![Daisy Kenyon](https://image.chilimovie.com/region2/en/300px/20220704/A3uIBvjXZVIAsenyJyMvonarqQf.jpg)
![Daisy Kenyon](https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/w780/icdGAwNnR3BpJQ8M6LEGUL7z7HB.jpg)
Daisy Kenyon (1947)
Daisy Kenyon is a Manhattan commercial artist having an affair with an arrogant and overbearing but successful lawyer named Dan O'Mara. O'Mara is married and has children. Daisy meets a single man, a war veteran named Peter Lapham, and after a brief and hesitant courtship decides to marry him, although she is still in love with Dan.
Watch Trailer
Cast
Similar titles
Reviews
Powerful
How sad is this?
A different way of telling a story
This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.
A woman becomes romantically involved with a married man and an army veteran. Given the talents of the star trio and the director, this one is a disappointment. This seems to be an attempt at another "Mildred Pierce," but falls far short. The main problem is the screenplay, which is little more than a soap opera. Crawford has to choose between rich but married Andrews and decent but dull Fonda. There is no exposition, with Crawford and Andrews having a tiff in the opening scene even before we get to know the characters. The dialog is mostly pedestrian. The goings on are mostly mundane until the latter stages, when it starts to become somewhat interesting. There's not much here beyond star gazing.
I'm not referring to the title character, played by the heavily shoulder padded Joan Crawford. I am referring to the embittered wife (Ruth Warrick) of the man (Dana Andrews) that Crawford is in love with. Warrick is an obviously bi-polared woman who shows no love for their two daughters who prefer the love of their much absent father. Warrick is determined to keep her paws on her husband, even if the marriage is miserable. We've seen this type of woman on screen many times, most notably to me Kay Francis in "In Name Only", Barbara O'Neill in "All This and Heaven Too", and most nastily, Constance Ford in "A Summer Place". These characters aren't one dimensional, they are just women who should have remained single (or questioned their sexuality), and prove that not all women should become mothers. Controlling, snobby (not unlike her role of Phoebe on "All My Children") and even somewhat abusive, Warrick is also conflicted inside, and the script gives the impression that she needs a ton of therapy if she is going to have any type of loving relationship with her children and some sort of communication with Andrews.This plot line is nothing spectacular, but with director Otto Preminger at the helm, a lot of psychology is inserted to explore the four miserable adult characters. That also includes Henry Fonda as a recently returned soldier who ends up marrying Crawford on the rebound. Lacking chemistry, Fonda and Crawford seem more like brother and sister than marital partners. It is ironic that Fonda would share chemistry with the three other dramatic divas of the golden age of cinema (Bette Davis, Barbara Stanwyck and Katharine Hepburn), but has absolutely none with Crawford. She looks more masculine here even than she did as "Mildred Pierce". This is the type of film she did better in the 1930's, as the film does not suit the changes in America after World War II ended.
As another poster mentioned, what happened to Tubby the dog? Tubby was a sheltie - I recognized it right away because I'm a sheltie owner myself. These dogs are hopelessly devoted to their owners and hate to be left alone. They live for the moment when their owner comes home, and follow them from room to room. These dogs will choose to sleep on a cold hard floor, as opposed to a nice soft couch if it means being nearer to their owners. It was somewhat disturbing to me to see that Daisy and Peter moved to the Cape without explaining what happened to Tubby. Perhaps that footage was edited out due to time constraints?Regarding the men in this movie, they are trying to win the love of Daisy and in retrospect it was in fact a chess game. One player (Dan) used his best moves and the other player (Peter) used his as well. Kudos to Peter for being cool, wise and astute restraining his emotions and remaining levelheaded in order to win his wife back. It was just killing him to pretend that he didn't care, but he knew that due to human nature being what it is, it was the best way to play this game. He won in the end and showed us all what he was made of.
I've seen about a dozen Preminger films and this is my favorite. I wasn't expecting too much once the movie began because it seemed I had seen this all done before but Preminger's characters (as is usually the case) are much more realistic than typical Hollywood movies of this era. The characterization actually compares favorably to foreign films of the time, like for example Quai des Orfèvres from the same year; this movie could easily have been a French production. I'm not much a fan of Crawford or Fonda but this is probably the best I've seen Fonda; and Crawford was just fine. Dana Andrews is superb - probably his best movie! What made this movie for me was that I could relate to all three main characters - in many ways they are more ideas (or philosophies) than actual people but the odd thing is that the line was so blurred that even though I knew this was the case I still enjoyed them as people. What puts this above the other Premingers I've seen is the very tight script, the fast pacing, and three fully realized characters that came across not only as real but as themes in themselves. Add in a memorable supporting cast and everything just blends together to make a perfect concoction.