5.0 out of 5 stars
Why was Darling edited?, Feb 8 2012
I remember seeing Darling in a Dallas, Texas "art house theater" in 1965. This theater specialized in uncut European movies that were deemed too risque for main stream movie theaters. I remember a scene in the office boardroom with Lawrence Harvey in which Julie Christie stripped on the long table to try to tempt him to tell her corporate secrets. I am sure I remember seeing it and if memory serves me, it ended with a low shot of Lawrence seen between her legs from the rear. Could someone please tell me if I am right and if so, why was it edited and especially now with more liberal standards? Could I have seen an European version of the film and the one currently on DVD is the American version?
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Great transfer but.........., Dec 3 2003
This review is from: Darling (DVD)
MGM's new release of DARLING looks beautiful and more pristine than the Criterion Collection's laserdisc edition from 1995. There are no features aside from the (very dated) trailer; commentary from Christie would have been a welcome feature and made this a great one for your collection. The greatest disappointment is in the brief editing within the Parisian brothel sequence: the standard VHS tape that had been floating around for years omitted Christie's nude scene, a couple of shots hinting at oral sex between she and Laurence Harvey, and the brothel sequence. The DVD keeps almost everything in tact except a shot of a man rushing into a room to 'perform' with his cigarette smoking female partner. What you're left watching is a close-up of Julie Christie's shocked face as she stares at a woman smoking. The impact of the scene is gone. Now, the only version of DARLING that is fully intact is the laserdisc from Criterion and late-night showings on TCM. What gives MGM? Are they afraid viewers might not be able to handle such 'shocking' material?
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
2 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Deserves SIX stars!, Oct 12 2001
Darling is like nothing you would see today, this is largely due to its maturity. It is a 'grown-up' film made by adults, about adults for an adult audience.
It is the tale of a very good looking young woman who rides with the wave that her good looks take her on.
Diana Scott (Christie) starts out a care-free young thing, swinging along the streets of mid-sixties London when she is stopped by a reporter and asked if she'd like to make a comment about 'today's youth' for a magazine TV programme. She is so flattered that she falls for the reporter who swiftly leaves his wife for her.
But after a while Julie gets bored and wants to expeience more of what this brave new sixties world has to offer & we the audience travel along with her for the journey...from model to film star to finally capturing the eye of an Italian prince who marries her.She becomes Princess Diana trapped in a palace with only her misery for company.
Julie Christie's character is supposed to be an immoral girl but you can't help but like her. Watching this film is like going on a journey through someone else's life to such a degree that you will forget your own after a while as you follow her around from Paris to Italy,through her various flings,friendships & encounters.No special effects here,Darling is about people. People living in the 'contemporary' world.
The film has dated 'terribly'...that's part of its fascination. It's a mid-sixties time capsule. If you are a fan of or are at all interested in 'sixties London buy this with confidence. It is a privilege to be be able to recommend it to you.
Darling is a witty film. Intelligently made. Superbly shot & edited. I would recommend it to anyone who is studying film, so fluently & deftly is this masterpiece put together.
Filmed in Black & White...not only does Julie Christie look stunning but she rises to every note. She well deserved her Oscar for best actress in 1966.
This is a movie that would interest & entertain even the people who usually would not be drawn to this kind of a theme.
Highly recommended!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No