Return to Peyton Place

1961
Return to Peyton Place
5.8| 2h3m| en| More Info
Released: 05 May 1961 Released
Producted By: Jerry Wald Productions
Country:
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

Residents of the small town of Peyton Place aren't pleased when they realize they're the characters in local writer Allison MacKenzie's controversial first novel. A sequel to the hit 1957 film.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Jerry Wald Productions

Trailers & Images

Reviews

JohnHowardReid Copyright 4 May 1961 by Jerry Wald Productions and Associated Producers, Inc. Released through 20th Century-Fox. New York opening simultaneously at the Paramount and the Normandie: 5 May 1961. U.S. release: 5 May 1961. U.K. release: 25 June 1961. 122 minutes.SYNOPSIS: The news that Allison MacKenzie (Carol Lynley) has received a telephone call from New York accepting her first novel, spreads rapidly through the small town of Peyton Place. Those not on "the grapevine" are soon informed by a bubbling Allison who joyously shouts her success to the rooftops as she rushes to her mother's dress shop. NOTES: Jeff Chandler's second-last film. He died on 17 June 1961. This film was released posthumously in the U.K. and Australia.VIEWER'S GUIDE: Adults.COMMENT: One of the few films of the CinemaScope era that I didn't see on its original release — and frankly that I didn't want to see. José Ferrer is not one of my favorite directors. Even "The Great Man" (1956), though well acted from a forceful script, is drearily directed in a stolidly unimaginative television style. "Return to Peyton Place" continued this tradition. As for the players, they don't interest me overmuch. True, Mary Astor contributes a convincing performance, but Carol Lynley, Jeff Chandler and the rest hardly inspire confidence.The lead character writing a book is such a hoary old catalyst for a plot, I'm amazed the script even got so far as a producer's desk. And Ronald Alexander, the author of "Holiday for Lovers", is a name that hardly inspires confidence.I'm afraid "Return to Peyton Place" rates as an exploitation film pure and simple, shot on the comparative cheap on a Hollywood sound stage. I understand that not a single one of the players from the original "Peyton Place" is represented here. What we have is a comparatively second-rate cast enacting a third-rate script on a fourth-rate budget.You'd think this mediocre movie would have put paid to the commercial viability of "Peyton Place" — but you'd be forgetting TV and its insatiable appetite!
dbdumonteil The sequel to the fifties blockbuster ,it's much more modest in scope and in ambition and its ending is so predictable it does not equal the first episode.Constance McKenzie (Lana Turner is replaced by Eleanor Parker) is no longer the central character but one must say there is no more central character.There are about three plots which could be depicted as "the book Alison wrote" "Ted and his over possessive mom" and "Will Selena be an outcast for all her life?" .All these plots meet in the end as Alison's stepfather stands in great danger of being discharged ,cause he put his stepdaughter's more or less autobiographical "work" in his high school library.Lucianna Paluzzi ,who plays the unfortunate daughter-in-law ,is a future James Bond Girl ( one of the best villains ,Fiona Volpe, in "Thunderball") "Peyton Place" fans might be interested but the others had better choose the 1957 original work .
Harold_Robbins I was pleasantly surprised that RETURN TO PEYTON PLACE wasn't as bad as I'd remembered it to be - it's a well-mounted film, again produced by Jerry Wald (who produced, among other classics, MILDRED PIERCE), but neither as glossy-slick nor as compelling as its predecessor. It suffers from the same fate most sequels do, no matter how well-done or well-intended: the magic that sparked the original is simply gone and cannot be recaptured.RETURN, of course, is a thinly-veiled account of some of what happened to author Grace Metalious after PEYTON PLACE became the publishing phenomenon of the 1950s (no indeed, the townsfolk were not too fond of their "Pandora in Blue Jeans," as she was called, and, if memory serves, did indeed fire her schoolteacher husband). But it's kind of inconceivable that Metalious's novel would have been published at all if she'd been the snotty bitch portrayed by Carol Lynley - no publisher would have put up with such an attitude from an unknown, first-time novelist.CLEOPATRA's budget was straining the coffers at Fox, so the cast is not as big as PEYTON PLACE, nor, with three exceptions, as notable. Three Hollywood veterans - Eleanor Parker, Mary Astor, and Jeff Chandler, show the young folks how it's done, and Astor, selfish and manipulative as were two other characters she played (Brigid O'Shaughnessy in THE MALTESE FALCON, and Sandra Kovack in THE GREAT LIE, for which she won an Oscar) simply walks off with the film. We don't like Roberta Carter, or the censorship she tries to impose, but we understand her resistance to change, to losing the values and things she holds dear (including her son). And, unfortunately, Astor/Carter's advisory to the people of Peyton Place that they will live to regret their willingness to encourage such changes in morals as Allison's book seems to exemplify, was a sad prediction of the painful price we would pay in the 1980s for the sexual freedom of the 1960s.
Poseidon-3 This is an interesting companion piece to the original, superior film "Peyton Place". This sequel has precious little of the gloss, prestige and just downright aura of the original. Still, it holds a certain fascination on it's own terms. Things start well with the theme song as sung by the director's wife Rosemary Clooney over glimpses of some attractive rural scenery. Then there are some amusing and old-fashioned scenes which include a perfectly voice-acted busybody telephone operator. However, before too long, the plot strays outside the town of Peyton Place and it stays out far too long. The film has two halves. One focuses on Lynley's exploits in NYC as she strives to have her novel (based on the events of the original film) published. The other half focuses on the hometown dramatics that occur because of Lynley's actions. Certain aspects of Lynley and book editor Chandler's story are charming and intriguing, but their tale would be better suited to an altogether different film. Audiences want to see the small-minded and set-in-their-ways New Englanders picking at each other and suffering through each other. When that occurs, it's like a shot in the arm. Parker has far less to work with than Lana Turner got in the first film, but she acquits herself with a few strong scenes...especially when she's had enough of Lynley. Sterling (as Parker's school principal husband) presents a very likable and modern character, but he is given even more of a backseat than Parker. Weld plays Selena Cross with far more hysteria than Hope Lange did, but since most of the rest of the cast is decorative (including delicious Halsey and curvy Paluzzi) rather than effective, it's a welcome change. The REAL reason to watch and the savior of the film is Astor. She effortlessly slithers in and steals every single moment that she is on screen. That is NOT to say that she overacts. She robs the screen of every other image besides herself simply by immersing herself into the bitter, narrow-minded and manipulative character of Mrs. Carter. There is not one false note in her portrayal. Her lines are delivered with such deep-toned authority and disgust and with such a steely face that it's impossible not to respond to her. She gets to toss off some truly surprising and amusing comments in this movie. The film surely must set some record for the most deliberately drab color schemes in the clothing and art direction. Puce drapes seem to hang everywhere and olive green, grey, black and mustard dominate the fabrics of the gowns. Interestingly, there is mention in the film of Paluzzi's habit of leaving cigarettes burning (and nearly setting the bedroom carpet on fire) and the trailer for the film shows the Carter house engulfed in flames as part of what had to be a different climax than what ends up in the finished movie. Apparently, one or more of the characters of Astor, Halsey and Paluzzi were meant to be killed at the end of this film (a murder plot was also cut out), but the decision was made to end with the town hall meeting. The thought of ANY scene with Astor being cut is devastating. With so many juicy aspects removed from the story, the film has to settle for being an intriguing, but old-fashioned and rather toothless affair. Still, it's worth sitting through for Astor.