MovieChat Forums > Darling (2016) Discussion > the license. (spoiler alert)

the license. (spoiler alert)

posted 9 years ago by splintzspc
5 replies | jump to latest

i thought darling was a very good movie. i took a good look at the license because i wanted to see what time period the movie was suppose to be taking place in.

in the beginning when she is walking through the house it showed all old stuff like the phone and it could be taking place in the 40'2, 50's, 60's. then she goes to her bedroom and there is a modern window AC unit. also in the diner when she is drinking coffee you can see modern dressed people walking around and brand new cars driving by. not a big deal if it was a goof or because of small budget. but i was trying to figure out if it was modern day but made to feel like an old movie. or just a goof. so when the license popped up on the screen i really looked at it.

-i saw the names and the importance of the names that the producers wanted you to see.
-i also saw that the "man" was born in 1940 and that the license expired in 1971. making the a time frame for the movie between 1965-1971.
-also he stated he grew up down the street from the haunted house when he went back with her for drinks. the license was clearly a Michigan license.

[–] or_bill68 9 years ago

A lot of people are into retro decor. Meaning even in modern times, people can have phones and such that look old.

[–] splintzspc 9 years ago

i know. while watching the movie i was just wondering what year it was taking place in. darling's clothing and hair style was also retro not only the decor in the apartment. so that is why i looked closely at the license. according to the license the movie takes place somewhere between approximately 1965-1971. since "the man" birth date on the license was 1940 and the license expired in 1971. i was just wondering if the license being a Michigan license was relevant to the story line since it takes place in Manhattan and he stated he grew down the street from the house as a kid.

[–] robbytara 8 years ago

So he had a 'retro' drivers license?? I would also assume the period of the movie was the latter 60s. Another thing, the police towards the end carried revolvers, NYC cops have not carried revolvers for over twenty years.

[–] essex9999 8 years ago

Agreed. The filmmakers were a bit ambiguous about the date. For example, there were glimpses of modern vehicles, and at least one nighttime outdoor scene featured buildings that looked very 21st century. But everything else pointed to the late 1960s.

Most telling was Lovely's appearance, not only the below-the-shoulders "flip" hairstyle and heavy black eye makeup, but her dress. That's a very distinctive look - simple shift dress, just above the knee, dark fabric (possibly velvet, although it's hard to tell on screen), white lace collar and cuffs, white stockings, flats. It's characteristic of the mid- or late 60s and no other time. So maybe she was into retro costumes ...? Well, except that almost every outdoor scene was shot (and then, presumably, edited since it did not look like stock footage) to show only pre-1970 buildings.

I don't know if Keating was being deliberately ambiguous with the few modern elements or if they just could not afford to reproduce a ±1968 street scene, but I do believe we're meant to experience the film as though it was happening ... and was made? ... 50 years ago.

[–] essex9999 8 years ago

Replying to myself ... very bad form, I know, but I just rewatched Darling and wanted to add that on second view, looking specifically for clues to the setting, I saw more things that don't fit with a late-60s setting. First of all, there are more modern buildings in the street scenes than I noticed the first time. The period feel is set with the opening shots, where we see a foggy, pre-1970 Manhattan. I think the fog was used to CGI out the more modern skyscrapers, but later on in the night shots they are clearly visible.

Darling's bra is a modern one, not the type worn in the 60s. The people on the streets are wearing modern casual clothes, not the dressier, more formal ones you'd expect from city folks in the 60s. As another post points out, the cars are all modern. They keep the camera tightly on Darling when she's outside, so the cars and people are out of focus, perhaps in an effort to obscure their recent vintage. Also, the cocktail dress Darling wears in the bar scene is modern, although not aggressively so.

The driver's license certainly points to the late-60s setting, as does the absence of modern technology. My theory is that the filmmakers deliberate blurred the period of the film to add the already strong surreal atmosphere. Certainly a few of the "mistakes" could have been avoided easily enough.

Re the telephone: Just to be clear, that was an antique phone even in ca. 1968. Again, I think this is an effort to be obscure about the date. If they wanted to be clear about it, they would have put in a normal telephone of the time, which was an ordinary desk set with a dial. This could the be same reason there's no television in the house, since the design of the TV set would have been too clear a pointer to the period.

Oh, the film itself? LOL I liked it just as much on second viewing and was again impressed with Lauren Ashley Carter's performance. Brian Morvant as "the Man" did a good job, too. Such was their skill that I didn't even recognize them from Pod, even though I just watched that film a month or so ago.