Kat's Film Reviews: What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?

Monday, May 17, 2004

What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?

Gosh, I really think I'm getting dumber. There must be a reason I watch all these classic old films and they leave me feeling I missed something crucial. (I could name at least a dozen other classic film reviews here that have sent readers around the bend.) There's nothing wrong with the two lead actresses in this film -- well, let me rephrase that. Bette Davis is superb, as always, as the frumpy, psychotic, definitely-not-60s-housewife-material sister. Joan Crawford is fine, but her over-developed sense of melodrama became embarrassing to watch. She's the "good" sister, the "good" actress-of-yore, the one we're supposed to root for. And you can't not empathize with her to some extent, as Davis does all sorts of horrible things to Crawford in the course of the film. (Yuck, rats. Yuck.) And if the dénouement is not exactly surprising, still, you end up feeling that Crawford was being too much of a weakling scaredy-pants by not telling her sister earlier (I kept wanting to shake her out of fear and into anger). I am only sometimes of the mindset that watching a film that has excellent performances even if the story plods along, goes on too long, or is poorly produced is worth it. Too often, it's simply irritating that I'm not watching a complete picture. (So, as much as I'd like to see, say, Colin Firth in all of his films, I just know I'll hate 3/4 of them for the reasons above.) Davis is much more compelling (because the film is better) in All About Eve, so rent that instead of this one. And that weird young man who gets roped into becoming Davis' accompanist -- that's the evil King Tut from the old Batman TV series, believe it or not.

year: 1962
length: 134 min.
rating: 3.0
IMDB link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056687/combined

¶ 11:24

Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home