cookiela2001
जुल॰ 2002 को शामिल हुए
नई प्रोफ़ाइल में आपका स्वागत है
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
रेटिंग7
cookiela2001की रेटिंग
समीक्षाएं15
cookiela2001की रेटिंग
It's curious that such a DEAD film can be made about what was considered "The Crime of the Century" at one time. A young Joan Collins is unbelievably lovely as the title character, but plays the role in a humble, eyes-downcast, saccharine-sweet way that, while it may possibly be what Nesbitt was really like, has an unvarying dullness to it.
The rest of the cast is wooden as well, and the entire design of the movie is obviously expensive, yet completely unimaginative. But the real problem with this movie is the script, which not only is too leisurely, but features some of the stuffiest, most phony-sounding dialogue I've heard.
This isn't actual dialogue from the movie (which I refuse to re-listen to), but it may as well be: "Oh my goodness, I thought this room was empty." / "No, my dear, it is not." / "I am sorry that I have disturbed you. I am afraid that you shall think me a goose." / "There is no need to run away, my child. Come here, and let me look at your face. Why, you are most beautiful. Yes, indeed. Most, most beautiful. But, you blush?" ETC. ETC. AD NAUSEAM! Again, Collins is beautiful to look at here (even though the movie curiously avoids spectacular closeups), but she's the film's sole virtue. (And even saying that, her contribution is her physical appeal rather than her acting performance.)
The rest of the cast is wooden as well, and the entire design of the movie is obviously expensive, yet completely unimaginative. But the real problem with this movie is the script, which not only is too leisurely, but features some of the stuffiest, most phony-sounding dialogue I've heard.
This isn't actual dialogue from the movie (which I refuse to re-listen to), but it may as well be: "Oh my goodness, I thought this room was empty." / "No, my dear, it is not." / "I am sorry that I have disturbed you. I am afraid that you shall think me a goose." / "There is no need to run away, my child. Come here, and let me look at your face. Why, you are most beautiful. Yes, indeed. Most, most beautiful. But, you blush?" ETC. ETC. AD NAUSEAM! Again, Collins is beautiful to look at here (even though the movie curiously avoids spectacular closeups), but she's the film's sole virtue. (And even saying that, her contribution is her physical appeal rather than her acting performance.)
This is an engrossing and faultlessly researched documentary with excellent movie clips. (The montages are GREAT!) I especially liked seeing the bit where you can actually glimpse Crawford playing for a fleeting second with Norma Shearer as her double in LADY OF THE NIGHT in 1925, and the sound clip from her radio recording of Ibsen's classic drama A DOLL'S HOUSE. (It's intriguing that some of her contemporaries have said elsewhere she was surprisingly effective in the plays she mounted with husband Franchot Tone in their little home theater, making us wonder if she might have actually been able to pull off classic stage roles if she'd taken it further.)
I do have to take issue with this comment from the review below, though:
<< I noticed Christina seemed all too eager to bring forth the darker side of Joan -- how she forced the children to do the cleaning, the wire hanger incident, taking over her role in "The Secret Storm" and all I sense from Christina is an incessant need to repeat to the public how nasty Crawford was. The damage has been done already with the book and MOMMIE DEAREST, isn't it time to move on?...It's the only headache in the entire documentary >>
We don't know how much tape the producers shot with Christina Crawford or what else she was asked, all we know is what they finally chose to use. To say that Christina is "still" focusing on that aspect of Crawford's life and should "move on" is like saying that Cliff Robertson is "still" focusing on AUTUMN LEAVES and should do likewise.
When the 20th Anniversary edition of her memoir MOMMIE DEAREST was released, Christina gave many interviews in which she praised her mother's career and effective performances. Those professional issues have never been in dispute, though, and what Crawford's daughter has to offer that's unique is insight into what the star's home life was like at specific periods of time.
Again, this is an extremely well done documentary, giving an excellent overview of Joan Crawford's life.
I do have to take issue with this comment from the review below, though:
<< I noticed Christina seemed all too eager to bring forth the darker side of Joan -- how she forced the children to do the cleaning, the wire hanger incident, taking over her role in "The Secret Storm" and all I sense from Christina is an incessant need to repeat to the public how nasty Crawford was. The damage has been done already with the book and MOMMIE DEAREST, isn't it time to move on?...It's the only headache in the entire documentary >>
We don't know how much tape the producers shot with Christina Crawford or what else she was asked, all we know is what they finally chose to use. To say that Christina is "still" focusing on that aspect of Crawford's life and should "move on" is like saying that Cliff Robertson is "still" focusing on AUTUMN LEAVES and should do likewise.
When the 20th Anniversary edition of her memoir MOMMIE DEAREST was released, Christina gave many interviews in which she praised her mother's career and effective performances. Those professional issues have never been in dispute, though, and what Crawford's daughter has to offer that's unique is insight into what the star's home life was like at specific periods of time.
Again, this is an extremely well done documentary, giving an excellent overview of Joan Crawford's life.