The son of a dead Italian nobleman and a wealthy American woman forgets the disappointment of finding he has no talent for being a painter by succumbing to the sexual advances of an amoral model who believes in indiscriminate love affairs.
When his fiancée Valentine dumps him, prominent lawyer Geoffrey Sherwood goes on a bender and winds up married to a stranger, Miriam Brady. They decide to give their marriage a chance. ... See full summary »
After his teenage daughter Danny is arrested for the murder of his ex-wife's current lover, Luke Miller recalls his marriage to Valerie Hayden and the subsequent events which led to the tragedy. The lurid story seems to have been suggested by the real-life Lana Turner/Johnny Stompanato/Cheryl Crane murder scandal of six years earlier when Lana's daughter Cheryl stabbed her mother's boyfriend (Stompanato) to death in the bedroom of Lana's Beverly Hills home.Written by
Natalie Wood's younger sister Lana was mentioned as possibility for Joey Heatherton role. See more »
During a scene in her bedroom, Susan Hayward is shown using a then-new Princess phone, however the dial does not light up. This was one of the new phone's selling points at the time, which was advertised with the slogan "It's little... It's lovely... It lights". See more »
I'm going to side-step the whole Lana Turner murder plot and just address the big flaming hole in this film.
About ten minutes into the film, we flashback about twenty years to approximately 1944, where we remain for at least an hour. No one changes. Not one bit. Everyone looks exactly the same, even wearing the same 1964 costumes and hairstyles. Someone was thoughtful enough to give Luke a 1940s automobile, which he drives down a street full of 1960's cars! (In 1944, there shouldn't be a Corvair parked across the street). Besides the hair and clothes, all the homes are decorated in the same 1964 decor they had prior to the flashback (oh, those AWFUL grays that just ruin Hayward's "studio"...!) It doesn't really matter what redeeming qualities the film might have outside of this, and I didn't really see much, you can't just insult the hell out of your audience with a lousy flashback that is only twenty years earlier because the characters say it is, and expect them to respect the rest of the film. This is really, really bad; the so-called flashback is the worst art and set direction I have ever seen.
13 of 16 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this