--- title: "Darling" year: 1965 kind: "film" canonical: "https://film.one/film/darling" fi1m_score: 70 critics_score: 62 critics_reviews: 12 published: "2026-09-20T04:24:04.022404+00:00" updated: "2026-09-20T04:24:19.012101+00:00" region: "US" licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # Darling (1965) Directed by John Schlesinger · 2h 08m · Drama, Romance **Fi1m score: 70** · Critics 62 from 12 reviews *In a sentence:* The camera adores her, the script despises her, and Dirk Bogarde looks tired on behalf of both > John Schlesinger’s portrait of a girl who gets everything she points at is sharp, handsome and rather pleased with itself. Julie Christie and Dirk Bogarde make it worth an evening; the script’s contempt for her is worth an argument afterwards. ## Synopsis London in the middle of the 1960s. Diana Scott (Julie Christie) is a young model with a husband, Tony Bridges (Trevor Bowen), a flat she is bored of and a face that photographs well. Stopped in the street by Robert Gold (Dirk Bogarde), a television interviewer filming a piece about the young, she flirts with him on camera and then off it, and before long both of them have left their marriages for a flat of their own and a great many evenings reading in bed. Diana’s story is told in her own voice, to a women’s magazine, while the film shows what actually happened. At a party she meets Miles Brand (Laurence Harvey), an advertising executive who can put her face on posters and get her into films, and Robert does not like him. ## Review John Schlesinger’s *Darling* opens on a hoarding. A poster appealing for famine relief is pasted over, sheet by sheet, with the face of Diana Scott on a magazine cover, and for the next 128 minutes the film keeps making the same point with slightly less economy. Diana (Julie Christie) is telling her life story to a women’s magazine, and Frederic Raphael’s screenplay lets us hear her version while Schlesinger shows us what happened. The gap between the two is the film. It is a clever device, and it is also a thumb on the scales, because she is never once allowed to be right. What she wants is not complicated. Robert Gold (Dirk Bogarde), a television interviewer, stops her in the street for a piece about the young, and within a few scenes they have both left their marriages for a flat and a life of long evenings and cheap wine. Then she meets Miles Brand (Laurence Harvey), who runs advertising accounts and knows people. Robert talks to her about books. Miles can get her work. The rest of the film is the argument between the two men, conducted mostly over her head. Christie plays Diana as someone who has learned that a laugh will get her out of any room she does not want to be in, and she uses it on everyone, including us. She is quick, funny and physically restless, forever reaching for a cigarette or a coat. The film thinks she is empty. Christie does not agree, and she is right; watch her face when Robert is being clever at her expense and there is somebody there who knows exactly how she is being judged and has decided not to mind. It is the performance that made her, and it deserved to. Bogarde is the film’s conscience and also its worst snob, and he plays both without asking us to like him. Robert speaks in finished sentences, corrects her, forgives her and then does not, and Bogarde lets a real tiredness show under the tweed. When he finally tells her what he thinks of her, late in their time together, we found ourselves on her side, which we suspect Raphael did not intend, and it is the moment the film became interesting to us rather than merely well made. Harvey, as Miles, is all polish and no temperature, which is what is asked of him, and it is a small pleasure to hear him make a proposition sound like a quarterly report. Kenneth Higgins shoots London in hard black and white, streets and stairwells and shop windows, and gets close enough in the interview scenes that the film has the grain of a news report. Jim Clark cuts against the voiceover: Diana says one thing about herself and we see the other. John Dankworth’s score is cool jazz, brass over a walking bass, and it gives the parties a lift the people at them do not have. Julie Harris dresses Christie in clothes that are neat at the start and expensive later, and you can follow the plot from the hats. The satire is where it lets itself down. Raphael has a good line for everyone and a kind word for no one, and the party scenes, in which the rich are bored and cruel in ways anybody could have predicted, run past their point. Roland Curram’s Malcolm, the photographer who becomes Diana’s friend, is the one person the film seems fond of, and it treats his private life as a running joke. The moral, that a girl who wants nice things deserves whatever she gets, is delivered with a straight face by a glossy film full of nice things. We laughed at the dialogue and felt slightly grubby about the aim. Schlesinger’s *Billy Liar* (1963), which also had Christie in it, was kinder to its dreamer, and this is the same director and producer, Joseph Janni, looking up the social ladder instead of down. The view is colder. The comparison the film invites is Fellini’s *La Dolce Vita* (1960), and the difference is plain: Fellini enjoyed the party. Schlesinger watches it from the doorway and disapproves. It runs 128 minutes and carries a 15 certificate, and it is worth your evening for Christie, for Bogarde and for Higgins’s London, which is a place rather than a period. Watch it with someone who will take Diana’s side. The film will not, and that is the argument you will be having at the end. *Fi1m score 70, published 20 September 2026.* ## What the critics say Most critics come down in favour of Darling, though the approval is measured rather than warm. Almost every review, including the hostile ones, singles out Julie Christie for praise, and several also credit Dirk Bogarde with the film’s most humane presence. The reviews from its sixtieth-anniversary re-release find the satire of Swinging London has kept its verve, and read Diana’s rise and hollow success as sharper about fame and its costs than the film’s reputation suggests. The original 1965 notices are approving too, treating it as a sleek study of modern mores. The spread is wide. The dissent comes almost entirely from critics writing between 2004 and 2016: Time Out calls the direction derivative and the script studied, Slant finds it drab and confused, and The AV Club argues it feigns hipness while pushing a prudish moral line. The mixed reviews find the second half slides towards soap opera and the tone inconsistent. Christie remains the one thing nobody disputes. ### Reviews we read (12) - **The Times**, Kevin Maher (★★★★★): The review positions the film as a definitive Swinging London movie that has gained gravitas, calling it a feminist picaresque about an It girl’s rise and moral emptiness, comparable in relevance to modern works like Barbie. It praises the Oscar-winning central performance, satirical screenplay, and lively cinéma vérité style capturing 1960s London. [Read](https://www.thetimes.com/culture/film/article/darling-1965-review-before-barbie-there-was-this-feminist-picaresque-6bqtc70vr) - **Radio Times**, David Parkinson (4/5): The review praises the film as an astute snapshot of its era with ongoing relevance, highlighting Julie Christie's vivacious Oscar-winning performance and Dirk Bogarde's strong supporting turn. [Read](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-etdzen/darling/) - **The Guardian** (80/100, inferred): The critic finds Schlesinger’s 1965 satire still possesses verve and ambition on its 60th-anniversary re-release, praising its witty take on swinging London and the director’s skill with innocents navigating society. Some dated elements and brittle dialogue are noted, but the overall energy and performances, especially Christie’s restrained lead, are highlighted positively. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2025/may/29/darling-review-julie-christies-romantic-satire-of-swinging-60s-has-a-terrific-punch) - **Evening Standard**, Nina Caplan (75/100, inferred): John Schlesinger's witty exploration of jetset mores follows bubbly beauty Julie Christie as she finds the path to fame and fortune bumpier than imagined. These neglected 1960s British New Wave films are well worth a look. [Read](https://www.standard.co.uk/showbiz/celebrity-news/old-favourites-7434065.html) - **The New York Times**, Bosley Crowther (70/100, inferred): The critic notes the film's sharp satire of selfish, ambitious social types in swinging London while portraying the heroine's restless quest. It is presented as a sleek, robust character study of modern mores. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/1965/08/04/archives/screen-darling-is-selfish-fickle-and-ambitious-softer-sentiments.html) - **Variety**, Variety Staff (70/100, inferred): The film is described as a British 'Dolce Vita' centered on an immoral young model who drifts through affairs and social climbing. Schlesinger's direction and Julie Christie's performance are singled out for strong praise. [Read](https://variety.com/1964/film/reviews/darling-1200420877/) - **Empire**, David Parkinson (55/100, inferred): The film offers an interesting portrait of the shallow nature of fame but overall fails to engage on an emotional level. It mixes satire of celebrity with attempts to show damage from that world, though the approach feels inconsistent and dated. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/darling-review/) - **The New Yorker**, Brendan Gill (50/100, inferred): The review finds the first half engaging and beautifully shot but grows wary of its charm turning into soap opera in the later sections. Julie Christie is highlighted for her intense, unselfconscious performance. [Read](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1965/08/07/good-intentions) - **The AV Club**, Scott Tobias (40/100, inferred): The critic views the 1965 film as a glib and reactionary relic that feigns hipness while advancing a prudish moral agenda, but praises Julie Christie's performance as the film's lone sympathetic character despite the contempt shown to her role. [Read](https://www.avclub.com/darling-dvd-1798199241) - **Slant Magazine**, Dan Callahan (30/100, inferred): The piece describes Darling as a drab, meandering, and confused movie torn between a bitchy screenplay and visually clumsy direction, criticizing its aimlessness while noting Christie's beauty and the film's focus on her. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/christie-65christie-07-julie-christie-in-darling-away-from-her/) - **Time Out**, TR (20/100, inferred): The critic views the film as emblematic of the rapid decline of the British New Wave, arguing that its studied script and derivative direction make it pretentious and out of touch with the lifestyles it depicts. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/darling) - **Eye for Film**, Jennie Kermode (80/100, inferred): The critic sees the film as a compelling character study of its ambitious but dissatisfied protagonist Diana, reinterpreting her as a modern Faust figure prey to temptation and insecurity rather than a simple moral failure. It singles out Julie Christie's Oscar-winning intensity and Dirk Bogarde's humane performance for praise, while noting the film's sharp take on 1960s social issues and consumer culture remains timely in a restoration for its 60th anniversary. [Read](https://eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/darling-1965-film-review-by-jennie-kermode) ## Details - **Director:** John Schlesinger - **Director:** John Schlesinger - **Screenplay:** Frederic Raphael - **Cinematography:** Kenneth Higgins - **Editor:** Jim Clark - **Music:** John Dankworth - **Costume design:** Julie Harris - **Producer:** Joseph Janni - **Cast:** Julie Christie as Diana Scott; Dirk Bogarde as Robert Gold; Laurence Harvey as Miles Brand; José Luis de Vilallonga as Prince Cesare della Romita; Roland Curram as Malcolm; Basil Henson as Alec Prosser-Jones; Dante Posani as Gino; Umberto Raho as Signor Palucci - **Runtime:** 2h 08m - **Release (the US):** 3 August 1965 - **Genres:** Drama, Romance - **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IbxDEjGJc0 ## Where to watch in the US - Tubi: free, sd, leaving 2026-10-01 - The Roku Channel: add-on, hd *Checked 2026-09-20.* Also available in: AT, CA, GB, IE, US. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country. ## Awards - Academy Awards 1966: Best Director (nominated); Best Picture (nominated); Best Actress (won); Best Costume Design, Black-and-White (won); Best Writing, Original Screenplay (won) - BAFTA Film Awards 1966: Best British Film (nominated); Best British Screenplay (won) - Directors Guild of America Award for Outstanding Directing – Feature Film 1965: Directors Guild of America Award for Outstanding Directing – Feature Film (nominated) - Golden Globes 1965: Best Actress – Motion Picture Drama (nominated); Best Director (nominated); Best English-Language Foreign Film (won) - National Board of Review Award for Best Actress 1965: National Board of Review Award for Best Actress (won) ## If you liked this - *La Dolce Vita* (1960): The Roman original: the same parties, the same emptiness, a director who enjoyed them. - *Room at the Top* (1959), Fi1m 82: Laurence Harvey climbs the same ladder from the bottom and pays for every rung. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/room-at-the-top.md) - *Cléo from 5 to 7* (1962): Ninety minutes in a young woman’s Paris, filmed with curiosity instead of judgement. - *Sunday Bloody Sunday* (1971): Schlesinger six years on, wiser and far gentler about people who want two things. - *The Souvenir* (2019), Fi1m 84: A young woman, an older man and a London flat; this time she gets the last word. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-souvenir.md) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/darling