I know it's terrible as movie at that time, but it's a descent campy satiric tragicomedy and somewhat entertaining, makes you keep watching. I liked the strong 60s style. One of few movies which Sharon Tate is in.

FOR SOME REASON THEY DIDN"T REALIZE THEY WERE MAKING A COMEDY! The acting is terrible. The dialogue cringe worthy. The songs banal. This film is so bad you'll want to watch it again and again.

Part of the movie's strange appeal is the fact that it is both salacious and moralizing. It wants you to know what they are showing you is wrong while the filmmakers also delight in showing you this tawdry melodrama. If you can make it through the slow first half the sudden decent in the second is so bizzare that you can't stop watching it.

Iconic. Camp classic.

Trashy, Campy, With terrible overheated acting, Cheesy in the extreme, But still has a quasi entertainment value, It's also a little sad.

A film you watch to see if it's as bad as its reputation, and the answer is: "Not a lot worse than other Hollywood films of its era." The three principle actresses do a fair job given the limitations of the screenplay, which is choppy, to say the least. Things progress in an orderly manner, then drop off the cliff at almost exactly the halfway mark, at the pool scene between Martin Milner and Patty Duke. There's no exposition as to how she became a pill-popping diva. My most serious criticism is reserved for the producer or casting director for roping an aging Susan Haywood into this train wreck. Did she need a paycheck bad enough to be humiliated?

For all the fame that Sharon Tate has maintained since her untimely death, she was involved in shockingly few films that could be called popular; Valley of the Dolls is probably her most substantial project, but even this is known more for its satirical follow-up. Just another film about the poisoned nature of show business and fame, but told without power or nuance. For some reason the story splits itself across different characters just to show different paths to ruin - substance abuse, debauchery, whatever - rather than committing to a single, unified arc; this is apparently a holdover from the novel, which had the room to be more substantial. The stories are just silly bits of over-the-top melodrama, tons of theatrics that are just dolloped into the film like a gallon of whipped cream on top of a very small slice of pie; I'm sure some people could relate to the rise and fall narrative sincerely, but with all the talk of genetic diseases, cancer diagnoses, and spins in the asylum, this is really a movie that can only be enjoyed for its crowd-pleasing excess and unintentional humor than anything it does deliberately. Nice costuming and a good visual experience of showbiz in the '60s, but really just a stupid story masquerading as something more profound; Patty Duke literally has her hands up in the air calling out to God by the end. Mostly a sensationalized, oversexed version of A Star is Born or one of the other classic 'small town girl goes to Hollywood' scripts. (2/5)

In its day it was a scandalous drama, a soap opera. It touched on 3 women's trials in fame & fortune, sex, sexuality, drugs & alcohol in Hollywood. Beautiful Sharon Tate was in this film.

Actually a good cast! Including Joey Bishop & Georgie Jessel. SUSAN HAYWARD! & memorable theme music sung by DIONNE WARWICK & conducted by JOHN WILLIAMS. Saw the whole thing for the first time 7-17-2022. I may have seen it in 1967 when it came out but in a drive-in theater but the inside of my windshield was so foggy & we weren't paying attention to what was on the movie screen so Vaguely remember it but it certainly did 'pass the time'. Never much cared for Patty Puke (who became a drugged out starlet herself) but worth watching for SHARON TATE before she was murdered by the Manson gang. On my telly again 7.17.2022

Way underrated , it is a good movie.

entertaining for cultural background (cult classic)

My favorite bad movie. Irresistibly delicious.

My favorite bad movie. I love it, and find it by entertaining!!

I love it, have seen it many times. It is campy and corny but has a terrific cast and was a gigantic hit. The book was excellent also and Jacqueline Susanne was a solid writer.

My lifelong attraction to Patty Duke (don't ask), the clear allure of the late Sharon Tate and this film's cult status couldn't get me to care one second about this campy look at Hollywood starlets and what I hope are exaggerations, though I admittedly couldn't stop thinking about Lindsay Lohan. If the book is as long and drawn out as the film, I happily admit to only seeing the movie. It was beating enough.

There have been a lot of movies made about the dangers of fame and drugs in Hollywood. I’m not sure if Valley of the Dolls was one of the first, but it is effective. It takes the stories of 3 different girls and shows multiple different facets of how their lives are torn down by the lure of the limelight. I was most impressed with the performance of Patty Duke, who has the clearest arc in the film, and she played the shifting attitude of this character so well. I think the reason it impressed me so much is that I was accustomed to her from more innocent and sweet roles from the past, so I didn’t expect some of the places she went. There are a few musical numbers in the movie as well, which I loved, and I wish there were more of them. (They could have made the whole thing a musical and I would have been happy.) There was something odd about the story-telling structure of Valley of the Dolls that kept throwing me off. It seemed like there were no clear time transitions, and yet the movie takes place over a long chunk of time. There were scenes where it almost felt like they walked out one door, and then came in a different door and it was 5 years later. The story isn’t pleasant, takes some dark turns, and has little sign of hope or redemption for the characters. I’ve never been a huge fan of this kind of story, where we see self-destructive people bringing about their own downfall, so it’s not a big surprise that I didn’t love Valley of the Dolls. However it is a well-made film, and I appreciate a number of the elements that went into it.

A mildly amusing soap opera but not as involving as one would hope.

Valley of the Dolls isn't sleazy enough to be trash, or laughably bad enough to be schlock, it's just a straight up waste of time that drags on forever, even if it has nice cinematography and a wonderful color palette.

Three women in show business. There's ups, there's downs. There's parts to take, there's parts to turn down. there's men, there's drama, there's alcohol, there's drugs. Strong, believeable perfomances and a lot of story going on. It moves fast but steady, never easy to predict and there is no time to be bored here even if my interest is not the greatest. I miss some true character knowledge - but it's never really a film that can focus on that matter. It's a bit sloppy, in a way. Not in ways of production, but the total idea. A sad mess, in a happy wrapping. All the fakeness shines trough, but they do not want the viewer to see the total pacakge in a way, just like in real showbiz. A nice move I think. Shannon Tate must be one of the prettiest girls of the 60's. The poor girl seemed troubled at times, but she could really act too. She is great here, beeing that natural stunner she was, even if I'm pretty sure that given image annoyed her a bit her entire life. Dolls is used as a metaphor for pills here so the title seem very fitting. OK film, that's showing of important matters and probably known facts in a delicatly off-beat way. 6 out of 10 dolls.

Great production value just churning out drivel.