Why Valley of the Dolls Still Sparkles at 50

That tranny propaganda from the 1980s Mrs. Arnold Manoff made was a bigger piece of shit than this by a wide margin.

I've watched it with a little fascination (if it happens to be on TV) because of what happened to Sharon Tate. If it wasn't for that, I'd never make it through that snoozefest.

And Sharon knew how bitchy fags like r2 can be!

Thanks, OP. I get a kick out of that,flick.

Fifty years! I am shocked, looking back, that my mother took me to see it at 10.

The film's memorable theme with a montage of pictures of Sharon Tate.

I saw another post today on DL where the poster was lamenting how Hollywood tries to get us to buy into the supposed great beauty of some of the young actresses out there. Tate was the real deal. What a horrible waste.

Highest camp with a classic unforgettable performance by national treasure Patty Duke. You cant stop watching.

Well, Robin's father raped her (as famously revealed in QUIVERS: A LIFE), so to expect any familial understanding or sympathy on her behalf... it would be asking a lot.

Robin has her own problems, but Artie has been on a downward spiral for decades now... and fell up, repeatedly, enough times to get him here.

It's very, very sad.

I love when Patty throws her ciggie into the pool.

That and the wig pull with Susan are worth the price of admission.

She was better off dead than married to a pedo breeder rapist.

"Neely, you know it's bad to take liquor with those pills."

"THEY WORK FASTER."

"It was the original 'Fifty Shades of Grey'", says writer and art gallery owner Bruce Bibby, a.k.a gossip-maven "Ted Casablanca", a nom de plume inspired by a character in "Dolls".

Finally we know what happened to him!

Why wasn't Miss Warwick interviewed about singing the title song?

[quote]That and the wig pull with Susan are worth the price of admission.

The wig thing is ridiculous. She has great hair. It's just happens to be gray. She's supposed to be bald. But Susan wouldn't do it.

WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF LINDA AND STACY???!!???

Did any of you re-enact scenes with actual dolls when you were gaylings?

STUPID-ASS NURSE!

It's funny how in the last year of the Production Code they gave all sorts of dirty words, drug use and heterosexual situations a pass, but actual homosexuality was the line so they gave Ted a girlfriend?

Walt Disney's swan song [italic]The Happiest Millionaire[/italic], released that same year, had more actual same-sex touching in the dance number in the bar.

**kisses, Dolls**

R11 That's precisely the moment my mother turned the movie off. I'd loaned her the DVD and that was the last straw.

R18 Ted was bi in the novel, too.

These seven are still living

Barbara Parkins .... Anne

Naomi Stevens .... Miss Steinberg (shown below)

Lee Grant .... Miriam

Tony Scotti .... Tony

Alex Davion .... Ted Casblanca

Robert Viharo .... production director at music hall

Richard Dreyfus .... stage assistant

Is the book any good?

How'd you know, R16?

My sister only had small barbies, but I managed to steal one from school. The full sized Barbie was Helen Lawson. the other girls were the 3 in tall ones

Who was Tony Polar supposed to be?

And the ONLY thing of interest about either the book or the movie was it's assicoatia with Judy Garland.

associatia

R25 was vaguely based on Dean Martin. Susann met him and thought he was mentally retarded.

That should be "Tony was vaguely based..."

Sussann recounted how Martin was reading a comic book while she was trying to interview him. In the book 'Tony' sometimes acts childish which is later explained by his illness. Childish and into anal sex with Jennifer; another 'sensation' promised for but kept out of the movie.

A huge problem for me is the lead character of Anne Welles (the story begins and ends with her) is A.) a snooze fest, and B.) played by a snooze fest.

#TeamAntiAnne

God bless Sharon Tate. Lee Grant is unrecognisable now. She looks good for 91 though.

When did Hollywood break its taboo on buttfucking? Was [italic]Deliverance[/italic] the first?

r33 "Last Tango in Paris" was the same year as "Deliverance."

What R7 said.

Was Lee Grant always such an ill-humored bitch? Or are all Communists just naturally like that?

[quote]Is the book any good?

I haven't read it yet, but a friend of mine read it in one sitting.

[quote]I haven't read it yet, but a friend of mine read it in one sitting.

Really? He must have skipped stuff. It's very long. that was my only problem with it.

R32 Lee doesn't look too bad there for being 89 at the time that was done (she's 92 now).

I mean, sure, it's a wig, but she looks human, and not too fucked around with facially.

I read it in one shitting.

I read it it one shitting, too!

In the book, Neely catches her husband, Ted Casablanca, in the pool with a boy, but the production code in 1967 wouldn't allow it in the movie, so we go the "broad.'

^^^got the 'broad.'^^^^

Go back and reread the book. Neely had caught him with a guy previously but the swimming pool scene was a girl.

r32 Lee Grants mother was stunning.. Loved her (and the rest of the cast) in Shampoo

VOTD will always be a favorite book and movie. My mother turned me on the JSs fabulous trash when I was 10.

[quote] Was Lee Grant always such an ill-humored bitch? Or are all Communists just naturally like that?

Not surprised she's a transcult supporter since her blacklisted husband's name was Arnold Manoff.

The Carol Burnett Show did a cute send-up of "Valley of the Dolls" when the film was released. Skip to 7:24. It's worth a few laughs.

............................

I know most the CB Shows haven't held up very well, but the first 2 seasons are actually nicely done.

Carol is still fresh and bubbly ...you can understand why she was such a hit. Harvey Korman is actually attractive. Vicky Lawrence looks like a teenager.

But they got awfully hard looking and full of themselves pretty fast. By season three they're pretty insufferable.

Funny how that scene with all three of them in the bed was never actually in the movie.

They were all three roommates in the novel. That aspect, how these three became close friends, was lost in the movie unfortunately.

[quote]They were all three roommates in the novel. That aspect, how these three became close friends, was lost in the movie unfortunately.

Right - so when Neely is on her knees in the alley and screams for Anne at the end of the movie - you think, why's she screaming for her, she barely knows her and all she did was fuck her over and take away her boyfriend.

It’s really interesting looking at how the book was pilloried in its day as being utter trash.

Everything you read about it is people saying how awful it was - how they were almost ashamed of themselves for reading it! - but that they couldn’t put it down...etc

A few years back I ordered myself a copy. Had just re-watched the film and wondered how different it was to the book - and if the book was as bad as everyone had said...

My copy duly arrived. What’s immediately remarkable is that for a book so criticised and lowest common denominator pop culture trash - both the US and UK editions are published by presses that are quasi-literary (and it seems both editions have forewords/essays that give the rationale for this).

My memory of the book is that it was OK. The writing isn’t terrible - compared to stuff on the bestseller lists today it almost seems like literary fiction! Compared to Twilight or Fifty Shades - it’s fucking Austen! And it wasn’t particularly shocking by today’s standards. I think I found Peyton Place a lot more salacious when I’d read it years before.

Other than some of the plot stuff already mentioned by others - The biggest difference to me was the era in which it was set. The movie is very much set mid/late sixties. And although the action is supposed to take place over several years at least - it seems as if the whole thing happens in the same timeframe. There’s no sense of the decade or more passing or a lot of change - social, technological - even the fashions and hair are mostly the same era throughout.

The book starts in the late forties and ends early/mid sixties and the stuff that happens really reflects more of the background it happens against. There’s a sense of time passing. Of friendships ebbing and flowing. The Entertainment industry changing. Slightly more - only slight though! - historical context. And it’s actually surprisingly gentle. I always expected it to be a little more - brutal maybe?

The story - which was very much a fifties story - was pretty dated by the time the film was made. So the film tries to make it contemporary for the late sixties - but it’s still dated and comes across as an out of touch Hollywood studio trying to make something really edgy - and producing something pretentious and delightfully camp instead.

Anyway - well worth a read. But don’t expect the film! A more thoughtful and depthy look at relationships between people who all have the same names as the characters in our beloved, fabulous, over-the-top camp favourite.

I worked at a movie rental store (a hundred years ago, I know) and every Friday night, when I worked, I played VOTD.

And Mommie Dearest, too, or some John Waters movies.

[quote]When did Hollywood break its taboo on buttfucking? Was Deliverance the first?

I think "Myra Breckinridge" was a couple of years before that.

Myra was rated X, as was Last Tango. Was Deliverance?

Tony was based on Dean Martin, but also on her son, who was born autistic.

[QUOTE]team anti-Parkins

Compared to Catherine Hicks in the 1981 tv mini-series, Barbara Parkins was nothing short of extraordinary.

I often do my hair like this when I go to the grocery store.

I was like that for a while too, back in my early 20s. Later on I learned some things.

R57 I prefer the center look, below.

Good in these chilly days of winter...

My Grindr profile describes me as "Younger Than Springtime...And Twice As Exciting!"

R44 Go back and reread the book. Neely had caught him with a guy previously but the swimming pool scene was a girl.

That is a misconception.

It is absolutely not a male who's discovered in the pool with Ted in the book. It is a starlet named Carmen Carver.

R61 GODDAMN IT!

I misread your post. Yes....we are in agreement. We know the TRUTH!

Ted was walked in on with "an English actor, their tongues down each other's throats"....but it's a girl in the pool with him in that big scene.

I CAN'T READ : (

This must have been a promo shot or something — it's not in the movie — but it has Patty Duke's magic tit-encircling necklace and a truly inspirational backcombed flip.

There are pics out there of Sharon Tate wearing a lot of the other character's costumes, shot for the designer Travilla.

She makes them all look better.

Travilla was also one of Marilyn's favorite costumers; he designed the clothes for 3 of her films.

Sharon was one gorgeous girl !

VOTD premiered onboard a cruise ship in Italy with Jackie Susann in attendance. She was so horrified by the finished product that she declared, "This movie is a piece of shit!"

I devoured the book in high school -- it was already out for several years at that point -- and I couldn't put it down. For a gayling with little exposure to gay anything, it was so exciting to read a book with living, breathing gay characters...

[quote] VOTD premiered onboard a cruise ship in Italy with Jackie Susann in attendance. She was so horrified by the finished product that she declared, "This movie is a piece of shit!"

They also played it back too fast because of some problem with the projector. The movie about her, which isn't even better than this, makes it look like she saw it in a normal theater.

Sharon was truly a goddess.

I bet even Erna would admit that she's gorgeous.

Sharon Tate was a totally boring and worthless stinkfish.

No one has ever heard of that movie today, except three gays.

[quote]For a gayling with little exposure to gay anything, it was so exciting to read a book with living, breathing gay characters...

But the few times they refer to gays it's negative - in the movie anyway.

& I don't remember the book being littered with colorful gay characters either.

The REAL Helen Lawson was FABULOUS beyond belief!

I couldn't finish the book. I was expecting trashy, and got boring instead.

Actually, it was a straight female who got me to watch it- so it's not just 3 gay guys. Add at least one hag.

Funny, but my mother turned me onto my first "doll" at 15. She must have gotten the worlds first prescription for valid when they hit the market. She told me and I quote, " Here, take these if you need them, they are in the medicine cabinet ." I did, I would help myself to get myself through my miserable teen yrs...PS she is the same one that gave me VOTD to read as a kid

I'm grateful there was a cult movie section of my neighborhood independent video store. It helped me discover John Waters movies, VOTD, and plenty of so-bad-they're-actually-brilliant favorites.

I once watched a double feature of this along with Beyond The Valley of The Dolls. Someday, I'll rewatch both and add Myra Breckenridge to make it a triple feature.

I never read the book. Does the famous toilet catfight happen in the novel, word-for-word?

[italic]Myra Breckinridge[/italic] is a ludicrous film made even more ludicrous by how many of the cast and crew went onto do family film musicals after it.

R82 - never got to see Myra. But there was a long piece about it Vanity Fair years ago - and sounded like it never had a chance. Studio and censored cut it to ribbons. And original footage all long since disappeared - so no chance of a restoration or reappraisal...

Mind you, I seem to remember the author of the article still thought that in spite of all of that it still probably would have been shite. But we just won’t get the opportunity to know for sure.

I don't think they ever had a coherent script, at least not after they let Gore Vidal go. Funny how he was good enough to write the screenplay for [italic]Ben-Hur[/italic] but not for this!

People insisted the book was better, so I read it 20 years ago and even did a school report on it, but re-reading it didn't have the same magic, even after actually having met trans people. Trying to see what the book had that the movie failed to capture made me think that it was never really there, and both the book and its subject matter were just a reaction to post-WWII homophobia and sexism. The only character who was really living his true self was Irving, the gay black man played by a horribly underused Calvin Lockhart in the movie. And the fact that Myra revealed himself as Myron and called himself "Buck's fag nephew" made me realize that trans is a war on homosexuality itself.

Wow 50 years ago

[quote]I never read the book. Does the famous toilet catfight happen in the novel, word-for-word?

The argument's longer in the book. Also tenser, because the worshipful nightclub crowd has just asked Neely to sing a few numbers, which then get a lot of applause. Meanwhile, Helen was ignored. In the ladies room the two get into whether Helen was a true friend to Anne or not all those years ago ("Friend? All you cared about was getting her to PIMP for you!") and Helen accusses Neely of never thanking her for giving her her Broadway start, etc.

See, early in the book, when all the characters are meeting, there's a vampy redhead singer (Terry?) who has the enginue role in Helen's show HIT THE SKY. She has the best song in the score and it doesn't fit Helen's character, so it can't be reassigned to her. Helen has the director and Mr. Bellamy presure her into quitting, then Anne suggests her housemate Neely be moved up from the chorus and into Terry's part.

The scene in the movie where Neely's song is dropped is basically Terry's story from the book.

What doesn't really make sense in the book is that Neely is even better in the part than Terry was....but Helen somehow doesn't see her as a threat. (She even has new costumes designed for her, etc.) This paradox is glossed over.

The book has its problems.....critics (and the publisher!) hated it.

R86 Terry was beautiful and talented, which Helen couldn't tolerate. Neely was talented but looked like "Little Orphan Annie." Jennifer was beautiful but couldn't sing, so no threat.

And also in the bathroom scene Helen' hair is thin and balding because of her chemotherapy treatments. So when Neely pulls off the wig, it makes sense that Helen is wearing one.

Remember when tge Nanny did this to Yetta in tgd Elton John episode?

R88 No, it was a bad dye job Helen got in Jamaica that caused her hair to break off.

R90 whatever the reason it made sense in the book it did not make sense in the movie. In the movie Helen's white hair was much nicer than the red wig.

There are only two photos of Tate wearing Lawson's pants suit and gown.

My favorite outfit and Sharon look of the movie.

That scene with the plastic mobile is incredibly dumb. The problem was that the story took place in the 50s and they tried to make it more contemporary and failed.

The entire look of the photo of Sharon @R93 just screams 1967 which is coincidentally is the same year I got to meet Sharon in Myrtle Beach, SC. She was making a personal appearance for the premiere of a movie she had made with Tony Curtis and Claudia Cardinale called "Don't Make Waves." I was 7 years old and my family was staying in the same hotel which they housed the actors. I had no idea of who any of them were, but Sharon came over to me while I was looking at a magazine by the pool, and she told me how pretty I was. You have to realize that to me, she was closer to a "mommy figure" to me than a future beauty icon, but of course I knew she was gorgeous. She took the time to chat with me for more than 5 minutes, and I will never forget how sweet she was. I have just one snapshot my dad took of us talking, and I really treasure it.

Thank you for sharing that sweet story about meeting Sharon Tate in '67 r95. It's just one of many I've heard over the years that seems to proves she really was a kind soul.

I loved this book when I found it hidden in my parents' bedroom in 1970. I must have read it dozens of times. By the time I finally saw the movie, I was disappointed. But I was always hot for Barbara Parkins, so there was that.

Even Madonna paid homage to the iconic stylings of VotD's.

(Click on the photo to derive the maximum enjoyment of the combined beauty. You'll not be sorry. Ah, glorious youth.)

If MGM had made VOTD in the 30s I would see the cast as

Katherine Hepburn as Ann Wells Lana Turner as Neely O’Hara Joan Crawford as Jennifer North

Warner Brothers Olivia de Havilland as Ann Wells Bette Davis as Neely O’Hara Ann Sheridan as Jennifer North

[quote]R90 it was a bad dye job Helen got in Jamaica that caused her hair to break off.

Yeah. Ol' Ironsides moved down there to be with a new husband that didn't work out.

(Dear god, WHY do i know this book so well???) (it's a bit pathetic...)

R98 That night when she was on the MTV Awards was the only time I can say that Madonna actually looked pretty.

Oh, she's looked sexy, stunning, stylish and hot many times, but that night she was pretty.

[quote]R95 Sharon came over to me while I was looking at a magazine by the pool, and she told me how pretty I was.

Predator....

I know you are joking R103, but c'mon.

Well, don't forget who she married...

Is VOTD a great novel or a great movie, of course not. Is VOTD a fun read or guilty pleasure to watch, most definitely.

Susann's publisher gave his wife the VOTD manuscript to read and wanted her opinion if he ought to publish VOTD. The wife said publish it!. She said it was like eavesdropping on your best girlfriends discussing their husbands in bed.

Years later, Patty Duke would have VOTD night when she was working on location. She would pay for pizza, show the film and answer questions

I have wondered if Duke has been in better health -- she hadn't been diagnosed as bi-polar -- what her performance might have been.

As much as I love Susan Hayward, I think she is miscast, but I don't know who should have played Helen Lawson. Judy Garland was way too far gone to have played Lawson

I think I had a crush on Martin Milner in the film

The only person who could convincingly play Helen Lawson was... Miss Helen Lawson!

As much as what happened to Sharon Tate fries my old, old, very old, brain... the performances seem to gel in this movie. So much so that yeah, 50 years on and we're still up to bat for it [No! A sports reference! Somebody help me! My gay card's getting tarnished!]. Everything seemed to work. I remember the end, the TWA 707 on final to somewhere, carrying a formerly star struck babe right back home. The book is actually a great read, and goes into more detail. You can pick up a copy on abebooks for cheap. Patty Duke just steals the fuckin show, doesn't she?

R95 that made me cry. Fucking serious.

I agree that Hayward wasn't quite right. To replace Garland, they should have cast Dolores Gray. She was a true Broadway musical comedy star. She often played Merman roles (Annie Get Your Gun and Gypsy in London and in stock) and used some of the same backstage tactics. For example, she took "If (You Hadn't But You Did)" from Kaye Ballard in a Broadway bound revue, effectively forcing Ballard out of the show. She would have brought Broadway authenticity, a killer singing voice, no shortage of ruthlessness, and a costumer's dream body (after a sleep cure or two).

Dolores, post sleep cure, fending off gay chorus boy.

Just think, if Patty Duke was nominated, or even won an Oscar for this role, how great a career she probably would have had. Or even the Golden Globe Award

R108 Yes, it brings back bittersweet memories for me as well. I have never thought about sharing that story before on DL, but as soon as I saw the photo of Sharon with her iconic 1967 hair, I impulsively went with it.

I am happy you felt the sentiment of that moment.

Doris Day could have played Helen.

Patty Duke never had the big screen career comeback she so richly deserved.

So true R114

Well, she went into TV movies. How many escape such a low down profession once they've entered it?

R116 what's a low down profession, working in TV?

Bette Davis desperately wanted to play Helen and Jacqueline Susann loved the idea.