was portrayed.

[wouldbestar]

 

{font:Times New Roman}I have never understood why this movie and Natalie Wood’s performance turned out so badly. She had just lost two lead Oscar races and according to the papers thought this would finally put her over the top. Since she’d been a child actress and dealt with much of this subject matter I expected she’d be perfect for the role and was anxious to see it when it was released. To me the mish-mash that came out is one of the great mysteries of Hollywood. Like Fred, I can’t sit through it either. {font}

 

 

[joefilmone]

The film was obviously designed as showcase for Natalie Wood. The novel takes place in 1950's not the 30's .

[Dargo2]

Yeah, and the funny thing is it LOOKS like it was set in the '60s!!!

 

Nope, there was little attempt to create the "feeling" that it was set in the '30s, let alone the '50s!

 

(...you know, kinda like all those westerns made in the '30s '40s '50s and '60s where all the cowboys are clean-shaven and have razor-cut "pompadour" haircuts!)

[Dothery]

I disliked this picture first time around and haven't seen it since. Christopher Plummer always bothers me and Natalie Wood drives me nuts. Her voice, for one thing.

 

Spare me from movies like this. Miserable things.

[bagladymimi]

Terrence, there is another place in the film that discusses his homosexuality - the scene after the marriage when Plummer is talking to Wood. It takes place at the swimming pool. Plummer talks about how all the women love Redford and yet Redford always "returns to the boys." I paid a lot more attention to the dialogue the other night because I wanted to see just how much they showed in a film from 1965. But, you really had to pay attention to catch what he was saying, otherwise the only thing you remember is when Plummer picks up Wood and they start kissing. It was a strange movie!

[bagladymimi]

That's really interesting to me because The Sound of Music is the first film in which I ever remember seeing Christopher Plummer. And the next one was Inside Daisy Clover. And let's face it, there is absolutely no comparison between these two movies.

[Terrence1]

 

Baglady, thanks for the information on that other scene. It's been so long since I last saw it, I guess I had completely forgotten about the scene.

 

 

 

 

 

Terrence.

 

 

[joefilmone]

Plummer probably wanted to play such a dark character to change his image from "The Sound of Music".... Redford has said that he did not play the character as homosexual....Wood is giving her all but she probably needed a better script- I'm curious about the book.

[Hibi]

A flawed film, but interesting. When I first saw the film on the network broadcast years ago, i couldnt understand Redford's character at all. The few references to his "preference" were cut. Even now if you dont listen closely you'll miss the few lines that alude to it. I've seen the film a few times since and I like it the more I see it, despite it's flaws. It was a big flop at the time, I remember......(I cant stand that circus song, but You're Gonna Hear From Me has become a standard of sorts over the years........)

[Hibi]

Along with the telephone comment there is also a line from Plummer's character about being surprised about the "switch".....

[Hibi]

There is nothing 30s about Natalie's wigs and hairstyles.......

[Hibi]

Interesting as I think Gavin Lambert (who was a friend of Natalie and eventually wrote a book about her) wrote the book and the screenplay. I think in the film (as is) he's made out more as a bi-sexual than homosexual......I never read the book.

[DownGoesFrazier]

I assume that THIS PROPERTY IS CONDEMNED, also with Wood and Redford around the same time, is a better film than DAISY CLOVER. I've never seen it.

[FredCDobbs]

Yes, THIS PROPERTY IS CONDEMNED is a better film. She is a small-town Southern girl, and he is a handsome young man who comes through town. She is dating a local **** (Charles Bronson), but eventually goes off with Redford. They have various problems when they get to New Orleans.

[bansi4]

It's the one and only Ruth Gordon that I enjoy in "Inside Daisy Clover". She was a hoot...as usual.