|
However, what I can tell you is that I'm not sure that I agree with the Academy's decision to give the best actress Oscar to Julie Christie for her portrayal of Diana. She did a good job mind you, but I'm not sure it was Oscar material. The nomination should have been honor enough. I did like her character though. I definitely have a soft spot in my heart for amoral women. Maybe it was just that Christie does not look like the model type to me. This might be a little too nit-picky, but did her teeth distract anyone else? Enough of my splitting of hairs, let's move on to the review.
The story in Darling is not an uncommon one, yet it is told in such a superb way that I don't think I can honestly compare it to other similar films. I have to give huge kudos to the writer Frederic Raphael for that. As a character study, I was totally engrossed by Darling. To see how Diana's life evolves throughout the film was a rare treat. Too many movies wash over some of the minor points in a character's life but this film didn't. I like how the parallel scenes of how the adulterers (Diana with Robert and then with Miles) called their spouses to make excuses in order to have the affair. Lesser movies would have glossed over that. I also liked the voice over interview style of story telling. It ties into the character of Diana. The other scene that sticks in my mind is the "truth-telling" scene at the orgy. It was quite raw and open.
A couple of reviews have said that Diana was a model sleeping her way to the top but I don't agree with that. She was just trying to sleep her way out of mediocrity and boredom to find "happiness". I've got two words for her - get cable! Take for example her one-night stand with the waiter in Capri; this wasn't to get her career anywhere but just an amoral act to break up the monotony. I think Diana is quite a disturbed individual and I would have liked to see more childhood scenes to try and locate the impetus to her amorality and restlessness.
The movie seemed a little lengthy, I think if the movie was 15 or 20 minutes shorter it would hit the tone just right. I'm not sure what could be trimmed because every scene seemed to have significance in one way or another. It could be the fact that I was starting to get really tired near the end of it due to the late hour that makes me feel this way however.
I think the best thing about Darling was some of the issues that it addressed throughout the plot. I can't help but think that they must have been quite risqué back in the mid 60's. Obviously there was adultery and promiscuity, but it also looked at abortion, orgies, and homosexuality. Quite a list for one film, but when you look at who the director was it isn't so odd. John Schlesinger who is no stranger to risqué material (Midnight Cowboy, Sunday Bloody Sunday) dives right into it. This Oscar winning director does a fantastic job of telling the story of Diana and puling out all the controversial stops. He doesn't dwell on them but throws them out their for the audience to quickly ponder and they are gone.
The acting was well done, especially Dirk Bogarde's Robert and Laurence Harvey's Miles. Both were solid and were balanced performances alongside Christie's Diana. I would almost love to see a follow up movie to see what happens to Robert in the years after the span of the movie.
Overall I give the movie a B-; it is worth watching but I don't have any desire to see it again.
I almost forgot. I really enjoyed the symbolism throughout the movie, especially at the beginning and the end. During the opening credits we see a giant poster of Diana being plastered over what looks like starving Africans. Are we seeing how beauty overshadows what really counts in our society? The final scene of an old homeless woman singing an Italian love song in the middle of a London square might have some deep significance. Are we to assume that this might be the fate of Diana?
|
|
