- Acting of Lead Performers
- Acting of Supporting Cast
- Music Score
- Title Sequence
- Historical Importance
- Would You Recommend?
0 Member Ratings
NO REVIEWS AVAILABLE
The title has not been reviewed. Be the first to write a review by clicking here to start.
- kevin sellers
Pretty good late Crawford/early Preminger movie about a gal who has to choose between two flawed men. It's that twist, making the two men in Daisy's life each dysfunctional in his own way, that lifts this film out of the "chick flick" category and into the "interesting character study" category, where good movies are usually found. David Hertz's screenplay is good, with one flaw of its own that I'll get to later. The three leads are fine, as well. Crawford is more restrained than usual. You get the feeling that Preminger stood up to her, unlike weaker directors who let her camp it up. Henry Fonda is quite believable as a neurotic, somewhat detached human being. Makes you think that maybe that's how he was in real life. But, in my opinion, the best performance is given by Dana Andrews, a woefully under-rated actor who really clicked with Preminger. (Laura, Where The Sidewalk Ends, this one) His Dan O'Mara is a fascinating combination of charm, principles, fecklessness, arrogance, and unhappiness. And each of these emotions is well captured by Andrews. Preminger's direction is at its typically intense here, especially in the scenes with O'Mara and his two daughters (you'd expect this from the director of Bonjour Tristesse) and the quarrels between Daisy and O'Mara, which are visceral without being melodramatic. Now, about that screenplay flaw. It involves Henry Fonda's character falling instantly in love with Daisy. First, there's no need for it, since love at first sight is not a theme or concern of this rather unromantic movie and, second, the screenplay gives no plausible explanation of why a young Fonda would instantly swoon for an aging gal, except that she's Joan Crawford. Give it a B plus.
A 1 film
I saw this film this morning for the 1st time and was drawn in immediately. The plot and charactors as well as the score held me in to the finish. Just going through a divorce recently and seeing how selfish Dana Andrews charactor was made me wish for the eventual outcome and had to see it to the end. Henry Fonda was as cool as anyone in the film industry could be, well done to all who made this film.
I just saw DAISY KENYON for the first time last nite and I was happily surprised at how much I enjoyed it. I'm learning to appreciate Joan Crawford and I thought her acting was excellent, but cannot understand why they dressed her in such uncomplimentary costumes. I know she had a "look and persona," but she could of been so much more appealing, while still being a strong woman. She always looked so...old? harsh? one-dimensional? prudish? Just my opinion, maybe the studio wanted her that way? Too bad, think her "look" got in the way of her talent.
I LOVED THIS MOVIE
I am a big Crawford fan. Loved her in Daisy Kenyon.Will buy it for my collection. I thought Dana Andrewsdid just what he was suppose to do....irritate most women. I loved Henry Fonda....he was so charming...said all the right things sincerely when needed and wasfunny when he need to be....Honey Bunch. I have always lovedFonda's stride....his walk alone always drew me in. Ashe said in the end of the movie....Crawford and Andrewswere both "amaters" compared to him with in the context ofthe story...and this is not kidding!
- Dana Fan
I'd take Dana over Hank,but my bad.Saw nothing wrong with Crawford's acting.She may be underrated in most pictures
Very Funny, Baby
Yes; the use of that word, "Baby," annoyed me as well. But that's how guys spoke in those days. It's still better than the word "Babe" in the 1960s-70s. Back to Miss Crawford, I think she's a pretty good actress; but you have to understand the nature of the role she is playing. It may not be the character YOU would like to see on the screen, but it's the one in the script, baby. And truthfully, she rarely gives a performance that displays poor acting ability. All you need to see that is to follow her eyes in any scene; the acting is there, baby. Having said that, I would acknowledge that this particular film is one of the poorer scripts she was given during that time period. It's simply to formulaic; we've seen it a million times, and you just know after the first five minutes that she's not gonna end up with Mr. Andrews with whom, by the way, I'm surprised to see that so many of you are unacquainted. THE BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES. One of the genuinely great films. Watch Dana Andrews in that one, and get out the Kleenex, baby. Or see him in LAURA, another first-rate film.
Please stop calling me Baby!!!
I was hoping that Joanie, especially towards the end of the movie, would scream to Dana Andrews and say "Stop calling me BABY, Honey bunch!" It was so aggravating to have to hear him say Baby throughout the whole movie. Maybe it's a personal thing, but I really hate the whole "baby" lingo, not only in movies but in real life too. It sounds so ridiculous, especially when it was said over and over again in this movie. I almost turned it off, but had to see how it ended. Why did she have such a hard time choosing one man over the other. I mean, Henry Fonda was was so much the better guy, the nicer, more steady guy. Maybe too boring for her? Dana Andrews was such a cad, and hey if a man cheats once, they're probably going to do it again, baby. The movie was decent. Joan was making her comeback at this time, and so many times in her career, a triangle love story, the other woman. The acting was good. I've really come to appreciate Dana Andrews' acting. I never paid much attention to him before I started watching TCM, but he is always good. Since I just finished a book about Miss Crawford, I'm glad whenever there is a movie of hers on TV, to compare notes with the author. I'm not a Joan Crawford hater like others on here, she was interesting and a very driven, hard working woman. I respect that. Maybe not the greatest actress, but hey, her career was spectacular, so she obviously did something right.I give this movie 2 and a half stars, Baby.
Hey Marie Andrews -- Johnny Garfield is not a supporting player in this film - he can be found with his back to the camera sitting at the bar of a then famous restaurant that Andrews and his family enter. So maybe you really didn't really notice if Crawford was miscast. Come on Honeybun, she was good.
A movie that grows on you
ignore the typical "i hate joan, blah, blah" reviews below (by the way by the same person who seems to have the time to trash almost every joan movie on here). the movie grows on you after a couple viewings. it's a very interesting movie and ALL THREE leads play their roles competently. also interesting seeing ruth warrick (all my children) play the uptight neurotic wife of andrews.
Fonda and Andrews Vehicle
Although not a classic film, it may worth watching for the performances of Henry Fonda and Dana Andrews, plus a small supporting role by Johnny Garfield.In my opinion Joan Crawford was miscast and ruins the film by not playing the character well at all. But the gest can be gotten from it by paying attention of Andrews and Fonda instead.
Henry Fonda and Dana Andrews are such great actors that both make Joan Crawford look like an amateur. That's why this film fails. As usual, Crawford plays herself, an adulterer, destructive,homely, and never gets the title character off the ground. This isn't a "love triangle," it's another of film that Crawford has made into an ugly mess. NNow, if it weren't for Crawford, Fonda and Andrews with a real actor as the leading woman between them would have had some potential.
Watch it for the Leads and Direction
- Fan of the Classics
This would be an average love triangle were it not for Otto Preminger's tense direction and the superlative leads, including the greatly underrated Dana Andrews. One of the better "illicit love" melodramas of the 40's--TCM needs to air this one!