Darling - 50th Anniversary Edition *Digitally Restored [DVD] [1965]

OK but not my favourite British film from this era

great film

This DVD was purchased as part of my collection of Dirk Bogarde movies. Released in 1965, Bogarde appeared second in the cast-list after Laurence Harvey, who was clearly more of a box-office draw at that time, a kind of Daniel Craig of the 1960s. Yet the Julie Christie-Dirk Bogarde relationship in the film is the longest and its centrepiece since it is to it that all the others re-act and return. John Coldstream, in his biography of Bogarde, mentions that the author and screenwriter Frederic Raphael saw Bogarde in the role of the TV interviewer from the start.`Darling' is about the social development of a young woman, played by Julie Christie in one of her earliest and best roles, through her relationships with four men. According to Coldstream, Bogarde said the film "contained the best part for a British actress in ten years ... a predatory beast who claws her way through four men, ruins them, finally ending up as an Italian contessa and is ruined in turn." A kind of 1960s Bess of Hardwick, then? Well, such a comparison is strictly unfair - often Christie's development is not consciously premeditated - and inaccurate, for unlike Bess of Hardwick, death and marriage barely enter the equation (save for marriage in the final one of the four).The four leading men reflect four different sides of character for the Christie role to engage with: the BBC journalist Dirk Bogarde provides intelligence; the advertising executive Laurence Harvey provides adventure; gay photographer Roland Curram fun; and Italian aristocrat Jose Luis de la Villalonga status. But each of the four betrays and is betrayed by Christie in turn, as each lacks all or some of what the others can provide. Christie and her men use each other and are used in turn, often at the same time.The film is replete with the so-called 1960s sophistication of the cultural demimonde. Set predominantly in the London of that decade, as observers from the twenty-first century we witness the new cars, the new furnishings, new technologies and cultural attitudes; the sexual and social promiscuity with plenty of irony. Coldstream writes, "If ever a film captured the zeitgeist of the mid-sixties it was `Darling' ". (It is interesting that the final Italian sequence shows Italy still with the feel of a more conservative 1950s.)Sequences in the film are well-plotted; the editing is noticeably good and there are imaginative shots reminiscent of the decade, combining and juxtaposing close-ups with long shots, as well as more traditional camera work. Director John Schlesinger makes the film also well-observed: see the yawning choirboy, the dead goldfish, the party invitations on the mantelpiece. All of these small details (and more), together with a good production team and fine performances by the actors makes this a superior British film that engages still with the modern day.There are, alas, no extras.

I find it rather shocking that Darling was released in the year that I was born - it's dated, a museum piece, almost and I'm glad that I think myself as being more open and less sneering and cynical.My film bible, Halliwells, before its demise, awarded Scheslinger's 1965 film a rare maximum 4 stars - they usually only gave 2 or 3 films per year such a rating and so I was really looking forward to watching this, as Julie Christie was indeed a fine and attractive actress.However, despite its cleverness and swipes at the glamour and beauty industry in the swinging '60s London, it's just too clinical, hard and unapproachable. Diana (Christie) is immediately presented just as she's telling us (via an overbearing voice-over commentary) that she's no home-breaker, but has already dragged successful TV journalist, Robert (Dirk Bogarde) from his wife and children and is fully enjoying their affair.From here-on in, it seems to be one gentleman suitor to the next, all the way up to foreign aristocracy. Dotted about and in-between are some wonderfully strange characters and scenarios, often in exotic European cities. Some fairly wacky and bohemian partying scenes remind me somewhat of the great Fellini, as in his La Dolce Vita. On my second viewing, this time, I cannot quite 'see' the scene/s that warrants the DVD's 15 certificate. There's no actual frontal nudity, or swearing, though some of the adult orientated (including 'homosexuality is becoming a menace in modern society') sort of attitude back then, they are hardly applicable now.The crisp, stark black and white photography should be a reason for celebration but it's like having the main central living-room light on all evening - it gets rather overbearing and head-achy, especially over its just over two hour running time.There are some real moments within, though, but the Oscar that Christie swooped misses me somewhat and the script, also Oscar-winning doesn't seem to stand out particularly. Back in its day, though, I'm sure it was quite different - and scathing enough to be seen as something profoundly exciting, especially for a British film.Is it worth buying today? The transfer quality is superb, but as far as the actual film is concerned, it will fall into two camps. Those who would have seen it and films of the like back in the day and want to be re-acquainted, or want to replace a worn out VHS and those exploring this era of Brit neo-realist cinema, like me. There are some real gems in this genre but some haven't stood the test of time that well and some have. Sadly, 'Darling' slots into the former but if you want to sample the most influential of them, then it is a must. It's a reasonable price at least and you may well enjoy it more than I did - and it still IS a good film.

Overall very good…dated…but accurate for the 60s

I'd never heard of this film and I thought Julie Christie's career was somewhat "provincial" but I'm not surprised that she won an Oscar for Darling. She carries the film throughout, playing Diana, a complicated character. She also looks amazingly fit! It's a complicated film and the nasty repartee of the "smart set" is of its time. Today, remarks like that would get you thrown out (bodily) anywhere but it used to be "quite the thing" to have an arsenal of put-downs as party talk (it kept out the riff-raff) and it throws Diana's different strategy into sharp relief - she does it behind your back and it isn't what she says, it's what she does - all the pain of the indecent woman. Some moments of quite ghoulish (even childish) humour slyly remind the watcher that he/she isn't so pure - one has been "pulled in" to Diana's world and is sharing the ill-gotten fun whilst disgusted with her self-justifying (also childish) narrative and it lightens the darkness somewhat. When the demise comes there's a sadness about it more than triumph - beautiful as she is, Diana becomes tiresome, her own worst enemy; she disappoints everybody. I'll almost certainly re-visit this film.All the cast, soundtrack etc is well "up to it".