Very enjoyable


I thought this movie as a whole was pretty unrealistic, but taking that aside, it's a very entertaining piece of cinema. I think the general consensus is that Miriam Hopkins steals the show, and she certainly does, there's a part around the middle where she isn't in it for like 20 minutes (when they're elaborating on Bette's new beau Gig Young and then focusing on Deirdre) and I surely was missing her.

The good thing about Hopkins' character is that she did not elevate it into a caricature despite the over-the-topness of some of her scenes. In fact she reminded me of a few people I know who could act the same if circumstances were in their favour for success, and that I felt was an awesome treat, because I sincerely was expecting her to cross the line of making her character unbelievable. But she never does, she restrained her character's wild idiosyncrasies right in the point.

Davis, on the other hand, I think she has the less interesting character, but she does a lot with it. It was strange for me to see her in such a restrained character, but she made Kit endearing to the point where one does want her to upstage Hopkins in the same evil way she always does throughout the film. Campy Millie-shaking aside, her confrontation scene is great, and I really liked their early scenes in the film.

The rest of the characters do nothing for me really and serve more as devices for the two stars to shine more than anything else, with Gig Young as the best of the three, I think he gives a fine performance out of his character. I've always found it weird that both he and John Loder's character are so similar physically, but I guess this was intentional, on the Red Cross scene where the character is introduced I was very confused.

reply

I just saw this film for a second time over the weekend, and loved it more than the first, so much so I changed my 9 for a 10. What I loved both times was Ms. Davis's absolutely perfect performance in what I thought would have been an otherwise difficult role, meaning for a less talented actress (which I guess would be pretty much anyone). The difficulty I sensed was in contrast to Millie's envy and jealousy of Kit, Kit also had envy and jealousy but of a much more subtle kind. There was also the portrayal of the attraction she felt for Preston, and later an even more complicated attraction for Rudd. And perhaps her best scene of all was in retrieving Didi from Grant. But of course in number her scenes with Ms. Hopkins dominate, and they truly played against each other perfectly.

My difficulty with the first viewing was that while I was not put off by how over the top Millie was as a character, it was still enough to leave me questioning just how Ms. Hopkins chose to play the role. But on second viewing I was better able to see such portrayal as exactly what the script called for, even the virtual insanity of converting knowledge of Preston's attraction for Kit into an indictment of Kit herself.

I also am frankly surprised in discussing the supporting cast how, once again, I found Delores Moran to be both perfect and stunning in her role, as she was in To Have and Have Not. MY understanding is it was not a lack of talent that prevented her from having a bigger career, but "problems" with some of the people running the studios. The script here did call for nuance and portraying both Didi's immature and attractive sides. Ms. Moran was quite effective in doing so.

Young and Loder I felt were both very good as well. The story and the themes of friendship and attraction, envy's relation to affection, were all excellent. A great great film, it also had moments of great humor. Excellent.

reply

Yes, a very apt discussion on this film.

reply