User reviews

The novel "Forever Amber" was wildly popular after debuting in 1944. But it also was banned in 16 states as well as abroad! Why? Because it was essentially a historical where the leading lady, Amber, sleeps her way from obscurity to the mistress of some of the most important men in the land. Today, it would be seen as somewhat tame...but in the 1940s it caused a sensation.

Now this brings up a serious problem In the Hollywood of 1947, the Production Code made it virtually impossible to film the script unless huge changes were made in the story. Well, apparently Twentieth Century-Fox STILL didn't sanitize the story enough...and the Catholic Legion of Decency condemned the film. The movie was quickly withdrawn from theaters, scenes were re-shot and it returned to theaters....where it was wildly successful. Despite a huge price tag of $6,000,000, it went on to be the top grossing film of the year. I wonder how much of the Catholic Legion of Decency hubbub actually ended up HELPING the film!

Linda Darnell stars as Amber St. Clair, a young girl from a good middleclass English family who lived during the Restoration period (when the monarchy was invited back to rule after the death of Cromwell in 1660). Amber is NOT a normal lady by any standard of the day and her family shocked when she not only refuses to marry the man they picked out for her but she then runs away to make her fortune. This essentially consists of sleeping her way up through the English gentry....with a brief period in which she slummed it with a highwayman. Throughout all her many affairs, she is most devoted to Bruce Carlton (Cornel Wilde)...though they never seem to connect up for long.

When I watched the movie, I could tell some cuts had been made in a few places. One was odd, as she suddenly ended up pregnant...and you really weren't sure what happened there and it remained that way through much of the picture! Well, she obviously slept with a guy....but who? And, after the baby was born you don't hear any more about the baby until late in the story. Was the tike misplaced somewhere or perhaps taken by aliens and then returned? Who knows?!

As far as the film goes, in many ways it's like a reworking of the Pre-Code film, "Red-Headed Woman"...in which Jean Harlow's character sleeps her way up through the social ranks. But of the two, "Red-Headed Woman" is the better film in many ways....mostly because it was much more open about the character's sexuality and the movie ended with the character receiving neither punishment nor learning a thing along the way! But with bowing to the Legion of Decency's demand for cuts, the film comes off as more episodic and confusing about Amber's sex life! Plus, let's be honest, the film is a lot less entertaining when it's less sleazy. As far as the production goes, it looks nice in rich Technicolor...but is also a tad stilted and dull after a while.

Overlong, overwrought romantic epic that lacks chemistry between the leads. Linda Darnell is passable as Amber -- if not stunningly talented, then at least gifted with screen presence. But Cornell Wilde is as flat as a wet blanket, dousing the fire out of every scene where it might possibly have ignited. Most errors in movies of this type can be overlooked if the attraction between the two lovers is palpable. Sadly, there is no indication that Wilde's Carlton even likes Amber, let alone finds her alluring. Production code aside, there were plenty of movies of this period that portrayed believable epic love, and this isn't one of them.

The real highlight here is George Sanders as the licentious Charles II, a part he was born to play. I have no doubt that Vincent Price, considered for the role, could have done well (he gave the best performance of his career in another Preminger movie, "Laura"), but Sanders brings so much dripping wit and irony to everything he does that he makes every scene he's in come alive. He's not in it much, however.

The production itself is pretty good, some great costumes and sets. The swordfighting scene (with thankfully little dialogue) was excellent and far too short. The story itself is a little choppy. The first scene was a non-sequitur, promising a potentially interesting plot device that never came. And the ending was a complete disaster - abrupt, unresolved, unbalanced, and worst of all, unsatisfying. Overall, the movie leaves a sour taste in the mouth, as if the decadence that was portrayed somehow got hold of the people making it and caused them to focus more on the image than on the story.

Kathleen Windsor's racy best-seller lost some of its punch in transition to the screen--mainly because censorship restrictions forced a complete whitewash of Amber St. Clair's exploits in bed-hopping. What is left is mild compared to today's graphic depiction of sex--but since the story unfolds against an interesting historical background in London during the reign of Charles II, it is worth viewing. Linda Darnell was not the first choice for Amber--Peggy Cummins began the role but after filming several scenes was dismissed as being too immature. Linda makes a voluptuous, willful Amber. Cornel Wilde is excellent as Bruce Carlton, her true love--although an unrequited one by the film's end. George Sanders does a terrific job as Charles II, spouting some of the film's wittiest dialogue and clever in his cat-and-mouse game with Amber. Richard Haydn as the Earl of Radcliffe gives perhaps the most interesting performance in the entire film, particularly during the fire sequences. The London fire is staged with authority, as are the scenes involving the Black Plague. David Raksin's musical background is a sumptuous, richly textured score (now available on CD from Marco Polo records). A film full of rich details under Otto Preminger's direction--but not as strong because of censorship restrictions and the inability to tell the story the way Windsor wrote it. The ending is entirely too abrupt in the video print with the original lengthier ending missing for some reason. Fans of Linda Darnell and Cornel Wilde will especially like this one.

It's 1644 and Civil War grips England. Baby Amber is found at the doorstep of a puritan family in the countryside. She is the product of a scandal from opposing sides of the war. It's 1660. Oliver Cromwell is dead and the monarchy is restored. Amber (Linda Darnell) refuses an arranged marriage and longs for a high class life. She uses her sex to social climb her way to the top. She follows a group of Royalist led by Lord Bruce Carlton (Cornel Wilde) and his friend Lord Almsbury to London. Her journey would take her to the court of King Charles II. Bruce gets her privateering ship. She gets pregnant and sent to debtors' prison where she joins highwayman Black Jack Mallard. They escape prison and go on their crime spree. Jack is killed and she is rescued by Captain Rex Morgan who introduced her to acting in the theater. That's where she reconnects with Lord Almsbury who is now married with a child. She continues to social climb as she pines for her true love Bruce.

This is based on a period-piece romance novel. The name that caught my eye is director Otto Preminger. It's three years after his stylistic masterpiece Laura. It's the days of the powerful studio head and Zanuck had him under contract. He is given this prestige affair with a big budget. The material is rather scandalous at the time which Zanuck used with the expected censor opposition. It's nothing nowadays and this costume affair seems rather stiff. I don't know much about Linda Darnell. She seems to have a long and varied career with this as one of her highlights. She's beautiful and she's doing some broad acting. This is reminiscent of the style of Gone with The Wind except it is far inferior. It's rather pulpy where the sexual opportunism wears out its salacious welcome. It's compelling enough to watch but I don't find the ambitious Amber to be that appealing.

I tried reading Kathleen Windsor's famous novel but found it too long and full of excess baggage. It didn't capture my attention the way that other famous historical novel, "Gone with the Wind" did.

And while I can't say I liked this film as much as GWTW, it was nevertheless very entertaining and held my interest the way the book couldn't. There was enough history, drama, romance and intrigue to make it worthwhile, without going overboard and getting bogged down with unnecessary detail and incidents.

What was most interesting about Amber (Linda Darnell at her best) was how you can understand her motives without having to agree with them, like her unwillingness to give up on Bruce, who had more than one opportunity to make an "honest woman" of her but didn't want to take them. At times, she does what she has to do, at others, she chooses her options. Her ambitions and schemes never get her what she truly wants, despite her rise in social position and material wealth.

Cornell Wilde gives a good performance as Bruce Carlton, the love of Amber's life, who prefers his freedom, at least where she's concerned.

I also liked George Sanders as King Charles II, who falls for Amber's charms, yet won't be anyone's fool.

Very entertaining!

If Forever Amber were being made today the results would have been quite different. Without The Code and the Catholic Legion of Decency inspecting all the product that came from Hollywood, Amber St. Clair's sexual escapades during Restoration Great Britain would have been a far better film. Still it's not bad as it is.

Another reviewer compared it to Gone With the Wind. You can look at that in two ways, the interaction between Linda Darnell and Cornel Wilde and compare it to Vivien Leigh and Clark Gable. Lots of similarities there. But also the book itself was a blockbuster best seller in the Forties as Gone With the Wind was in the previous decade and brought in a built-in audience.

Kathleen Winsor when she wrote the novel was married to her first husband a football player who was a history student. For his honor's thesis he was writing about the Stuart Restoration. From his research material, Winsor became fascinated with the period and created her novel.

20th Century Fox and Otto Preminger got the rights and did a fine job in recreating the United Kingdom of the 1660s. Linda Darnell got one of her best roles in her career as Amber, a high spirited and vivacious girl like Scarlett O'Hara, who finds true love, but sacrifices it for ambition.

In class conscious times as those were there were few venues for people to rise, even less if you were a woman. Darnell rises from Newgate Prison to the court of Charles II where she becomes one of Charles's numerous mistresses. Along the way she uses many men, like highwayman John Russell, army captain Glenn Langan, nobleman Richard Haydn and even her own true love nobleman Cornel Wilde with whom she has a son out of wedlock.

Presiding over it all is a world weary and cynical George Sanders who plays Charles II. Sanders would play The Merry Monarch in another and vastly inferior film called The King's Thief. He does capture the jaded cynicism of Charles II so very well, it's one of his top five career parts.

If the title role in the film were about the male lead Bruce Carlton, I'm sure Darryl Zanuck would have cast Tyrone Power in the part as he appeared in several films opposite Linda Darnell. Instead Cornel Wilde steps in and he's a most dashing Restoration nobleman and seeker of fortune in the New World.

The most spellbinding performance and so against type is that of Richard Haydn as the elderly rake, Lord Radcliff. He's a widower who's looking for a 17th century trophy wife and finds one in Linda who at the point in time he first meets her is an actress. He's a coldblooded person of mystery and menace and really registers it well on the screen. He marries Linda and she inherits his title when he dies.

Haydn is killed in a thrilling scene involving the great fire of London which occurred in 1666. It's the highlight of the film and I can't say any more about how and why he's killed, but trust me it was one deserved end.

Though Forever Amber is a good film, it could have been far better, but for censorship problems. Still it provides Darnell, Sanders, and Haydn with some of their best career parts and is worth seeing.

Kathleen Winsor's novel is frequently referred to as a "bodice ripper", a description often used for mildly salacious historical romances, generally featuring passionate, strong-willed heroines and dashing, tempestuous heroes. Although the Catholic League of Decency saw to it that much of the salaciousness went missing between book and screen (Puritanism in America is clearly not an exclusively Protestant phenomenon), the film version still preserves a healthy ration of tempestuous passion. The heroine is Amber St Clair, a beautiful farmer's daughter in the reign of Charles II, who becomes an actress, a fashionable London lady and eventually the mistress of the King himself. The decade immediately following the Restoration was one of the most dramatic in English history, and the plot of "Forever Amber" milks that drama to the full, featuring plague, fire, a highwayman, a duel, and the heroine's numerous love affairs.

I would agree with the reviewer who pointed out the similarity of the plot to that of "Gone with the Wind", with Amber as a seventeenth-century Scarlett O'Hara and her lover Lord Bruce Carlton as the Rhett Butler figure, the one man whom the heroine truly loves but eventually loses. Amber's obsession with Bruce brings out the best in her character- she courageously and selflessly nurses him through the plague- but also the worst, seen in her unsuccessful attempts to destroy his relationship with his new American wife Corinne. It also ruins her chances of happiness with any other man, leading to the deaths of her elderly husband and a fiancé (killed in a duel) and to the loss of the King's favour. (He cannot bear the idea that his mistresses might have feelings for other men).

The ending of the film, in which Amber loses her young son to Bruce and Corinne, seems to have been added by the film-makers to placate the League of Decency, showing her being punished for her sins. It also provides the pretext for a display of American patriotism, with the implication that the boy will enjoy a morally purer life in the New World away from the aristocratic decadence of the Old. This contrast between the innocence and purity of Young America and the cynicism and corruption of Old Europe is, of course, a common theme in American popular culture, but I was rather surprised to find it pushed as far back into history as the good old colonial days of the sixteen-sixties. As young Bruce junior was destined to become the master of a Virginia plantation built on slave labour, I doubt if his new life in the colonies was any morally purer than the life he might have led as an English aristocrat and the son of the King's mistress.

As a historical melodrama, "Forever Amber" is not in the same class as "Gone with the Wind". This is partly because of the look of the film- the colour is rather dark and muddy- but mostly because the leading actors could not bring to their roles the same depth that Vivien Leigh and Clark Gable brought to Scarlett O'Hara and Rhett Butler. I found it ironic that Peggy Cummins was sacked from the part of Amber because she was not "worldly enough", as I felt that Linda Darnell also came across as too young and innocent, particularly in the later scenes where Amber has matured into a scheming courtesan. It perhaps might have been a better film if the slightly older and more experienced Susan Hayward (who was also considered) had got the part. As for Cornell Wilde, he made a rather uncharismatic Bruce, and I found it difficult to conceive of him as the great love of Amber's life. The other characters do not make much impression, with the exception of George Sanders' King Charles. He was perhaps slightly too old for the part (Charles was only thirty at the time of the Restoration) but his cynical, saturnine interpretation of the role was probably closer to the real Charles than the dashing "merry monarch" of the popular imagination. Him apart, however, this film is a largely forgettable historical melodrama. 5/10

Somewhat saucy romp has a ravishingly beautiful and amber haired Linda Darnell in the lead full of piquant carnality, lavish costumes and settings and a scene stealing George Sanders as Charles II. What it doesn't have is a lively pace and that to some extent is its undoing. Preminger was the wrong director for a piece of entertainment like this that required a florid touch, Michael Curtiz would have been much more at home at the helm.

The novel this is based on was a notorious but tremendously successful sensation of its day. That book while certainly not "A Great American Novel" is a highly enjoyable piece of pulp fiction full of sex, murder and double crosses in fancy clothes with a complex, very entertaining heroine at its center who has a good heart but is not overly burdened with morals. Unfortunately since they tried to film it in the forties when the Production Code was in full force the more salacious plot points had to be excised. What made it to the screen has its moments but shows the heavy hand of censors most evident in the abrupt ending but scattered throughout the movie. Still a fun romp with Linda giving a spirited performance and for those who haven't read the book a somewhat racy tone.

A troubled production from the beginning what with censorship problems, a recast leading lady, Linda Darnell stepped in after production had started when Peggy Cummings didn't work out and Lana Turner couldn't be borrowed from MGM and a martinet in the director's chair.

There are still a few amusing stories connected to the backstage upheaval that went on. Linda Darnell had worked with Preminger before on Fallen Angel and it had been rough going but she truly came to loathe him during production of Amber. Later while filming A Letter to Three Wives Joseph Mankiewicz needed her to throw a look of disgust at a picture unseen by the audience, to achieve that look he slipped a picture of Preminger into the frame without her knowledge, he got his look.

A small sampling of Preminger's directorial style: after acting out a scene for Linda and Cornel Wilde he screamed at them as they tried to do as he had instructed "Don't do it like I did it! Do it like I meant it!"

One peripheral story: when Ava Gardner was briefly married to Artie Shaw he flew into a rage and berated her when he caught her reading Forever Amber saying it was trash and she should be focusing her attention on things that would enrich her mind, he was that kind of husband. They divorced shortly after and within the year he had married Kathleen Winsor...the author of Forever Amber!

I just wanted to say that for an old movie, it was okay. I read the book before I saw the movie, and usually that is cause for nitpicking. I think that the main problems I had with the movie were that it seemed to jump around a lot and I don't think I would have known what was going on if I hadn't read the book. Also, one comment mentioned that the ending could have led to a sequel, which I guess is true. But, in the book, Amber lets Bruce and Corrine take little Bruce, and then Amber's enemies tell her that Corrine has died, so Amber takes off to America to be with him. The problem is, Corrine is alive, Amber's enemies simply wanted to be rid of her. I really think it would be great if the movie were remade today, with all the details. I would pay to see it!

Otto Preminger is a director whose movies I've come to really admire and enjoy, from his early black and white noirs of the mid - 40's to his boundary-challenging movies of the mid-to-late 50's and his political thrillers of the early 60's. While he has probably never had the consistency to be accorded the reverence paid to, say Hitchcock or Ford, or more recently perceived auteurs like say Wyler and Hawks, I find myself rating many of his movies quite highly. How then, he landed this gig of adapting a popular, racy historical novel of the day for the big screen, is difficult to credit.

It is what it is, as the phrase goes. It's a richly decorated costume drama concerning the rather unoriginal story of a baby girl, abandoned by her Cavalier family during the 17th Century English Civil War and left Moses-like at the door of a Puritan Roundhead middle-aged couple to be brought up in their image as a God-fearing do-gooder young woman, to be married off at the earliest opportunity to the local neighbour's son. Well, Moses young Amber isn't and when she starts to realise the effect of her dazzling beauty on men of all social positions, it's obvious she'll not be chained to a life of dull drudgery. Instead, she will unabashedly use her considerable attributes and feminine wiles to move her up the social ladder, in the end leading her all the way up into the orbit of the philandering King Charles II. The only trouble is she's still madly in love with her first and only love, the adventurer Bruce Carlton, also the father of her son. How will Amber's conflicting loyalties resolve themselves and will she ever find true love?

All Preminger merely has to do here is set up his cameras and let the episodic moments occur in Amber's eventful life. Adapting chameleon-like to her surroundings, be they a prison or the Royal Court, her ruthless ambition and determination to succeed are unstoppable, with only two men able to thwart her, Carlton and the King. The Production Code was still in play and Preminger this early in his career wasn't about to test it as he would in the 50's, so a lot of Amber's shenanigans are diluted for the viewing public, even if its still fairly obvious to deduce that she didn't get ahead by playing the choir-girl.

The movie certainly sprawls as Preminger piles in the major incidents of the courtesan's lurid life and he gets good performances from Linda Darnell in the title role and especially George Sanders as the sly old king, the one person better than Amber at practicing the dark art of deception.

I enjoyed the film without ever really engaging with it, often admiring the backgrounds and costumes more than the drama itself. The film had a massive budget and it was Preminger's main job I guess to present the movie in such a way as to ensure it made its money back and that it did. It is possible to make a blockbuster movie which has lasting cinematic merit but "Forever Amber" isn't one of those and isn't really one of those I would choose to sit through again in a hurry.

Back in the days when the Roman Catholic censorship body, the Legion of Decency, had an unwarranted share of influence over the major Hollywood studios and their product, Darryl F. Zanuck, head of production at 20th-Century Fox, found himself embroiled in plenty of hot water with the L. of D. militia over his plans to film Kathleen Winsor's wildly popular succes du scandale "Forever Amber." We can be grateful he braved the fulminations of the clerics and their cohorts and lavished class "A" production values on this entertaining spectacle. Of course the more salacious aspects of Miss Winsor's story are toned down and softened, but there's a rather bitterly astringent tone to the proceedings, nevertheless.

The cast performs ably under the legendarily tyrranical Otto Preminger, whose direction of some sequences does seem a bit perfunctory. Linda Darnell is gorgeously gowned and lovingly photographed in three-strip Technicolor by Leon Shamroy, at his professional best. (I will agree that some scenes, especially at the beginning, seem a bit underlit, possibly due to an inferior VHS video transfer...I have never seen this on a big screen.) Miss Darnell holds her own against the likes of George Sanders, giving one of his wittiest performances as King Charles II, and her line readings, spoken in that delicious speaking voice of hers, ring true for the most part. The always reliable Richard Haydn, as the loathsome Earl of Radcliffe, convinces us that his grisly fate is well-deserved. And even the usually laconic Cornel Wilde convinces as a suitable object of Amber's steadfastly unrequited passion.

Best of all David Raksin's score achieves near-operatic grandeur, lending a sensual sweep that underscores one of Twentieth's really memorable costumers. Alfred Newman, head of Twentieth's music department, masterfully conducted Raksin's music, back in the days when the major studios employed full-time orchestras of musicians whose talents rivalled the players of the best symphony orchestras of the day and, perhaps, even now. Of course the video's audio track doesn't do the musical score the justice it deserves and it may be that in the late Forties when this was made, only the Warner Brothers studio sound technicians achieved full sonority on the optical tracks on which were recorded the scores of Korngold and Steiner and the other masters who worked at that rival studio.

I did enjoy Otto Preminger's "Forever Amber" a bit while watching it. Then of course I learned that the studio changed it to assuage the Legion of Decency. Seriously, had I been around back then, I would've deliberately filled my movie with things that would've given every member of the Legion of Decency a massive heart attack. Of course, such a movie probably couldn't have gotten released (thank you very much, Hays Code!).

Anyway, this story of a girl who sleeps her way up the ladder in Restoration-era England has a lot going for it, even if it doesn't reach its full potential. I would've liked to see a version made after the Hays Code got abolished. Otherwise, the actors give great performances, despite the conspicuous differences in accents. The score received an Academy Award nomination.

In addition to Linda Darnell, Cornel Wilde, Richard Greene and George Sanders, the cast includes Jessica Tandy (a few decades before playing a woman forced to accept her African-American chauffeur), Leo G. Carroll (soon to be the boss of the men from U.N.C.L.E.) and Alan Napier (soon to be Batman's butler).

Forever Amber (FA) is a classic example of how a major controversial studio-system project evolved from a troubled production into a commercially successful movie. It was based on the sexy popular novel written by Kathleen Winsor and tagged by studio head Darryl F. Zanuck to be the biggest film made by Twentieth Century-Fox in 1947.

From its earliest efforts, FA was destined not to be an easy film to make. Original director John M. Stahl and lead actress Peggy Cummins were the first to go, after Zanuck found their work unsatisfactory. He turned to then-contract director Otto Preminger to salvage the production, but he had little interest in doing so. Preminger disliked the novel and wanted Lana Turner to now play Amber rather than Zanuck's personal choice---TCF contract player Linda Darnell. However, Turner was under contract to MGM at the time, while Darnell was a TCF employee (like Preminger). In the end, Preminger did what he was told to do. Zanuck gave Preminger a new script and production, but the director remained unhappy with the final result.

Would the film have been more successful with Turner as Amber? Probably not. Turner had an acting range somewhat similar to Darnell's. With the wisdom of hindsight, it seems that the Amber role should have gone to an actress who could convey more strength, spirit and courage. At that time, someone like Susan Hayward or Maureen O'Hara might have been able to make a real difference in creating the Amber character. But Zanuck was the boss of TCF, and the project had to conform to his vision of it. That FA turned out as well as it did is a tribute to the often high quality results obtained from the collaborative efforts possible under the studio system.

While many critics had little praise to offer for the acting of FA's two principal leads (Darnell and Cornel Wilde), George Sanders is often singled out for his sardonic performance as King Charles II. But to this reviewer, the best acting in the film came from character player Richard Haydn. His Clifton Webb imitation as Amber's rich elderly husband was quite entertaining, droll and thoroughly appropriate.

An interesting side note to the casting in FA. Jessica Tandy played without any particular distinction the rather bland and colorless role of Amber's servant Nan Britton. Almost at the same time, she lit the New. York stage with her performance as the original Blanche du Bois in A. Streetcar Named Desire---for which she received a Tony Award in 1948. . It is hard to imagine two such different performances coming from the same actress at about the same time.

Many people believe that FA is really a disguised version of Gone with the Wind. I submit that it is much closer in plot and spirit to the lesser known but more enjoyable period romance Kitty (1945), directed with great style by the under appreciated Mitchell Leisen. It is too bad that Kitty was shot in black and white. Once again--blame the studio system!

This movie is about an ambitious, bold, shrewd but a charming lady who is raised in a poor family, however, she has aimed high plans for her future. She takes no time to leave the poor family and embarks upon a tough and challenging journey towards London. From rags to riches, we see her go through harsh and trying times, but she surpasses the difficulties with her unending debaucheries and affairs ranging from a thief to King of England.

The movie is set in 17th century England and filmed in USA with portrayal of 17th century London, which is adeptly performed. At times, it feels like the old London envisioned by Charles Dickens in his works.

The sets and costumes are spectacular, presenting time and style that of the 17th century that too in Technicolor. The script is a bit inconsistent respecting the portrayal of lead character of Amber St. Claire (Linda Darnell). George Sanders has superbly performed the role of King Charles II; performance of other lead actors is also superb.

Perhaps had Otto Preminger just been a bit more judicious with the razor blade in the edit, this rather over-long drama might have been more enjoyable. As it is, it takes far too long to establish the story of the disenfranchised "Amber" (Linda Darnell) whose family were on the wrong side at the end of the English Civil war. Upon the restoration of King Charles II (George Sanders) her prospects start to look better, and to that end she allies herself with "Lord Carlton" (Cornel Wilde) and his friend "Lord Almsbury" (Richard Greene) and a bumpy ride of men, prison and opportunity ensues. Not to put too fine a point on it, "Amber" is quite prepared to use all of her feminine wiles to achieve her goals, and as she moves onwards and upwards, she equally finds herself more and more alone - a position that becomes much clearer as the great fire of London changes everything. The drama depicts well the ambitious woman, and Darnell carries off the part quite successfully, but Wilde is well past his best here and Green doesn't really impose himself often enough to make much impact on rather plodding nature of the chronology. Sanders is adequate in a role he played more than once and the whole look of the film captures well the sense of optimism and opportunism that prevailed upon the return of the King. Keep an eye out for Jessica Tandy amongst a competent supporting cast that also features Richard Haydn in the rather implausible guise of her wealthy and jealous husband "Radcliffe". It's a largely forgotten film, this, and though I did quite enjoy watching it, I can understand why. I am fan of the genre, and Darnell does well here, but it's all just a bit lacklustre.

Story takes place in 1660 England. Strong willed 16 year old Amber St. Clair (Linda Darnell) falls in love with bland Bruce Carlton (Cornel Wilde). She follows him to England but he doesn't love her. So Amber decides to become rich and powerful no matter what.

The book this was based on was a HUGE bestseller in the 1940s. It was (for its time) a racy book that makes it clear that Amber sleeps her way to the top. Also the book was historically accurate and (even at 800+ pages) a fascinating read. 20th Century Fox took the book, jettisoned all the racy stuff (more or less) and spent great care and no expense in bringing this to the screen. It's in beautiful color with gorgeous costumes and sets. Sure, there are plot holes and bad acting but this is never dull and speeds along. Even at 140 minutes it didn't seem too long.

Darnell is beautiful and pretty good in the lead. George Sanders matches her playing Charles II. He's clearly enjoying himself. Richard Greene is good also popping up as a friend of Ambers. However Wilde is pretty bad as Carlton--you keep wondering what Amber sees in him. The silly wig he wears doesn't do him any favors. It's kind of funny to realize this was considered pretty dirty back in 1947. It wouldn't raise an eyebrow today and, as it is, the movie never makes it clear that Amber is sleeping around.

So it's colorful, elaborate and well worth catching. The book was better but this is easier than reading it! An 8.

This film is an adaptation of the novel written by Kathleen Winsor. And it certainly feels very literary, as if a large tome were condensed into a film slightly over two hours long. In its day, it was compared in many ways to "Gone With the Wind", but GWTW was given nearly four hours to interpret Margaret Mitchell's saga. So, the filmic story of "Forever Amber" feels peripatetic.

Set in the 17th century, the central story is filmed against the backdrop of historical events in and around London. Amber (Linda Darnell) begins as a foundling who is raised in a strict, Puritan family. Frustrated by the constraints of her religion, she leaves her country home at age sixteen and makes her way to London, where Charles II has regained the throne.

There are two central themes. Firstly, she develops an obsessive love for an adventurer who becomes a privateer named Bruce Carlton (Cornel Wilde). Through all her misfortunes she maintains her goal of wedding Bruce, while he displays mere affection for her. Secondly, she will do whatever it takes to advance through the levels of society, presumably to reach a station worthy of Bruce's affection.

Darnell is just as strikingly beautiful as the script requires. Men fall at her feet, and it is quite believable. Wilde, on the other hand, feels miscast. In fact, there are a number of actors in this film that could more believably portray the object of her lifelong fascination. It has been said that Wilde was not thrilled with being in this film, so that may have been a factor.

Still, the film was a huge success. And other actors delivered strong performances, like Leo G. Carroll, who believably portrayed Amber's foster father. And Anne Revere, who plays a dangerous gang leader named Mother Red Cap. And George Sanders, who is wonderful as the multifaceted Charles II, who danced while London burned.

One cannot help but wonder what might have been if Tyrone Power had given life to Bruce Carlton. And despite a solid performance by Linda Darnell, considering Lana Turner in the lead role is an interesting idea.

This movie was the highest grossing movie of 1947. And yet didnt do much for its star. This was a big expensive film,the studio gambled on this one,Darnell was finally asked to carry a big movie which should have skyrocketed her career. But her career after this one was more mediocre parts in mediocre movies. The reason i believe is because even though this movie made money ,the leading character is so unlikable,that audiences didnt have much cause to be fond of Linda Darnell. Usually,actors become very popular from some popular role. Noone could have been popular portraying this woman who tried to manipulate everyone from peasants to the KIng. It is based on bestselling book,but best sellers dont always make popular movies. Darnell didnt get lucky with this one,if only her big movie was to be portraying someone likable she could have had a different career. But basicaly thats the main problem of this movie. Other than that the production values are good but the story of this 17th century woman who wants to get to the top while obessing for a man who cares very little for her, leaves a lot to be desired.

I had not seen Forever Amber since I saw it in a theater as a young girl and was completely captivated by the intrigue and the flash and dash of it all.

Seeing it now as a MUCH older woman, I see the holes, mostly in the lighting which is quite dim even when it should be bright. Perhaps the set designer was trying to give the effect of period lighting.

I was struck by how much the story follows the bare-bones of Gone With The Wind, in particular the way it ends and the glamorous and enigmatic Baron Carlton- Cornell Wilde, walk away with the child while Amber watches from the window. A perfect opening for the sequel that never came.

Forever Amber doesn't even pretend to be a GREAT film, but it is a good one with good acting and some wonderful touches, especially George Sanders' terrific "Snidley Whiplash" aka James II. as he calls his brace of King Charles spaniels "children".

Linda Darnell is lovely but not as accomplished an actress as Vivian Leigh (or as beautiful). Cornell Wilde is NOT Clark Gable-but who was? Still, both manager to give satisfactory performances.

Wilde's best scenes are with the child who looks very much like him. There is a warmth and humor about Wilde when he is interacting with the child that is charming. His Baron Carlton is aloof and something of a snob with everyone else. He is aware of his station in life and unable to break his code of behavior even for Amber. I have no doubt he likes her, but I don't think he ever loved her in the same way she loved him. He never really seems to empathize with her struggles, but is genuinely grateful to her for saving his life and delighted with his young son. He is an puzzle wrapped in a conundrum.

Amber is all surface. She has the depth of a parking-lot puddle and I find myself wishing Maureen O'Hara had been cast. Then REAL sparks would fly. In Darnell's Amber we get a smudge-pot. Oh well.

The glimpses of the court and old London, the plague and the fire are interesting and, in general the film is FUN.

My one REAL regret is that we never see enough of Wilde fencing. He was a National fencing champion and on the 1936 Olympic Fencing team, but his fencing scene in Amber is shot through fog so dense you can hardly see him. That's a shame!!

Enjoy that barn-burner for what it is, not what it could have been!

"You've done very well for yourself, Amber."

With this line, Cornell Wilde's character shows himself a master of understatement. It is delivered coldly, with neither criticism nor respect.

FOREVER AMBER is the portrait of a peasant girl who refused to be destroyed by her poverty and the hopeless prospects awaiting her. She used her sexuality and her brains to become the King's consort.

This film presents a vivid portrait of life in England before the Cromwellian revolution. It was an amoral, extremely cynical, heartlessly cruel society.

Linda Darnell's performance is a tour de force. She manages to play the strumpet, while letting the audience see her strength of character shining through all the while. Her love for the fickle Bruce Carlton/Cornell Wilde is too deep for him to ever understand.

One of the most haunting episodes in classic films is the depiction of London in the grip of the Black Plague. Amber risks her life by staying at Bruce's side through his delirium and personally performing the surgery that saves him.

Amber's tragedy is one that every woman who has ever had to fight for herself in this world can recognize. The movie is far more than a period soap opera. In fact, with David Raksin's incredible orchestral score, the production could have provided the framework for the composition of a real opera.... La Boheme, move over!