The Amorous Adventures of Moll Flanders (1965)

I love this movie so much

Redundant and unnecessary.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

Watchable, faintly amusing adaptation of Daniel Defoe's novel "Moll Flanders", chronicling the sexual misadventures of an orphan-turned-servant girl in the 18th century who marries her employer's foolish son and quickly becomes a widow. Working as a maid to a titled lady, she is determined to find a wealthy husband, but instead finds herself attracted to a suave highway robber. Director Terence Young and a solid assemblage of talents can't quite breathe life into this British-made comedy, much of it seeming like a distaff "Tom Jones". There are lively moments along the way, although Kim Novak just squeaks by as Moll (a good sport rather than a star performer, she's upstaged by the randy supporting cast). The production is meant to be plush and the screenplay is meant to be bawdy, yet both are disappointing. Novak and Richard Johnson were briefly married in real life. ** from ****

This could have been a great movie--taking, as it does, a delightfully farcical approach to Defoe's novel. Moll is an innocent and relatively virtuous young woman, who finds herself in sexual jeopardy again and again--as she bounces from one depraved environment to another. Lots of self-conscious references to Tom Jones, which had been an unqualified success just a few years before. Sadly, where Tom Jones was anchored by Albert Finney, an actor of impeccable skill and astonishing range, Kim Novak is simply not up to the task. She is wholly out of her depth here; her only ability is looking pretty and being a good sport about being placed in various kinds of dishevelment. Still, despite her inability to project any complexities of character (a good woman struggling to maintain some kind of honour, and whose greatest temptation is to marry money rather than the con-man she really cares for), the movie's not bad. Lansbury, Sanders, DeSica, Palmer, Parker, Griffith, and (especially) Leo McKern are wonderful--so good the movie is still at B or B+ level, despite the relative emptiness at the top. BTW It's not surprising that Johnson and Novak didn't stay married for long. He was so far superior to her in acting ability, there must have been a slew of professional tension there...

My summary line is from one scene when Moll was newly in a house, not knowing where the bedroom was, and the suitor says, "Then let us reconnoiter." You don't see that word used often anymore.I am a Kim Novak fan, have been since I was a teenager. Until recently I didn't even know she was in a 'Moll Flanders' movie. I was able to watch this one on Netflix streaming.Truthfully I think this is overall a dreadful movie, a British farce that is overly silly and tedious to watch most of the time. For me, the only redeeming values are Kim Novak, in her early 30s here and 5 to 10 years after her most famous roles but still lovely, and native Brit Angela Lansbury, nearing 40 and lovely, many years before 'Murder She Wrote'.I don't know the original Moll Flanders story, but I did see the 1996 movie with Robin Wright as Flanders. That one differs quite a lot from this one, but in each Flanders ends up on a ship to the New World after getting out of prison.The basic story is followed in both, as a young child Moll Flanders ends up in an orphanage and, growing up to be a strong young woman wants to make something of herself. She ends up working as she can to survive in a difficult time, 18th century England.

This movie has to be one that shows off Kim Novak at her most luscious. It's too bad there wasn't enough showcasing! It's also too bad that this movie was made as a COMEDY unlike the newer PBS version. The only consolation, once again, is the luscious Kim Novak.