MovieChat Forums > Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte (1965) Discussion > What would CHARLOTTE have been like with...

What would CHARLOTTE have been like with Joan Crawford?


Even though HUSH... HUSH, SWEET CHARLOTTE did, in my opinion, fare quite well with Olivia DeHavilland (and received 7 Oscar noms), one does wonder how much darker, creepier, it would have been had Joan not allowed herself to be driven off the set by Bette.

Olivia worked because she created a breezy contrast to Bette Davis. But would Joan's greater similarity to Bette be a strength or a weakness had Joan completed CHARLOTTE?

Unlike BABY JANE, in which Crawford is wheelchair bound and whose malevolence is not clear until the final denouement, the idea of Joan, in giant beehive and gargantuan neckwear, prowling silently around the antebellum manor at midnight (as Olivia did in the final version of CHARLOTTE) is just too intriguing.

And we get a whiff of what that might have been like in William Castle's I SAW WHAT YOU DID in which Joan is costumed accordingly, and photographed by shadowmaster Joseph Biroc (who also filmed CHARLOTTE):

http://goregirl.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/screenshot-from-2013-07-21 -2226022.png

http://joancrawfordbest.com/65isaw13oct7.jpg

I mean, Bette, Joan, Biroc and 1964 beats Bette, Joan, Ernest Haller and 1962 any day of the week hands down for undiluted, ground-zero, back-of-the-closet macabre par excellence.

So it's a bit of a shame we didn't ever quite see it.


--

Non-sequiturs are delicious.

reply

[deleted]

I'm not attacking Bette. Given Joan's Oscar-race machinations, I don't doubt Bette had her reasons.

And, yes, it's hard to believe that Joan would leave A-list CHARLOTTE, no matter the pressures, to go do William Castle dreck. But that's what Mommie Dearest did.

--

Non-sequiturs are delicious.

reply

This whole situation on Hush Hush was really Bette’s fault to begin with, although Joan did not do herself a service by accepting for Bancroft. Davis might have been more amenable to working with Crawford a second time if she had not done that.

According to Bette and Joan: The Divine Feud by Shaun Considine - Crawford and Aldrich had seen Baby Jane complete except for part of the credits, and one short scene with Jane as a young girl, which was being re-dubbed. Bette had missed the screening so Joan sent her flowers and champagne and told her how wonderful she had been.

After some urging, Bette went to a screening and then later after not hearing anything from her Crawford phoned Davis and asked her what she thought of the film to which Davis replied: “You were so right, Joan. The picture was good. And I was terrific.”

Crawford to author Shaun Considine: “That was it. She never said anything about my performance. Not a word.”

Not once in her entire career, it seemed, had the great actress Bette Davis ever acknowledged that her rival Joan Crawford had any talent. He then alleged that this last denial of approval led Crawford to cancel the Baby Jane publicity tour with Davis, and to upstage her at the Oscars. [Shaun Considine]


Crawford explained this to Lawrence Quirk when he was visiting the set of Hush Hush and this is according to Joan Crawford: The Essential Biography (2002) by Lawrence J. Quirk and William Schoell:

Joan confided in Quirk that she knew Davis was angry because of the Oscar business, but added:

“She [Davis] acted like Baby Jane was a one-woman show after they nominated her. What was I supposed to do, let her hog all the glory, act like I hadn't even been in the movie? She got the nomination. I didn't begrudge her that, but it would have been nice if she'd been a little gracious in interviews and given me a little credit. I would have done it for her.”

Robert Aldrich didn't help matters, actually he did nothing. He pretty much was a coward during Hush and let Bette (whom he obviously favoured) run Crawford into the ground until she could take no more.

Aldrich later said that he was disappointed that Joan hadn't finished the picture despite the added tension her presence had created. He also admitted that most of the tension was actually caused by Davis, not Joan. [Lawrence J. Quirk and William Schoell]

reply

Not once in her entire career, it seemed, had the great actress Bette Davis ever acknowledged that her rival Joan Crawford had any talent.

Bette and I share a lot of opinions. And this is one of them.

Crawford's acting comes across and pretentious and contrived. Her acting is boring. She's a star because she lights up the screen.

Davis is like a bolt of lightning whenever she opens her mouth. I love her acting. But she wasn't a very nice person. Actually, Davis was mean-spirited to quite a few people. She said what was on her mind and had no filter. And she got away with the things that she said and did because she was movie star. Her exchange with Celeste Holm when they met on the set of "All About Eve" is more evidence of this.

So, while I roll my eyes at the very mention of Crawford's name, she seems like she tried to be a nice person. Davis proved herself to be an ego-maniac.

reply

Davis said more positive things about Crawford after Crawford died.

I think they were both egomaniacs, both narcissistcs with Crawford having the edge into borderline sociopathology... I don't think Crawford was concerned at all with being "a nice person" but very concerned with seeming like a nice person, and Bette didn't give a crap about surface stuff like that.

Despite Davis' assertions that "we were very different women" they were not. But as director Vince Sherman has said many times, "They were sisters under the skin" and indeed they were.

Even Blanche Hudson proclaimed with some gravity, "We're sisters, Elvira, we know each other very well."

--

Non-sequiturs are delicious.

reply

Bette and I share a lot of opinions. And this is one of them.

Crawford's acting comes across and pretentious and contrived. Her acting is boring. She's a star because she lights up the screen.

Davis is like a bolt of lightning whenever she opens her mouth.


You apparently haven't seen many Crawford films.

Davis is one of the most overrated actresses ever. So many of her performances are downright bad - including her performance in "Hush".
Her badly spoken accent and mismatched performance is like nails on a chalkboard.

reply


So many of her performances are downright bad - including her performance in "Hush".

Foolishness.


--

Non-sequiturs are delicious.

reply

I wouldn't say Bette is bad in Hush but I will say that her performance as Charlotte (maybe due in part to the script) is not as nuanced as let's say Crawford's Louise Howell in 1947's Possessed (she received a Best Actress Oscar nomination). During the course of these two film's, both women are suffering from eventual mental breakdowns.

reply

The script for "Hush" is fine, it's Bette's performance that's bad...so many things about it is bad.

Her portrayal of Charlotte is mix-matched and uneven.
The character called for an actress who could portray subtlety and Bette never could, it was out of her realm, so she compensated by screeching her way through the film and being over the top in an attempt to upstage her co-stars.
If you notice, her scenes without other actors are more soft, that's clearly because there's no "competition" with her on camera so she doesn't have to scream and upstage - all the while butchering the character.

Another horrible element of Bette playing Charlotte is the southern accent.
Bette never could do a southern accent properly, and in "Hush" she layers it on even more and it's horrible to listen to.
It's probably one of the worst southern accents in a film.

Agnes Moorehead stole this film out from under Davis, and she's really the only good thing about it.

reply

Another horrible element of Bette playing Charlotte is the southern accent. 
Bette never could do a southern accent properly, and in "Hush" she layers it on even more and it's horrible to listen to. It's probably one of the worst southern accents in a film.

I think Bette was actually hopeing she'd be nominated for this performance. Years before she had won an Oscar for playing a whacked out southern belle (Jezebel).

According to Shaun Considine Bette & Joan - When Joan Crawford was in Baton Rouge and she came to film Miriam's arrival, there was no dialogue involved. Joan was to arrive at the mansion in a cab, exit, carrying a small case, pay the driver, and lowering her sunglasses, look up at the balcony of the house where Bette, in pigtails and a nightgown, was standing in the shadows, holding a shot gun. The scene was designed to be photographed in a wide continuous shot, and, thanks to Crawford's proficient technical skill, it was completed in one take. Later that evening, when publicist Harry Mines called on Bette in her motel bungalow, he found her standing in the middle of the room practicing Joan's scene. "My God!" said Bette. "I've been here all evening long with a pair of dark glasses and some luggage and I'm imagining getting out of a cab and trying to do that whole business in one gesture. How did she do it?"

reply

Bette couldn't act using only body language and facial expressions the way Crawford could. Crawford began in silent films and carried what she learned during that era throughout her career.

reply

http://imnotpatty.blogspot.ca/2011/04/whatever-happened-to-cousin-miri am_30.html

"It strikes me how all of the omissions and deletions (even those of only a few lines) resulted in a lesser film than it could have been, though I really do love HHSC, however it turned out."

"And as you know, I LOVES me some Olivia (as an actress and as a person) but I sincerely believe that her "best friend" Bette made sure OdH was never going to be in a position to overshadow her, when she took over the role of Miriam. And Robert Aldrich, gutless weakling that he was, just let her direct the picture for him! What might have been, huh?"

http://imnotpatty.blogspot.ca/2011/05/whatever-happened-to-cousin-miri am-part.html

"Bette Davis told more than a few people that she enjoyed using her status as co-producer (without credit) to demoralize Joan Crawford during filming of Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte. Although her reminiscences varied depending on her mood and whom she was talking to, on the set of one of her two films with Joan, Davis exercised her authority and eliminated dialogue that both Crawford and Joseph Cotten were performing."

"Shows director Robert Aldrich for the craven coward he was, allowing Bette to steamroll over him and basically let her not only portray her own character, but to direct and re-write the entire movie as well."

http://imnotpatty.blogspot.ca/2011/07/whatever-happened-to-cousin-miri am-pt-3.html

"I'm astonished at how much the character of Miriam Deering was diminished in the final version of Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte that was released theatrically--she's easily the most interesting person in HHSC and she is the one character that reveals shades of depth and ambiguity)."

"Apparently Bette Davis and Robert Aldrich took care of that after Crawford left the production. There's a parity between Charlotte and Miriam in the script that never quite made it into the final film (although talented, beautiful Olivia de Havilland does a terrific job of making Miriam a dominant supporting role in the final product, still...)"

reply

As critic Kenneth Tynan stated, Bette Davis "has done nothing better since The Little Foxes."

--

Non-sequiturs are delicious.

reply

People who say that Bette Davis was not good in Hush, Hush Sweet Charlotte are full of it. She gave a brilliant performance, one of the best performances of her career. And Olivia De Havilland's role was not diminished or subjugated in any way. Her Miriam was a perfect foil for Charlotte, and she was a co-star of the film in every way. It amazes me how some people's hatred for Bette Davis overrides their judgement of her performance as an actress. Some people of course, being Auntie's little puppets.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

reply

Bette Davis' performance in "Hush" is H-O-R-R-I-B-L-E.
Davis herself was later ashamed of it.

And yes, the character of "Miriam" *was* diminished - it's very obvious when you read the original script and see the stills of deleted scenes that involved the character.
All of which was done by producer Davis.

reply

People who say that Bette Davis was not good in Hush, Hush Sweet Charlotte are full of it. She gave a brilliant performance, one of the best performances of her career.


Yes.

Bette Davis' performance in "Hush" is H-O-R-R-I-B-L-E.


No. And pedantic.

Davis herself was later ashamed of it.


More foolishness.


--

Non-sequiturs are delicious.

reply

More foolishness


So, *if* Bette Davis was SO good in "Hush", where are her nominations? She wasn't nominated for any major award for her performance.

*Why* did she later say she didn't like the film if it was a good performance?

While this is opinion on both our parts, the opinion of Davis' performance not being good in the film is clearly more widely spread.

reply

Hi, Auntie Carla! How are things in Troll Land? You sweet old THING you!
I'M YOUR BIGGEST FAN!

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

reply

Oh, of course, Auntie Carla. I should have smelled the fecal entree.

--

Non-sequiturs are delicious.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Bette and Joan could have learned a great deal from Mammoth and Prometheus.

reply

A compliment?

--
LBJ's mistress on JFK:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcXeutDmuRA


reply

Someone has a difference in opinion and they're a troll...good lord, *WHO* let you old geezers on the internet in the first place?

reply

Take your meds, Auntie.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

reply

Go back to the nursing home...

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Auntie's two new puppets, "W" and "E", are really on a rampage. They are ranting and raving and foaming at the mouth.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

reply

I don't know what you're talking about I have ONE account, you old geezer.

reply

EliKahn is indeed AuntieCarla. No question about it.

--

Non-sequiturs are delicious.

reply

I would like to have seen Crawford's performance.

Just to see how she would have played off the various other characters and how they would have approached her.

Velma was the only one who saw through Miriam's bullshyt. But how would she have reacted to Crawford's Miriam (or was she Geraldine, from the prologue. I'v often wondered this because a painting of Charlotte and another girl is prominent in the prologue, which seems to look like Crawford and Geraldine had some killin' newsto tell Charlotte. Also, she was greeting people at the party.)

Swing away, Merrill....Merrill, swing away...

reply

Not Geraldine. Geraldine was dancing at the party with a boy while Miriam was spying on John and Charlotte in the summerhouse.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

reply

yes. i read the script. straightned me out. thanks

Swing away, Merrill....Merrill, swing away...

reply

I have no idea but I would like to see a film made about the relationship between Davis and Crawford. Has a Davis biopic been made? We have one on Crawford but the over the top makeup used on Dunaway made it more comical than anything else.

reply

The bottom line is Davis and De Havilland scored themselves a hit with Charlotte . Crawford, after having tried to sabotage this A-list production, was sentenced to William Castle dreck. She and Castle cheapened this film genre with the dreck they made.

Crawford would have ruined the film so it wasn't such a tough decision to kick her off the Fox lot. Credit Aldrich for going out of his way to convince De Havilland to play Miriam. And by out of his way, I think he actually rode a horse to seek her out in an inaccessible mountain resort in Europe. It was worth the trouble.

reply

Joan Crawford as soon as she stepped out of the taxi would have given herself away as the villainess in the whole story line, the subtle re writes in the script made sure you didn't suspect Olivia De Havilland until well into the movie, Joan really threw away probably the last decent part she had written for her, her diva antics while filming this movie cost her any chance of having any decent projects after Hush Hush, it had nothing to do with Bette and her so called treatment of Joan during filming.

reply

Crawford, after having tried to sabotage this A-list production, was sentenced to William Castle dreck. She and Castle cheapened this film genre with the dreck they made.


George Cukor put it best, "The two of them spawned a regrettable cycle in motion pictures."

And the script for Charlotte isn't really much better than the one for Strait-Jacket. Joan and Bette both liked to think of Baby Jane and its follow-up as dramatic pictures and not mere horror films, but deep down, they knew better. These pictures had better production values and bigger budgets than their subsequent films, that is the only difference.

Crawford would have ruined the film so it wasn't such a tough decision to kick her off the Fox lot. Credit Aldrich for going out of his way to convince De Havilland to play Miriam. And by out of his way, I think he actually rode a horse to seek her out in an inaccessible mountain resort in Europe. It was worth the trouble.


Aldrich thought Joan would have done a lot for the picture. The part was tailored for Joan and her special delivery and persona. One can imagine Joan snapping out Miriam's bitterness toward Charlotte as she recalled how she was always treated like the poor relation by Charlotte's family.

One can imagine her imparting an extra dimension to the sequence in which Miriam and Charlotte drive off to get rid of Dr. Bayliss's body, and Miriam winds up slapping Charlotte on the drive home. De Havilland confronting Agnes Moorehead's Velma and knocking her down the stairs with a chair was menacing enough, but Crawford's formidable, threatening presence might have made the sequence crackle with fury and tension.


Joan Crawford as soon as she stepped out of the taxi would have given herself away as the villainess in the whole story line, the subtle re writes in the script made sure you didn't suspect Olivia De Havilland until well into the movie, Joan really threw away probably the last decent part she had written for her, her diva antics while filming this movie cost her any chance of having any decent projects after Hush Hush, it had nothing to do with Bette and her so called treatment of Joan during filming.


Unlike Davis, Joan wanted to approach her role with some dignity and not completely give away the fact that she was a villainess, which was supposed to come as some surprise.

Henry Farrell's screenplay was undoubtedly better than the one concocted by Lukas Heller, who later blamed Aldrich for the new script's resemblances to Diabolique instead of his own inadequacies as a screenwriter. The rare excellent dialogue in which Miriam and Charlotte explain their backgrounds and motivations was scripted by Henry Farrell.

While in hospital Joan requested deeper characterization and motivation (unlikely to come from Heller) which was laudatory, but other suggestions, such as another big ballroom scene were ill-advised.

Davis was quite hard on Joan. It was what she wanted and it was foolish of her. Daivs would throw parties in her bungalow to which she invited everyone but Joan. Joan would greet Davis warmly, but Davis would hardly deign to reply. She would also stand next to Aldrich while he was filming Joan's scenes and make loud, negative comments. At one point Davis succeeded in getting cuts that eliminated some of Joan's dialogue, as well as that of Joseph Cotten. Aldrich admitted that most of the tension was actually caused by Davis, not Joan.


reply

George Cukor put it best, "The two of them spawned a regrettable cycle in motion pictures."

And the script for Charlotte isn't really much better than the one for Strait-Jacket. Joan and Bette both liked to think of Baby Jane and its follow-up as dramatic pictures and not mere horror films, but deep down, they knew better. These pictures had better production values and bigger budgets than their subsequent films, that is the only difference.



The cycle became regrettable when Crawford started working with William Castle who plowed out embarrassing dreck like Strait-Jacket, I Know what you Did and that Stanwyck vehicle. The author who interviewed Cukor wrote that Crawford did worse damage to her reputation. Charlotte garnered seven Academy Award nominations in a year that was dominated by expensive musicals like Mary Poppins and My Fair Lady. Only unbalanced Crawford fans believe there is anything good in Strait-Jacket. Perhaps good for a few unintentional laughs. (Comparing Charlotte to Strait-Jacket is like comparing My Fair Lady to Beach Blanket Bingo.)


Aldrich thought Joan would have done a lot for the picture. The part was tailored for Joan and her special delivery and persona. One can imagine Joan snapping out Miriam's bitterness toward Charlotte as she recalled how she was always treated like the poor relation by Charlotte's family.



Aldrich merely wanted to reteam Davis and Crawford. If Crawford's contributions to the film were important, he wouldn't have kicked her off the lot. And did you actually see the movie? De Havilland, a much better actress, did just what you imagined Crawford might have done. Sadly for you, De Havilland made Miriam all her own.

Davis was quite hard on Joan. It was what she wanted and it was foolish of her. Daivs would throw parties in her bungalow to which she invited everyone but Joan. Joan would greet Davis warmly, but Davis would hardly deign to reply. She would also stand next to Aldrich while he was filming Joan's scenes and make loud, negative comments.



So you actually believe Crawford was a passive victim for being made a social outcast. The so-called victim who deviously arranged to pick up the Oscar for Anne Bancroft, which was a very public slight against Davis. Crawford who caused permanent damage to her adopted children was now being put into a corner by mean Davis? You underestimate the star you admire so much. Crawford fought back in a very devious way and it backfired on her big time. She was costing a lot of money for Fox which had already put up with the tantrums of Elizabeth Taylor and Marilyn Monroe. It was easy to let Crawford go because she was not indispensable. They were actually willing to spend more to use another actress.

This happened over 50 years ago. Get a grip. Crawford tied the knot around her neck and is not part of this film. Go hit the board of Strait-Jacket and have some fun.


reply

The cycle became regrettable when Crawford started working with William Castle who plowed out embarrassing dreck like Strait-Jacket, I Know what you Did and that Stanwyck vehicle.


The cycle was regrettable from the very beginning. The films were dreck compared to what the ladies (including Davis) had appeared in earlier.


Crawford tied the knot around her neck and is not part of this film.


Well, that's not exactly true because there she is when Miriam arrives in the taxi.


So you actually believe Crawford was a passive victim for being made a social outcast. The so-called victim who deviously arranged to pick up the Oscar for Anne Bancroft, which was a very public slight against Davis.


Davis had made it clear on more than one occasion that she thought she was much more talented than Joan, who resented such remarks. To have her rival humbled was sweet indeed. Joan never denied that she thought Davis had talent and was a great star, but she also felt that Davis was in no position to condescend to her.


In a 1972 telephone conservation, Joan related to future author Shaun Considine that after attending a screening of Baby Jane (before its release) she urged Davis to go and have a look. Afterwards, Crawford called Davis and asked her what she thought of the film to which Davis replied, "You were so right, Joan. The picture is good. And I was terrific." Crawford, "That was it. She never said anything about my performance. Not a word."

During the filming of Charlotte, "She acted like Baby Jane was a one-woman show after they nominated her. What was I supposed to do, let her hog all the glory, act like I hadn't even been in the movie? She got the nomination. I didn't begrudge her that, but it would have been nice if she'd been a little gracious in interviews and given me a little credit. I would have done it for her."

reply

The cycle was regrettable from the very beginning. The films were dreck compared to what the ladies (including Davis) had appeared in earlier



You'd say anything to prove yourself right, anything for the sake of Crawford, even if it means trashing the last classic she ever starred in. Yes, Baby Jane is considered a classic and it received 5 Academy Award nominations and great reviews. Crawford and the likes of Stanwyck and Bankhead went on to do B film imitations of Baby Jane. Charlotte also received positive reviews, as did The Nanny, which was Davis' next film, as opposed to Crawford's I Saw What you Did. In 1968, Davis starred in The Anniversary, a black comedy based on a hit play.The movie was a not a hit but it had a much better pedigree than what Crawford did that same year, Berserk, a bloody slasher movie. Davis next did Connecting Rooms with Sir Michael Redgrave, a character study on two lonely people. It flopped but it held much more dignity for Davis in contrast to Trog, which took away all what's left of its star's dignity.


Well, that's not exactly true because there she is when Miriam arrives in the taxi.


Well, audiences don't see Crawford's face and she doesn't utter a line and she isn't shown stepping out of the car. They used that available footage with Crawford, ultimately demoted as a virtual stand-in sans any credit. You tend to make a mole hill out of that less than 10 second scene when in fact it's a slap on your favorite star's face.

The rest of the quotes you posted clearly prove that Crawford was a petty, jealous monster and a sore loser who tried to justify her treacherous behavior at the Oscars by blaming Davis for not having recognized her acting abilities. That's very funny, and childish. That's the marked difference between Davis and Crawford; one is brutally frank while the other is completely phony. Crawford perhaps expected Davis to be as phony as herself.

Davis would retaliate though she wouldn't have done so had Crawford offered any genuine apology for what she had done. But Crawford didn't and she just went on to pretend as if nothing had happened. Davis wouldn't have won this round had the cast and crew of Charlotte not cooperated with her. As it happened, Crawford wasn't well liked on the set. Even Aldrich's daughter testified to her attitude on the set in the book you so widely rely on to make such silly posts on this board.

reply

You'd say anything to prove yourself right


The pot calling the kettle black - you are guilty of the very thing of which you accuse me of.


It flopped but it held much more dignity for Davis in contrast to Trog, which took away all what's left of its star's dignity.


And Wicked Stepmother didn't take away the last of Davis' dignity? She was wasting away in front of everyone.


Well, audiences don't see Crawford's face and she doesn't utter a line and she isn't shown stepping out of the car. They used that available footage with Crawford, ultimately demoted as a virtual stand-in sans any credit. You tend to make a mole hill out of that less than 10 second scene when in fact it's a slap on your favorite star's face.


If you watch the film enough like most people do today then you'll notice. And it's a big continuity goof when it's established from the prior shot that Miriam is wearing a hat and light colored clothing.


Davis wouldn't have won this round had the cast and crew of Charlotte not cooperated with her.


Joseph Cotten and Agnes Moorehead were actually sympathetic to Joan but did not want to get drawn into the situation. Moorehead even sent flowers to Joan on two different occasions while she was in the hospital.


As it happened, Crawford wasn't well liked on the set. Even Aldrich's daughter testified to her attitude on the set in the book you so widely rely on to make such silly posts on this board.


Aldrich's daughter did not testify to anything. It was what she remembered happening, not on Charlotte but on the Baby Jane set.

Crawford would "yell and scream", said continuity girl Adelle Aldrich, "and so did Davis, but afterwards she would teach me my job. I was only eighteen years old at the time, and that was my first job, to make sure things matched in the shots. My dad had told the ladies to give me a hard time. They both would question me very hard. Davis did it with great fondness. She was a wonderful teacher, and I'll forever be indebted to her. But Crawford was quite evil about it."

reply

[deleted]

Aldrich merely wanted to reteam Davis and Crawford. If Crawford's contributions to the film were important, he wouldn't have kicked her off the lot.

I do think Aldrich strongly wanted Joan for the film due to her chemistry with Davis, but ultimately he came to favor Davis over Crawford following "Baby Jane", and therefore gave Davis more control on "Hush" by allowing her to be a producer.

I think had Aldrich not desperately wanted Joan in the role, she would have been terminated much sooner than she was.

The dynamics of Joan's illness and the ultimate length of time Aldrich held production is somewhat of a testament to Aldrich's dedication to the original envisioning for the film - which included Joan.

And did you actually see the movie? De Havilland, a much better actress, did just what you imagined Crawford might have done. Sadly for you, De Havilland made Miriam all her own.

Joan understood the character better than Olivia. Several cast and crew members commented how much better the scenes shot with Joan were than those shot with de Havilland.

And, I doubt Olivia could have achieved the 'arrival shot' within one take as Joan had.

reply

And the script for Charlotte isn't really much better than the one for Strait-Jacket.

Only a fool with an agendum can't see the difference in the scripts.

--
LBJ's mistress on JFK:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcXeutDmuRA


reply


The pot calling the kettle black - you are guilty of the very thing of which you accuse me of.



Whatever I've been posting is fact and you made this remark I copied and pasted above because you can't swallow the real truth. As Prometheus said in his latest post, only a fool couldn't tell the difference between the scripts of Charlotte and Strait-Jacket. Case closed, well at least the case pertaining to your strange obsession.


And Wicked Stepmother didn't take away the last of Davis' dignity? She was wasting away in front of everyone.


Yes, Wicked Stepmother didn't take away any of her dignity, because she chose to leave the production, as opposed to being fired. Despite that, she received top billing. Her achievements are so remarkable that a lousy movie, and not even a Mommie Dearest type of book, could ruin her legend.

You are kind of slow in getting the drift of my post about the films they did after 1964. I compared the films they made in the years following Charlotte. It's clear that the productions Davis took part in were superior (The Nanny as opposed to I Saw What you Did). So there, I spelled it out for you.

And please, you're definition of "wasting away" is completely wrong. When one wastes away, it happens away from the public eye.. The person remains idle for years and falls ill and withers while confined in a private dwelling. Davis was active and in the spotlight until the weeks prior to her death. I've told you this before. Crawford wasted away in her apartment, doing nothing and staying bitter at Davis up until the months prior to her death. Now that's wasting away.

If you watch the film enough like most people do today then you'll notice. And it's a big continuity goof when it's established from the prior shot that Miriam is wearing a hat and light colored clothing.


Yes, we do notice it because Crawford is wearing a darker colored outfit and because you keep reminding everyone it's her. It also underscores the fact that Crawford was fired and was reduced to being a stand-in for whom ever played Miriam. You do know what a stand-in does, don't you? He subs for the actor when the actor is not needed since it's just an establishing shot and the camera doesn't capture the face of the character anyway. Usually, that sort of scene is filmed by the second unit. And you consider that a victory for Crawford? A Victory worth an entire thread that you actually created?

Joseph Cotten and Agnes Moorehead were actually sympathetic to Joan but did not want to get drawn into the situation. Moorehead even sent flowers to Joan on two different occasions while she was in the hospital.


You have a selective memory when it comes to that book you like to quote. Why not mention the quote from Moorehead, where she says she had a lot of fun making Crawford feel like an outcast. And Davis sent flowers too, remember?


"...But Crawford was quite evil about it."


Thanks for the correction.

reply

As Prometheus said in his latest post, only a fool couldn't tell the difference between the scripts of Charlotte and Strait-Jacket. Case closed, well at least the case pertaining to your strange obsession.


Yes they're two different films but quality wise they are no different. You see the same kind of cheap head in both of them.

You have a selective memory when it comes to that book you like to quote. Why not mention the quote from Moorehead, where she says she had a lot of fun making Crawford feel like an outcast. And Davis sent flowers too, remember?


I read the biography on Moorehead by Charles Tranberg called 'I Love the Illusion' and there is nothing whatsoever that says she made Joan feel like an outcast or confided to anyone she did. Hello that was Bette.

And Bette did not send Joan any flowers while she was in the hospital. She did however give Joan a red rose on her return to the set.

reply

Yes they're two different films but quality wise they are no different. You see the same kind of cheap head in both of them.



That's your opinion but most other Crawford fans wouldn't agree with you. Add the film critics,the Academy voters, and the audience. Only a fool wouldn't tell the difference between the quality of these two films. Makes me wonder what goes on in the brain of this particular Crawford fan who remains bitter over the supposedly vile things Bette Davis did to her 50 years ago. It's as if he's been possessed by Crawford's fractured mind.

I read the biography on Moorehead by Charles Tranberg called 'I Love the Illusion' and there is nothing whatsoever that says she made Joan feel like an outcast or confided to anyone she did. Hello that was Bette.

And Bette did not send Joan any flowers while she was in the hospital. She did however give Joan a red rose on her return to the set.


And you say any book that you've read has the final say on everything? Have you read the other books? I suggest you read Ed Sikov's book. And yes, Bette Davis gave Crawford a red rose upon her return. Isn't that so sweet of her?

reply

And you say any book that you've read has the final say on everything? Have you read the other books? I suggest you read Ed Sikov's book.


Tranberg had access to all of Moorehead's papers and letters unlike Ed Sikov and even James Spada who wrote in his book about Bette that Moorehead later confided to friends that she and Bette had 'ganged up on Crawford psychologically.'

But Tranberg's research found nothing to confirm or suggest such things. Moorehead confided to Georgia Johnston that while there was conflict on the set, she didn't want to get mixed up in it. This is a book about Agnes Moorehead NOT Bette Davis.


And yes, Bette Davis gave Crawford a red rose upon her return. Isn't that so sweet of her?


It was sweet wasn't it. Too bad it was only for show.

reply

Yes they're two different films but quality wise they are no different. You see the same kind of cheap head in both of them.


Again, only a fool would assert that. Or someone being deliberately disingenuous. (I suspect it's the latter).

CHARLOTTE was nominated for 7 Oscars (a record for a horror film up until then) and even though it didn't win any, it was an A-level production obviously and a good, polished picture. And it gave Davis some of the best lines of her latter career.

STRAIT-JACKET had Crawford (and that's a lot) but it was a sloppy Bill Castle movie; Castle was a much better producer than a director, and STRAIT-JACKET isn't even amongst his best work! Even I SAW WHAT YOU DID and HOMICIDAL are better made than STRAIT-JACKET (in fact, that's something I find quite frustrating).

But the Crawford crowd relate to their star just a wee bit too much: they see her darkness in themselves. Bette Davis' fans can be pretty rabid, too, but they don't seem to have the same delusions or pathologies. (I enjoy both actresses, for all that's worth).

And much as I love and respect George Cukor's work, I don't really agree with him and his assessment that the grande dame guignol genre of the '60s was an unfortunate trend -- although many of them (like STRAIT-JACKET) weren't up to snuff, like most horror pictures. (Some people think they're misogynistic, but some folks also think any movie in which a woman is not held up as a role model 24/7 is therefore automatically "misogynistic" --- which is silly).

I frankly wouldn't want to live in a world where those films didn't exist.

And genre doesn't define quality.

I own a copy of STRAIT-JACKET and enjoy it -- to a point -- as campy shlock, but I always wish it was slightly better. And it doesn't come close to BABY JANE or CHARLOTTE as a movie. It's patently absurd to suggest otherwise.



--
LBJ's mistress on JFK:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcXeutDmuRA


reply

The one thing that always has intrigued me is that judging by the stills available it looks like Joan Crawford had at least shot half the movie, there are the scenes where she arrives in the taxi, scenes with Joseph Cotton and Agnes Morehead and also it is spoken of the scene she filmed with Mary Astor[ Joseph Cotton's wife mentions that]but there are no shots with filmed with Joan and Bette Davis together.

With the DVD extras and all the clear shots of Joan available filming you would think that somewhere in the vaults of Fox there may be some of the scenes with Joan hidden away.

reply

It would seem that Joan's and Bette's scenes together were delayed until they'd finished their scenes with everybody else. One assumes they had a reason for that, but it didn't avoid the problem.

--
LBJ's mistress on JFK:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcXeutDmuRA


reply

But she *wasn't*! She *wasn't* in this movie!



~women who seek to be equal with men lack ambition~ MM

reply

Davis was active and in the spotlight until the weeks prior to her death. I've told you this before. Crawford wasted away in her apartment, doing nothing and staying bitter at Davis up until the months prior to her death. Now that's wasting away.

Joan RETREATED from the limelight and the press during the last few years of her life - she practically became a recluse. But hardly what you would expect from someone who wanted "attention" at any cost.

It was Bette who continued to make public appearances, and take on projects like "Wicked Stepmother" even when she was clearly in no physical condition to do so. Hence, I'd say Bette is the one who craved attention. ;)

reply

Its almost a myth that Davis film career stalled after Charlotte.

One just needs to look at her film resume from 1964 and awards to see that she still had it. She gave some fine performances in lead and supporting parts.

The Nanny
Connecting Rooms
The Disappearance of Aimee
Death on the nile
Strangers
White Mama
A piano for mrs cimino
Right of way

and the glorious " the whales of august" ( such a shame it wasnt her final film) . It would have been a fitting ending to that legendary career.

reply

I can't see it with her. She certainly could have played any of the roles..the lead or supporting. I was way too young to wonder when I saw it the first time.
I was taken to the theater by two cousins. My mom had her reservations,but I insisted. She was a fan of all the actors including,but I didn't hear about the controversy until I was a lot older. I had bad nightmares about the hand and head scene. Now it's hard to believe,but it is all relative. Today it would be nothing for most kids,,but I was like in 2nd grade. Thing is ,.it stuck with me as one of my favorite movies. I couldn't have really followed the story then.

Years later I saw it on tv,,again and again,,I just received it from Amazon and it has a bonus feature commentary that is chuck full of all kinds of info for the movie buff. I have t seen it all yet. Maybe more of this is pursued there???

But we have Baby Jane anther classic suspense horror,drama. Betty Davis said she didn't care about her looks. Didn't see herself as a beauty ,even when young and beautiful,she just wanted to work. I heard that when I was a kid and I always had an appreciation for her after.
I think I always preferred Davis,but liked Crawford as well. Then she became something very diffr when we heard she abused her child,,I never heard how true it all was..

Either way,,,we saw how they were able to work together on Baby Jane,so I expect that when the director called action is was who could out act the other. Lol.. So great performances,,I don't even know why they hated each other so???

I guess I don't know as much about these two after all. ..lol. Maybe just as well. Doesn't cloud the performances..Moorehead takes the prize (not literally) for her preformance however,,it was her I remembered best. As a kid Bewitched was popular and we watched it.

reply

[deleted]