Adapting a novel that was a runaway hit with an up-and-coming young cast and an original song by an iconic musician is normally a recipe for success, right? It seemed to have worked in the modern cases of Twilight, The Hunger Games, and even the abysmal Where the Crawdads Sing. So, why was it that Valley of the Dolls seems to have been met with such indifference upon release but seems to have now gained cult status? I think this is partly  due to the bleak subject matter it depicted, with the society at the time unwilling to embrace the depressing themes portrayed. 

Based upon Jacqueline Susann’s best-seller, the film follows the lives and friendship of three young women, Anne, Neely and Jennifer, as they attempt to break into and survive show business.  Each of the women deals with addiction of some sort. Anne is a bright, young college graduate from New England, who moves to New York in search of a more exciting life. While Neely and Jennifer are both actresses attempting to make it into the cutthroat business. Each of the women eventually turn to pills (the pills are called dolls) in order to help them through their struggles. Jennifer, played by Sharon Tate, has one of the more quietly heart-breaking storylines, as we watch her struggle with her image and her family who seem to reinforce her belief that she is nothing more than her looks. Tate provides one of the stronger performances in the film. It’s made all the more melancholic when one thinks of what happened to her shortly after the film’s release. 

Initially slapped with an X rating due to its inclusion of sex and drugs, one would wonder if the film would receive the equivalent today? In terms of depicting addiction, it may not be as explicit as Aronofsky’s harrowing Requiem for a Dream, but it is still a compelling watch. One of the things I always try to watch out for when watching older films is how they’ve aged. Are there any aspects of this film which haven’t aged well? I guess so. There are a few instances of homophobic slurs being used in the film. However, one can forgive this when you think of the time in which the film was released and how it was almost seen as normal to be using these terms, although rightfully not acceptable by today’s standards.

Upon release, the film received harsh reviews from the critics, pointing out what they felt were unintentional laughs and poor acting scattered throughout. Despite this, the film was a financial smash, bringing in more than ten times its budget. Since then, the film has enjoyed a revival due to cult status with many embracing the campy elements of the film. This is something many films have enjoyed years after their initial release. Melodramatic acting was something quite commonplace in films released in this era, especially when dealing with such tense topics. I would argue it was described as melodramatic and soapy upon release as it was a female centred film aimed at female audiences. However, I still found it to be a difficult watch and didn’t really see eye to eye with the critics who bashed the film upon release. While it may have melodramatic elements, it doesn’t take away from the harrowing depiction of addiction on screen. Roger Ebert famously gave the film a mediocre review and described it as soapy. However, he went on to write the screenplay for the sequel/parody, Beyond the Valley of the Dolls.

For the time of release, this was quite an interesting depiction of female characters, putting them front and centre, flaws and all. Each character has a distinct personality and doesn’t appear to be a copy and paste of a stereotype from another film. Time is put into each character so we care about their journey, making the outcome of each storyline more effective. The film Interestingly depicts their friendships and their downfalls within society. It’s tough to think of a modern film which is as female centric and depicts characters as nuanced as the ones in Mark Robson’s film. That’s not to say the film is faultless; it does drag on a little too long and also the theme song by Dionne Warwick is overused a little, losing some of its effectiveness. Dolls is perhaps not the cheery film the audiences of 1967 were looking for, but it is one of the more iconic depictions of substance abuse of films of the 1960s.Released in 1967, the ‘Summer of Love’, a time synonymous with free love and excess; this film perfectly encapsulates the pitfalls of excess.