Summer of the Seventeenth Doll (1961)

I read with some interest the comments by Aussie reviewers on this film before writing my own review. They seem to think the spirit of Ray Lawler's play was cut right of the film version of The Summer Of The 17th Doll. My own view just as it was the producer's choice to hire American and British leads it was also his choice to bow to American censor requirements and omnipresent Code still in force.I sympathize with the the Aussies who complain that one of their own should have been in the lead. Certainly Chips Rafferty who was the biggest name in Aussie cinema at the time could have taken Ernest Borgnine's part. He sure had the size for it.Summer Of The 17th Doll casts Borgnine and John Mills as a pair of sugar cane cutters who are now at liberty as the occupation is seasonal. Borgnine's size and strength make him respected while Mills reputation and identity come from his love 'em and leave 'em attitude with women. Both have their steady girls Anne Baxter and Angela Lansbury as anchors of a sort.But these two women are getting tired of being a pair of Adelaides for their Nathan Detroits. Plain and simple these two won't acknowledge they're not young any more. Plain and simple they won't grow up.And that's a universal situation not necessarily an Australian one. If Summer Of The 17th Doll were remade today I can see Nicole Kidman as one of the women and Guy Pearce as one of the men. And the Code restrictions would be off.Still while it's not all it could be, Summer Of the 17th Doll is a fine bit of film making.

The single most obvious problem with this film is that you have to go so far down the credits before actually finding an Aussie. The four leads, the old lady, Bubba, even the boxing promoter are all foreign actors. I can vaguely picture a big dumb Yank as played by Mr Borgnine doing some work as a canecutter, but John Mills just doesn't look the part. I have watched him in so many movies and this is probably the first I have ever thought him miscast.If you are from Sydney there is some great footage of Luna Park in its former glory, the old ferries, Central Station and so on. I believe the play is a mix of humour and drama but there is very little humour in this film. Anne Baxter is probably the best of the four leads, playing a rather desperate sweetheart. Vincent Ball's character is a little too smarmy and one is left wondering why anyone would find him appealing.It would be very interesting to see a remake with Australian actors in it, although it's doubtful whether the era could be captured as well again. Watch the movie for the locations but don't expect too much from the performances.

Ray Lawler's play about two tempestuous sweetheart couples coping with the layoff season in Sydney, Australia comes to the screen without much humor and a misguided heart. Sugar cane cutters Ernest Borgnine and John Mills take Kewpie doll collector Anne Baxter and manicurist Angela Lansbury to South Australia to rest up and look for holiday work--but trouble brews with Borgnine, who has mysteriously left his job after fifteen years. Practically without plot, this character study has become, on film, a visual journey rather than an emotional or personable one. Paul Beeson's cinematography is certainly striking, even as the entangled relationships and mercurial tempers at the forefront of the story quickly wear themselves out. Forget about accents, these actors (interestingly, if unsuccessfully, cast) don't even look like Aussie natives. Borgnine's strong sense of character and natural way with a complicated chunk of dialogue nearly saves him, but it was a fundamental error to surround these stars with unknown players who really do sound like Australians. The lively section at the amusement park is full of raucous vitriol and Beeson's playful visual composition, but every scene back at the boarding house is a lost cause. A very strange project, indeed. ** from ****

I Have read the play and seen the film, Ray Lawler wrote the play extremely well. He did something interesting, in writing the play with accents. This is something i haven't seen before.Leslie Norman however did a poor adaptation of the text version, simple things like getting the city wrong that the play was set in and Australian accents. The accents were bad, the actors did not even seem to try to talk like an Australian. Ernest Borgnine was the main culprit. He had a full blown yank accent happening during the whole film.This film was a waste of my time, and a waste of everyone else's time who has ever watched it. I does not even deserve a 3 out of 10.