I have to agree that this film would have been a sleeper. With Sue Lyon, it has a 7.6 rating on IMDB. The Director could have helped the cause by including her in the film more often. It was a mostly boring plot, average acting (at best), and is hopelessly slow in the middle 60 minutes of the film. What saves it at all? Sue Lyon. There is no denying that she is very easy to look at......
Remember When Movies Didn't Have To Be Politically Correct?
Maybe for you but I couldn't care less about Sue Lyon when you have two of my favorites Richard Burton and Deborah Kerr.
I don't usually care for Ava Gardner but she was very good in this as well.
Burton and Gardner were the best parts of the movie for me as were Grayson Hall as Ms. Fellows. Sue was just eye candy. Beautiful but not a make-or-break actress to the film.
shareI wanted to punch her, repeatedly, in the face. Obviously an unmedicated bi-polar. That was probably before they knew what bi-polar was and everyone tolerated her because she was pretty. You can get away with a LOT if you're pretty.
shareThere is still no reason to know what "bi-polar" is, because it doesn't exist. It's an invention.
Modern society just loves to apply a name to every behavioral eccentricity known to man, as though it's a sickness. And then prescribe drugs to treat every said "sickness".
Today, doctors likely would have said Shannon had two or three "dysfunctions" as well, aside from alcoholism.
And prescribed four big pharma medications to him, and Sue Lyon's character too, which would make them no fun at all.
" Cristal, Beluga, Wolfgang Puck... It's a f#@k house."
It's that kind of thinking that prevents people from getting the help that they need. Perhaps doctors have a tendency to overprescribe pharmaceuticals, but there are other treatment strategies besides medication. And denial doesn't help at all.
shareThank You --- FINALLY someone with some sense
We should change the name BACK to MANIC DEPRESSION
NO ONE wanted to be Manic Depressive BUT tell them they have bi-polar and they go right alongg
I agree completely.
There is no such thing as “just” eye candy.
shareShe was good in the movie, but she isn't the only reason it was good. Grayson Hall's performance was wonderful and I would've liked to have seen more of her character. Richard Burton and Deborah Kerr were good as well.
Come, fly the teeth of the wind. Share my wings.
Personally I thought all the acting was great. I am a fan of Burton's, and Deborah Kerr always impresses. I consider it something of a hole in my film viewing history to have not seen more films with Ava Gardner, who was also great here. Sue Lyon's career for those who are not familiar with the story wasa not much after Lolita and this film, due to, depending on how one looks at it, either an overreaction to some oddities of her personal life, or a genuine and justified concern, to say the least, over what those oddities said about her and her prospects going forward.
In any event, the cast was great. I loved this film.
This is one my favorite films--in the top 5, but definitely NOT because of Sue Lyon! You have some of the greatest actors of the day in this and John Huston as director, but Sue Lyon was just what you said: "easy to look at"., Nothing more.
She also ruined Kubrick's version of "Lolita" with her ditziness and lack of acting ability, not to mention the fact that she's way too old to be a "nymphet".
This is why Sue Lyon never attained the status of "Great Actress": she was eye candy.
She deserves her revenge, and we deserve to die.
Lyon was the weak link in this movie, a barely adequate actress at best, and could have been replaced with any generic blonde teeny bopper type without any adverse effect.
shareI totally agree. It was like she was an afterthought. Maybe an attempt to cash in on the infamy of Lyon's character from 'Lolita'?
I'm a civilian, I'm not a trout
One of my favorite movies. I watch for Burton, Gardner, and Kerr, in that order, but I think Sue Lyons did a good job too.
shareI could not disagree more with the OP. Still, Lyon was stunningly beautiful and her pursuit of Burton (excellent and the center of this very entertaining movie) was, along with Ava, great comic relief.
American voters will destroy the economy by 2016. Whoopsy-daisy!
Lyon was great. The movie was good though. Can't be knocked for being too wordy being a play, but... that poem had too many words, and while not perfect, it was good.
My SUE LYON blog is here: https://thesuelyoncage.wordpress.com/
Cinema Purgatory www.skullislandsurfer.com
She was eye candy, but any late-teenage starlet with a little charisma could have been substituted and it wouldn't have made any difference. The adult leads were what made this movie.
shareFor me Burton, Kerr and Grayson Hall were the standouts. Ava Gardner was a little theatrical for my tastes but I do understand those who love her in the film. Sue Lyon... was in the film.
share