How sad is this?

Boring

Best movie ever!

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

I wasn't exactly expecting great things from the sequel to a shamelessly melodramatic film, but the least it could have done was do some things different...and well. In this followup to PEYTON PLACE (which I actually quite liked), Allison has now gotten a book deal for her first novel, "Samuel's Castle," which is based on her life and the people she knows in Peyton Place. However, after the book gets published (and that, after a long rewriting session), the townspeople don't find it flattering at all. That's basically because everything in the book was covered in the previous film. Despite the soapy and silly nature of the story, it still manages to say a few interesting, if unoriginal, things about small town life, censorship, and progressive values (at least for the time period in which it's set). However, most of this was relegated to a final scene which plays out in much the same way as the courtroom finale of its predecessor. Other positive things to say include that the cinematography, production design and sets were just as good this time around. However, too often this film decides to ride the coattails of what came before instead of exploring new intrigues and problems. Basically, it's dependent on the previous film to a fault. Of course, it doesn't help that none of the original cast is back, for whatever reason. The replacements simply didn't have the talent or charm that the previous cast did. Granted, there are a couple of decent performances, but only a couple. Those are Mary Astor (as Ted Carter's mother), and Tuesday Weld (as Selena Cross). Everyone else gave lifeless performances and amateurish-sounding line readings, living down to the soapy source material. Overall, RETURN TO PEYTON PLACE falls into the trap that many sequels find themselves in: it's content to rehash the previous film without much charm, no originality and, worst of all, a sub-par cast. The only reason I'm giving this as high of a rating as I am is because it was at least visually appealing, but otherwise there's not too much to recommend here. Only see this if soap operas really do it for you.

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.

In 2006 I finally read "Peyton Place" and "Return to Peyton Place". I was born in 1957. I'd seen Peyton Place on TV many times and have the video. I love the movie BECAUSE it was sanitized. I was shocked, yes, in this day and age I was shocked by the subject matter. Hated the book, love the movie.However, not only do I hate the sequel as written but I also hate the movie version as well. My problem with the movie is not only are the wonderful characters of Mr. Harrington, Doc Swain, Elsie Thornton and Seth Buswell missing but the entire cast has been changed. Not one original person is in the sequel. But the characters seem to have been written by someone who has never even read Peyton Place. Ted Carter and his mother seem more like Norman Page and his mother. Wasn't Ted Carter wondering how to pay for law school? Now his mother has a mansion and says she will buy her son a law partnership with Charlie Partridge. Selena Cross declares that "when she was 13, Luke threw me down, tore off my clothes and raped me!". She was 17 and about to graduate! Then there's the ridiculous line that her stepfathers' name was Luke not Lucas. Isn't Luke short for Lucas and does that really matter?There is no chemistry between any of the characters. The dialogue is silly, I don't really care about the characters and there is no "atmosphere" as in Peyton Place. The only notable dialogue is during the town meeting. I watch the movie because it's so bad. If it didn't have the words Peyton Place in the title it might stand on its own.I get chills when I hear Mary Astor's speech at the end about living to regret the decisions made in the town meeting for Peyton Place if they disregard the standards they have lived by all these years and which have made Peyton Place a decent and respectable place to live.She was right. What a shame no one listened to her.

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.