Score : 9/10
Year :
1962
Country:
USA
Language:
English
Duration:
2h14 (imdb) ; 2h08 (French dvd, Pal speedup)
What ever
happened to baby Jane ? is a very well-made film, constructed in 3 main,
chronological segments. I'm so glad it didn't start at the end of the story and
then done a flashback like so many other movies do. Instead, it starts in 1917,
when Baby Jane, a child star, is on stage singing. We see her
spoiled-brat temperament, and Blanche's jealousy, as she is left unseen in
the shadows of her sister.
Fast
forward to the 1930's, when both are budding actresses, and then to the present
of the movie, presumably 1962. (The movie only says "yesterday"
to start this segment).
Here, we
discover the long-term effects of the sister's jealousy and bitterness and how
it may unravel in a few days of their adult lives.
This is a
must-see movie - as long as you aren't too afraid of scary psychological
thriller/ horror films. It's not bloody or gory, but depicts physical torment,
emotional abuse, and, for fragile vegetarians or vegans such as myself, 3
quick scenes relating to food*.
The
cinematography of this film is really superb ; many shots are very
claustrophobic, in narrow angles. Others show a wider angle, but with rich
contrasts between the low light sources and the overall dark atmosphere which
adds to the dramatic and horrific nature of the story as it unravels.
The
acting is superb, and as one knows that Bette Davies and Joan Crawford really
hated one another off-screen, the mutual abuses their characters spew at one
another take a very real dimension. However, they both also physically act
their respective roles flawlessly and very realistically.
The cast
looked very real - none of that pristine look that is so prevalent elsewhere.
Here, Bette Davies and Joan Crawford both appear real and terrible with unkempt
hair, or an over-achieving make-up, and so on. Maidie Norman, Victor Buono and
others in the cast also appear realistically human, un-glamorized, though not
in the extremes of the main cast.
What ever
happened to baby Jane ? really show-cases the psychological breakdown of
characters with untreated mental illnesses, jealousy and how they can get stuck
in a routine of abuse as well as their former past glories.
Also,
it's a very different kind of movie, where there is no romance or man to save
anyone from anything ; the women actresses shine through and through -
including supporting women actresses, whilst the men are left a bit
behind.
As such,
we also see how damaging it is for women who lose their sole source of success
- their cuteness and beauty, which defined them in their younger age and how,
not having other aspects to define them can create bitterness as they are
unnoticeable and erased in society.
Generally, Frank DeVol's music
was suspenseful and to the point, accompanying the stressful scenes and
expectations of 'what's next', but on rare occasions, he missed it with
whimsical bits that should've also been suspenseful, or silent.
However,
overall and especially for its time, this score is rather good.
What ever happened to baby Jane ? is a classic of its genre, and yet is very different in several respects - including its somewhat open-ended conclusion.
Cast :
· Bette Davis as Jane Hudson
· Julie Allred as nine-year-old Jane
· Debbie Burton as young Jane's singing voice
· Joan Crawford as Blanche Hudson
· Gina Gillespie as thirteen-year-old Blanche
· Victor Buono as Edwin Flagg
· Marjorie Bennett as Dehlia Flagg
· Maidie Norman as Elvira Stitt
· Anna Lee as Mrs. Bates
· B. D. Merrill as Liza Bates
· Dave Willock as Ray Hudson
· Anne Barton as Cora Hudson
· Wesley Addy as Marty McDonald
· Bert Freed as Ben Golden
· Robert Cornthwaite as Doctor Shelby
* Here's the small spoiler portion for sensitive souls, starting by non-veggie-friendly incidents :
* a) 3 scenes briefly show a dead bird and a dead rat on a plate, as part of the ongoing torment ; another shows a character eating for a seconds something not vegetarian.
* b) there is a scene of a brutal attack, but it's quick, maybe a minute or so long. Not bloody, not gory, but quite horrific, especially for 1962.gory, but quite horrific, especially for 1962.
Comments
Post a Comment