The Doctor and the Playgirl (1965) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
3/10
More snooze-fest than sensation shocker
Leofwine_draca4 February 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Here's a film which has been marketed as a sensation film complete with exploitative taglines and the like ("The sex scandal that rocked the world!"). The end result is something different entirely, a rather sedate character drama about a doctor who falls in love with one of his clients, a put-upon playgirl. The story plays out in New York but the production is so cheap that the majority of the tale is filmed in just a couple of bedrooms.

The only part of this film that could be described as shocking is the opening sequence in which the main character is sexually attacked by her own stepfather. You don't see anything, of course, not in the early 1960s, but the implication is still enough. Later the film becomes a traditional romance, with a few scenes of characters in bed. There are even some loan sharks and gangsters lower down in the cast list. It's a dialogue-heavy production that offers very little in the way of entertainment value and is nothing more than a typical low budget tale.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Acceptable
blumdeluxe16 March 2017
Warning: Spoilers
"The Doctor and the Playgirl" surely isn't a shocker anymore nowadays. If people in the sixties were widely shocked by it I cannot tell but I could at least imagine that it represented very progressive models of relationships. In all of this it remains quite soft, there's nothing explicit in this film, rather the concepts presented are what marks it scandalous.

Personally I think that the story even has some potential. Not like in other "shocking" movies, there is kind of a plot worked out that could lead to suspense, unfortunately the realization is at best mediocre so that this is not really a movie that makes you forget everything around you.

What seemed a bit strange to me was the attempt to moralize a bit in the very end of the movie. That seemed a bit half-hearted for a movie advertising with sex and scandals.

All in all it is neither a great pleasure to watch this one, nor is it a torture. See and forget.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Boring story and boring leading man
lor_27 September 2023
Not much to enjoy in this would-be shocker, just another exploitation movie without the goods. Incumbent on pornographers, especially soft porn purveyors, is to whip up some thrills or diversion, and here we have none.

WIlliam McDaniels is an unsuccessful actor, who walks through this rare leading role in his sparse career. Static conversations with leading lady Ann Hutchinson drag on and on, going nowhere. Main story of quasi-prostitution, McDaniels on the hook with loan sharks and guest shots by boxers and non-celebrities -it's all filler.

Hutchinson has a British accent but doesn't play a British character, and is quite obscure -IMDb lists this as her only known credit. I watched the film as an early-career project for talented cinematographer Gayne Rescher, but his work here is unimpressive -probably given no resources or time to work some cinematic magic - a far cry from such classics he shot ranging from "A Face in the Crowd" and "Rachel, Rachel" to "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan".
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed