A lot of fun.

Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

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

The movie is made so realistic it has a lot of that WoW feeling at the right moments and never tooo over the top. the suspense is done so well and the emotion is felt. Very well put together with the music and all.

"Inside Daisy Clover" is a pointless and deceptive film with Natalie Wood in the lead role of Daisy Clover. The story has the intention to criticize the Hollywood industry but never works. Daisy Clover is a naive barefooted teenager tomboy that lives in a shack nearby the sea with her insane mother that out of the blue is discovered as a singer by Hollywood producer Raymond Swan and promoted to be the America´s darling in 1936 (meaning in the Depression decade). Like in any other business, she has to follow procedures. She becomes famous and has to protect her image. But she is rebel and does not accept the fate of her mother in an institution; and makes bad choices in love. Therefore this film is a huge disappointment that looks like a Mexican soap opera. My vote is four.Title (Brazil): "À Procura do Destino" ("Seeking the Destiny")

A great Hollywood story that unfortunately left me disconcerted by the fact that this is a story that takes place during the 1930s & 40's but Natalie Woods character is dressed and made up like she is in the 1960s. I think this lack of veracity simply throws off the entire film and prevents the story to really move forward. How did this immense detail escape Edith Head and the directors eye? As the story moves on you can see, perhaps the reason behind keeping Woods hair in an ugly short bob (maybe to make her look younger?) she is playing a 17 yr old although Wood was 27. The hair is frosted over by 1960s ugly highlights. Natalie Woods costumes are simply horrendous and the films ending looks way off and zany.

I enjoyed the movie, even though it has its flaws.One of the problems is that Daisy is really not a sympathetic character. Yes, you feel very sorry for her when Christopher Plummer's character informs her that she is no longer allowed to visit her mother in the asylum. However, she never seems to be grateful for her fame and monetary success. Instead she runs off with Redford's character when she is supposed to sing with a children's choir. She is being groomed for movie stardom the same way Judy Garland, Deanna Durbin, Kathryn Grayson, Jane Powell, and countless other singing and non singing performers were as well. The viewer doesn't really feel sorry for her since she almost seems to create much of her unhappiness. It is true that teenagers don't always think maturely, but back then with her poverty and fatherless life, one would think Daisy might be more grateful with her chance for success. Natalie's own voice was not good enough to be used for the songs (except for the brief introduction of "You're Gonna Hear From Me"), and it's evident when you listen to the FSM Silver Age Classics double CD recording of the film. I like Jackie Ward very much as a singer, but I don't think she sounded much like Natalie Wood. Carole Richards sang for Cyd Charisse in Brigadoon and Silk Stockings, and she sounded like Cyd. Rita Hayworth's vocal dubber Nan Wynn also sounded like her. If the film contained a more believable sound, I might have been more convinced that Daisy was more realistic. For fun, go to You Tube and look up the videos of lostvocals3. He presents the songs with Natalie's recorded tracks. I have never been a huge Natalie Wood fan. I enjoy her work, and I have seen several of her films. I do think she turned in a good performance, even though she never looked fifteen years old. They could have made the character a bit older but then you would lose out on the parts where they commit her mom due to her being a minor and also Redford's marriage proposal isn't as necessary. However, she does turn in a solid portrayal.I wish Redford's character could have been shown dallying with a handsome hunk, but it was 1965 after all. I enjoyed his performance, but I would have liked to have learned more about his character and his career. Was his career ever in danger due to his drinking and sexual partners? Was he protected as long as his box office stayed strong? I also wish I could have seen some real reaction from Daisy when he reappears long after he leaves her in Arizona. How can he just come back with flowers after dumping her? Well, it's the character all right. He is self absorbed and lacks responsibility.Christopher Plummer's character is ruthless. After kissing Daisy and getting involved with a minor (after he chastises Redford's character on the same behavior), he later says he doesn't care what she does or what happens to after she completes the movie she is in the middle of shooting. That's it. Finish the picture and he can get a new girl to take her place. It's true. When Garland left MGM in 1950, there was Debbie Reynolds, Jane Powell, and Kathryn Grayson to fill in. I enjoyed Plummer's chilling performance.I too wish Roddy McDowall had more to do, but he was fine with his limited screen time. I liked Ruth Gordon and Kathryn Bard was strong too.I agree with the many reviewers and their comments on the hairstyles and clothing not being really from the 1930s. However, I still think the film does a good job at showing the studio system at that time.

This film seems way ahead of it's time, made in 1965 it's one of the first to show a darker side of Tinsel Town. Natalie Wood plays a tomboy who's plucked from obscurity and becomes a teen singing star. Her character is almost immediately jaded by the experience, manipulated by a studio head and a dubious male heartthrob, played by a stunning looking Robert Redford. Ruth Gordon once again stands out as the teen stars' mother. Christopher Plummer is excellent as the smooth studio head with Roddy McDowall as his cold assistant. Katharine Bard plays Plummers' wife, and her character is fascinating. She seems to float and flow when she moves and her character sums up the film's overall feel. Distant, detached and alien yet seething with anger and disappointment.The problem with the film is that it's very dark in tone. That is to say the slick big budget production is overshadowed by a strange menace, highlighting the fact that the studio system was basically a people factory, uncaring and cannibalistic. Audiences at the time must have been very confused, expecting a light, breezy musical. Instead it's a realistic yet stylized downer, reminiscent of Valley of the Dolls, which was yet to come. There's very little genuine romance, sentiment or humor, just a steady flow of odd scenes.This is one of those movies that many have never heard of, it remains obscure despite it's almost epic appeal. It's certainly worth a look, but just try to nail it down to any specific category.