CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › Films in Release or On Video › Whatever Happened to Baby Jane (1962)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Whatever Happened to Baby Jane (1962)

post #1 of 21
2/14/10 at 5:44pm
Thread Starter 
One of those movies that I grew up being aware of without ever having seen it. Finally decided to watch it last night and was really impressed by the whole thing. Story-wise it's fairly straight-forward but it's solid with only a little fat to be trimmed and the narrative moves along fairly briskly. It does tend to get a little saggy in the middle with the whole accompanist subplot and I didn't necessarily like what happened with Elvira, but those are all minor complaints.

Especially minor considering that this is a performance-driven movie and holy shit Bette Davis. I'll admit I'm not too up to snuff on her work so I don't have a broad basis for comparison, but she did stellar work. For the type of character she played, the way she was able to go big but keep it from going over the top was an exercise in restraint. Impressive, impressive stuff. I wish Joan Crawford would have had more to do but someone else could have just as easily gone all maudlin and trite with Blanche's character as well.

And that final shot? Creepy, tragic stuff.
Reply
post #2 of 21
2/14/10 at 7:25pm
Bette Davis is arguable the greatest actress ever. She is diffidently in the top 5. She may have been a lousy human being, but she was a great actress.
Reply
post #3 of 21
2/15/10 at 12:49am
I saw this movie on TV when I was a kid & the twist blew my little mind.
It turns everything on its head - the character you despised throughout the whole movie turns out to be the one who was wronged & the one you thought was the victim is revealed to be the bitter schemer.
I watched it again a few years later & to be perfectly honest it didn't hold up, as is the case with many movies that rely on twists. Only thing that keeps you watching that second time is the great twisted central performance.
Reply
post #4 of 21
2/15/10 at 1:00am
Thread Starter 
I dunno, I think it sells the story short to just hold up the little revelation as a simple "twist" in those terms. Knowing what it is should serve to elevate the characters and their respective choices in the situation.
Reply
post #5 of 21
2/15/10 at 1:08am
I agree that it gives you an understanding of the characters choices/actions retroactively, which is why the first viewing of it is awesome. It makes you rethink what you just saw. But for me, the second time around just didn't have the same impact, unsurprisingly. It's surely an inbuilt design flaw (probably not the right word for it) in "twist/reveal" stories, don't you think?
Reply
post #6 of 21
2/15/10 at 1:43am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HtP View Post
I agree that it gives you an understanding of the characters choices/actions retroactively, which is why the first viewing of it is awesome. It makes you rethink what you just saw. But for me, the second time around just didn't have the same impact, unsurprisingly. It's surely an inbuilt design flaw (probably not the right word for it) in "twist/reveal" stories, don't you think?
Perhaps, in general. But that's the thing though. With your standard, modern-day "twist story," the story exists ONLY to serve the twist. And yeah when it comes you're like "WOAH I didn't see THAT coming!" and then you're blown away (or you make the jerkoff gesture because you did in fact see it coming). And the reason later viewings fall flat is because the entire story becomes an exercise in sleight of hand - since you know what's coming now, you can see through all the little "Look at THIS don't look at THAT" gestures because, again, the story exists ONLY to serve the twist.

With THIS, the story exists as a story and what we learn at the end isn't so much a twist but a revelation (and there is a significance). So on later viewings the story still stands on its own merits and is, in fact, elevated by knowing what we already know. It's what makes THE SIXTH SENSE stand out from THE VILLAGE. My $.02, anyway.
Reply
post #7 of 21
2/15/10 at 1:45am
I agree with Mr. Butler. This isn't a "twist/reveal". Like, at all. The revelation at the end really doesn't change the story or shed light on anything.

Movies like Fight Club and The Sixth Sense are twist films, because when you watch them a second time, your perspective has been irreversibly skewed. It alters the meaning of the individual scenes. That isn't the case with Baby Jane. Nothing has changed. Crawford is clearly still the victim of an insane person, revelation or not. If you went into a second viewing expecting the new information to alter the experience, then you were expecting something that the filmmakers didn't intend. No wonder it didn't work for you.
Reply
post #8 of 21
2/15/10 at 2:10am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg David View Post
That isn't the case with Baby Jane. Nothing has changed. Crawford is clearly still the victim of an insane person, revelation or not. If you went into a second viewing expecting the new information to alter the experience, then you were expecting something that the filmmakers didn't intend. No wonder it didn't work for you.
While on the whole I agree with you I do think learning what we learned at the end did skew a couple of subtleties. Why did Blanche go so far out of her way to be tolerant of Jane? Why did she put up with what she put up with? Which is why I say it informs a lot of her decisions as a character. And in a lot of ways I think it does put Jane, as insane as she was, in an almost sympathetic light.
Reply
post #9 of 21
2/15/10 at 2:19am
Good point. It does bring some depth to Crawford's character. And I might add that it's very much needed. Until that comes to light, she's practically angelic. But the only scene I can imagine this causing to play differently is the Baby Jane sequence at the beginning, since it finally gives a payoff to young Blanche's childhood anger.
Reply
post #10 of 21
2/15/10 at 2:39am
Thread Starter 
Indeed. I did find myself wondering why Blanche was SO HESITANT to call the doctor, but I was able to write that off as her feeling too dependent on Jane and trapped in a lot of ways. And that would have worked just fine as it was, but once we learn what really happened it saddles Blanche with this implied guilt that just gives her that much more color as a character. Which, I agree, is ESPECIALLY needed in Blanche's case since Crawford has to do a lot of second-banana work to Davis.

Also did a little reading on the real-life BTS stuff on set - those two ladies hated each other.
Reply
post #11 of 21
2/15/10 at 3:32am
You guys make some interesting points.

I'd like some clarification on what you guys think differentiate a "revelation" from a "twist" though. I'm guessing that the "revelation" is something earned? Like revealing some fact or turn of a story that would resolve a gnawing mystery in a story? In which case, I'm not sure that BabyJane qualifies, as the audience is mislead throughout the entire story about the truth revealed at the end.
Reply
post #12 of 21
2/15/10 at 4:28am
I honestly don't find it misleading though. When we do learn the truth, it doesn't alter the story so much as it simply provides missing motivation to one of the characters.

Compare that to The Sixth Sense, in which it turns out that the protagonist hasn't actually been interacting with anybody but the kid the entire time, even though we think we've seen him do so. It puts a dramatic new spin on the entire story we think we've watched.
Reply
post #13 of 21
2/15/10 at 4:46am
Really? I thought the construction of the movie was such that you were supposed to think Baby Jane tried to drive over her sister, only for it to be revealed that it was the sister who accidentally crippled herself while trying to do the dirty on Jane. This, surely, is misdirection. Based on the little you see of the hit & run (crawl), your sympathies are placed on the sister & Jane is vilified for most of the movie. Granted, the ending doesn't change the narrative of the rest of the movie as dramatically as The Sixth Sense, but it does (& is intended to) make you see the characters in a different light. (In fact, I'm pretty sure Bette Davis gets the glowy defocused starlet treatment from the DP after the reveal.)
It's possible that I'm remembering the story incorrectly, as it has been years since I last saw it.
Reply
post #14 of 21
2/15/10 at 4:54am
Your memory is more or less correct, but the alteration doesn't dramatically change Jane as a character, only Blanche. Jane started life as an unpleasant little brat, and turned into an awful drunk as an adult, all before the accident. She was never going to be a nice person. The reveal really only changes our perception of Blanche, who's been a flawless, put-upon angel up until that point. I doubt that we're supposed to suddenly see their roles as hero and villain reversed. At most, it just becomes the story of two awful people who deserve each other.
Reply
post #15 of 21
2/15/10 at 5:11am
I can't disagree with your assessment that Jane was & is a horrible person, but I think the movie tries to present it as a complete reversal. Like I said, I remember a greased-lens, soft-lit, angelic shot of Davis at the end. But I definitely could be remembering it wrong. I should probably bow out of this discussion & watch it again.
Reply
post #16 of 21
2/15/10 at 11:50am
Thread Starter 
I agree you should watch it again, if only to get a fresh perspective.

That said though, regarding the way they adjust how they shoot Davis after the revelation - yeah, you're right (maybe not to that dramatic of a degree, but you're right) but even though I won't be presumptuous and say this was the filmmakers' intent, what I saw that as was a visual representation of Jane's final push over the edge. Once she learned the truth it broke her completely and the cloudy, soft-focus photography just reinforced that.

Also, by watching it again you'll realize that they sort of telegraphed the reveal all throughout the movie, honestly. From the fact that they made a point to not show you any faces during the accident to the numerous times Blanche tried to bring it up, you pretty much have the idea well before-hand.
Reply
post #17 of 21
10/7/10 at 12:49am
That fucking "I Wrote A Letter To Daddy" sequence is incredibly creepy.
Reply
post #18 of 21
10/7/10 at 12:56am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Ripoll View Post
That fucking "I Wrote A Letter To Daddy" sequence is incredibly creepy.
Isn't that the one where she catches her reflection in the mirror? If so - then goddammit yes.
Reply
post #19 of 21
10/7/10 at 1:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Ripoll View Post
That fucking "I Wrote A Letter To Daddy" sequence is incredibly creepy.
It really really is, I saw the film when I was probably about eleven or twelve and I remember that scene creeping the shit out of me.

Really brilliant movie with two quite incredible performances at its heart. I should really revisit it.

I'm kind of surprised it hasn't been given the movie remake treatment actually.
Reply
post #20 of 21
10/7/10 at 1:59am
I really loved the high-contrast photography. Especially the out-door scenes, but even the mansion the use of shadows was incredible.

I can't see a remake being worth it for the studios. It's not a big enough name to draw in modern audiences, the story is too much of a slow-burn, and it's already been aped by too many movies (namely Misery) to feel at all fresh anymore.
Reply
post #21 of 21
10/7/10 at 1:30pm
I think there was a TV remake in the early'90s with sisters Lynn and Vanessa Redgrave.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Films in Release or On Video
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › Films in Release or On Video › Whatever Happened to Baby Jane (1962)