Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaA lonely 'Stay-at-Home' Housewife is being watched every night through the bathroom window by a 'Peeping Tom', who is being put up to it by his friend. She eventually finds out and gets her ... Ler tudoA lonely 'Stay-at-Home' Housewife is being watched every night through the bathroom window by a 'Peeping Tom', who is being put up to it by his friend. She eventually finds out and gets her revenge on them.A lonely 'Stay-at-Home' Housewife is being watched every night through the bathroom window by a 'Peeping Tom', who is being put up to it by his friend. She eventually finds out and gets her revenge on them.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
Sean Barry-Weske
- Eddie
- (as Sean Barry)
- …
Fiona Richmond
- Suzanne
- (as Amber Harrison)
- …
Carole Catkin
- Jill
- (as Carol Catkin)
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Elenco e equipe completos
- Produção, bilheteria e muito mais no IMDbPro
Avaliações em destaque
I watched this film in the early hours on a VERY obscure Sky channel called 'Movies for Men' ( That says just about everything ) The ONLY reason I watched it was the hope of seeing the lovely Luan Peters with her clothes off . By any standard she is lovely . I had a real thing for her in the 70's and if any of you are 'Fawlty Towers ' fans , she was the Aussie in the yellow T shirt who Basil manhandles with oily hands .
The film is an illustration of the films that were bought out just to titillate male audiences and for film makers to see exactly what they could show .
The most laughable aspect is the actor Vince Ball, an aging Australian actor who must be years older than all the girls who describe him as 'gorgeous ' . I think he must of been a friend of somebody and probably paid them to get next to Ms Peters ! Like all these films it is more interesting to take note of the fashions, scenery, attitudes of the 70's rather than follow the plot .
The ending is weak and inconclusive . Really only for fans of Luan Peters .
The film is an illustration of the films that were bought out just to titillate male audiences and for film makers to see exactly what they could show .
The most laughable aspect is the actor Vince Ball, an aging Australian actor who must be years older than all the girls who describe him as 'gorgeous ' . I think he must of been a friend of somebody and probably paid them to get next to Ms Peters ! Like all these films it is more interesting to take note of the fashions, scenery, attitudes of the 70's rather than follow the plot .
The ending is weak and inconclusive . Really only for fans of Luan Peters .
A London housewife (Luan Peters) is bored with her sexually cold husband (Jason Twelvetrees -- and yes he is that wooden!) and is lead/blackmailed in to temptation with an Australian travelling salesman (Vincent Ball) and his rather more unbuttoned pals.
There are many films around where the story behind the film is far more interesting than the film itself. There are also films which are more interesting for the background than the foreground. This is both.
London in the early 70's was in a strange hangover of a place -- vice had been clamped down upon and the new thing were films that were sold as sexy, but were actually nothing of the kind (but hey, they have your money by then). Today this is less sexy than post watershed TV!
The one thing that I learn from watching this is that body painting had left the London sex scene as of 1971 and that heavy blue mascara could be worn all day long. Even in bed. Love the last sightings of the those wooden finished cars too.
Thunderclap Newman come on -- and don't (repeat don't) perform their only hit "Something in the Air."
Liz Taylor once said that she won an Oscar of Butterfield 8 because she had an utter contempt for the part (and her life at that time) and the Academy mistook it for great acting. No such luck for Peters who needs her whole life (on screen) to come apart to register emotion.
This is a film that has the air of multiple failure. The acting is cold and wooden and has a pretty bad script. Indeed if you stick with it, it doesn't even reach a conclusion to its rather weak storyline. That really twists the knife in the wound.
Antony Sloman (the director) is said to be one of the biggest film buffs in the UK -- but this proves that watching a lot of good movies doesn't mean you can learn a thing from them!
There are many films around where the story behind the film is far more interesting than the film itself. There are also films which are more interesting for the background than the foreground. This is both.
London in the early 70's was in a strange hangover of a place -- vice had been clamped down upon and the new thing were films that were sold as sexy, but were actually nothing of the kind (but hey, they have your money by then). Today this is less sexy than post watershed TV!
The one thing that I learn from watching this is that body painting had left the London sex scene as of 1971 and that heavy blue mascara could be worn all day long. Even in bed. Love the last sightings of the those wooden finished cars too.
Thunderclap Newman come on -- and don't (repeat don't) perform their only hit "Something in the Air."
Liz Taylor once said that she won an Oscar of Butterfield 8 because she had an utter contempt for the part (and her life at that time) and the Academy mistook it for great acting. No such luck for Peters who needs her whole life (on screen) to come apart to register emotion.
This is a film that has the air of multiple failure. The acting is cold and wooden and has a pretty bad script. Indeed if you stick with it, it doesn't even reach a conclusion to its rather weak storyline. That really twists the knife in the wound.
Antony Sloman (the director) is said to be one of the biggest film buffs in the UK -- but this proves that watching a lot of good movies doesn't mean you can learn a thing from them!
I agree with all the reviewers here-this is pretty dire in respect of acting, script, dead unpopulated locations, unsatisfactory ending (for those who lasted the course!), limited flesh for those who paid their money in expectation back in the day...But:
It's of some interest as another example of that weird period in the early '70s of the Brit "sex comedy". I assume that the Aussie actor Vincent Ball ("A Town Like Alice" etc.) is thoroughly ashamed of this, though he does get to get down to the adorable Luan Peters. As I write (Nov. 2021) he's still around at 97-bless him! No-one else is worthy of remark, though rock enthusiasts will no doubt savour the appearance of Thunderclap Newman.
So to Ms Peters....she's what we called in the day "a nice bit of crumpet", absolutely perfect body, and well remembered as the Aussie girl in that "Fawlty Towers" episode. There's no other reason really to watch this; the "porn" sequence (more revealed on some overseas markets?) is laughable and, apparently, had to import American specialists as the local actors couldn't get the necessary enthusiasm up!
I liked the gym club sequence near the end where Ms Peters is in virginal white-verily the covered body stimulates more the imagination!
Thanks again to the UK's wonderful Talking Pictures channel for giving these little movies an airing. They will figure in historical studies in the future, believe me!
It's of some interest as another example of that weird period in the early '70s of the Brit "sex comedy". I assume that the Aussie actor Vincent Ball ("A Town Like Alice" etc.) is thoroughly ashamed of this, though he does get to get down to the adorable Luan Peters. As I write (Nov. 2021) he's still around at 97-bless him! No-one else is worthy of remark, though rock enthusiasts will no doubt savour the appearance of Thunderclap Newman.
So to Ms Peters....she's what we called in the day "a nice bit of crumpet", absolutely perfect body, and well remembered as the Aussie girl in that "Fawlty Towers" episode. There's no other reason really to watch this; the "porn" sequence (more revealed on some overseas markets?) is laughable and, apparently, had to import American specialists as the local actors couldn't get the necessary enthusiasm up!
I liked the gym club sequence near the end where Ms Peters is in virginal white-verily the covered body stimulates more the imagination!
Thanks again to the UK's wonderful Talking Pictures channel for giving these little movies an airing. They will figure in historical studies in the future, believe me!
The demise of the British theatrical feature of the end of the sixties, along with the proliferation of sex cinemas, tempted a number of fringe operators into the production of Girlie Movies.
This one looks quite handsome, with established director of photography Waxman (Waterfront, I Thank A Fool) on board, as a favor to the then young crew. By the standards which must apply, it met the needs. The women are presentable. The dialogue is audible and the plot can be followed without any effort - enough for the demands of the British skin flic.
The real action had already moved on to TV where the technical standards left much to be desired but talent and ideas were showcased. These films proved a dead end.
This one looks quite handsome, with established director of photography Waxman (Waterfront, I Thank A Fool) on board, as a favor to the then young crew. By the standards which must apply, it met the needs. The women are presentable. The dialogue is audible and the plot can be followed without any effort - enough for the demands of the British skin flic.
The real action had already moved on to TV where the technical standards left much to be desired but talent and ideas were showcased. These films proved a dead end.
Back in 1971, if you had never seen this and someone summarised it as "young blonde wife, frustrated by her husband's total lack of libido, decides to explore her sexuality", then I'm sure you'd have parted with your 50p at the cinema just as I would.
However, you'd have barely had time to lick your drink-on-a-stick before you'd have realised you'd been sold a pup.
The film says nothing, the acting is dire, the direction non- existent, the storyline meanders, wanders, then concludes by saying "make of this what you will. I give up"
However, this film is not without redemption. Here's why:
a) If you ever wondered what a seedy Soho strip club looked like in the daytime, this is for you. And what about that compere? ("Okay, remove your raincoats")
b) Captain Harrison (Bill Shine) may not be on screen for long but he does have the best lines. ("He called me Bill. Well, it was my name)
c) You really have to see the camera-work in the health club scenes to believe it. The young lady on the vibrator belt especially.
d) Thunderclap Newman playing live (along the lines of The Yardbirds in 'Blow Up' or Alan Price in 'O Lucky Man'). A previous reviewer mentioned this would interest those interested in the music of the era. It does.
e) The, shall we say, 'incredible' dream scene in the grocer's shop. Hard to believe and more than a touch of The Bonzo Dog Doo Dah Band about it (if you recall Magical Mystery Tour).
So, all in all, a dreadful film if you look on it as a film - but a fascinating slice of what 1971 was capable of, if you come at it from another angle!
However, you'd have barely had time to lick your drink-on-a-stick before you'd have realised you'd been sold a pup.
The film says nothing, the acting is dire, the direction non- existent, the storyline meanders, wanders, then concludes by saying "make of this what you will. I give up"
However, this film is not without redemption. Here's why:
a) If you ever wondered what a seedy Soho strip club looked like in the daytime, this is for you. And what about that compere? ("Okay, remove your raincoats")
b) Captain Harrison (Bill Shine) may not be on screen for long but he does have the best lines. ("He called me Bill. Well, it was my name)
c) You really have to see the camera-work in the health club scenes to believe it. The young lady on the vibrator belt especially.
d) Thunderclap Newman playing live (along the lines of The Yardbirds in 'Blow Up' or Alan Price in 'O Lucky Man'). A previous reviewer mentioned this would interest those interested in the music of the era. It does.
e) The, shall we say, 'incredible' dream scene in the grocer's shop. Hard to believe and more than a touch of The Bonzo Dog Doo Dah Band about it (if you recall Magical Mystery Tour).
So, all in all, a dreadful film if you look on it as a film - but a fascinating slice of what 1971 was capable of, if you come at it from another angle!
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesFiona Richmond's first role. She is credited Amber Harrison. Richmond was working as a Playboy Bunny and modeling nude at the time she made this film. She also performed fully nude in the play Pyjama Tops in 1970. When she found out about the nudity, she said it amused her rather large appalled her and being naked on stage in front of a huge crowd sounded fun. That later led into posing fully nude in men's magazines and appearing nude in movies.
- Erros de gravaçãoWhen Thunderclap Newman begin performing Hollywood Dream, the guitar playing singer has a lit cigarette jammed into the top of his guitar fret board and wisps of cigarette smoke are clearly visible. The cigarette disappears then reappears between long shots and close-ups.
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is Not Tonight, Darling?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- Not Tonight, Darling!
- Locações de filme
- Londres, Inglaterra, Reino Unido(filmed entirely on location in)
- Empresa de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
- Tempo de duração1 hora 30 minutos
- Mixagem de som
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente
Principal brecha
By what name was Not Tonight, Darling (1971) officially released in Canada in English?
Responda