Here we are all these years later and people are still fascinated by Joan and Bette---bespeaks how star power goes beyond the grave--especially with regards such over the top personalites such as these two ladies--and their famous feud. Good documentary--top flight--and helps us understand these two's complex mindset.
windstorm1000 It’s true because of the new filmmakers . They are the ones who keep the old star system alive, as well as those female stars . It starts in most major film schools, because today, there are no studios that operate this way anymore. It’s the love of the past as well as the fantasy that causes us to go back, and watch .
Oh God, I SO agree!!!! This title would never be used for male Hollywood stars of the era, who were just as "ruthless" in trying to snatch up strong parts!
At 1:10, Drew Casper is wrong; Davis did NOT get an Oscar nomination in 1934 for "Of Human Bondage". Her first nomination was for the 1935 "Dangerous".
Yeah I was gonna say... the snub DID generate a huge write-in campaign on her behalf and led to the Academy changing their voting procedures as a result but she was never officially nominated. It annoys me that a historian could make such an obvious flub
Huge urban legend: Bette Davis was offered, and refused, "Mildred Pierce". During the pre-production of "MP," Davis was far too busy filming "The Corn Is Green" and "A Stolen Life". Director Michael Curtiz wanted Stanwyck for Mildred, and Jack Warner was leaning toward Ann Sheridan. Rosalind Russell had been promised Mildred as the second of a two-picture deal at Warner Brothers, but Bette Davis was never in the running for it. The Davis fans perpetuate the legend that Davis turned down "MP," because they don't like to think that she wasn't thought of for such an important film.
Both actresses were strong in their individual acting styles and repertoire which was considerably different from one another. But as far as raw talent, Bette wins hands down! Bette was a "classically trained theater" actress which Joan was not. Joan was a "movie star"....had more of the glamour and sophistication but that doesn't make one necessarily more talented.
Bette had more talent as an actress (Joan was better for me) but Joan Crawford was much more profitable at the box office than Bette Davis. And Joan was more talented than Davis in other facets of life. Joan was more creative and looked for her own projects (Johnny Guitar or Baby Jaen) and off the cinema screen she was the first single adoptive mother in history (she changed the law forever and the image of a single woman with children) and the most Importantly, she was the first female boss to run a men's business in history. Bette did not have Crawford's records; In the 20's the Fllaper, in the 30's the American girl who achieved her dream, in the 40's the mother who fights hard for her children, in the 50's she was the mature woman who did what she wanted in life after working hard all the time. life and in the 60's horror series B movies that would later influence future movies. I think Crawford was one of the most talented women of all time in Hollywood. But Bette was also brilliant.
Although Bette did not receive an official Academy Award nomination for "Of Human Bondage," in those days (1935), "write-in" candidates were allowed, and despite many write-in votes, Bette still lost that year. The very next year, however, she was nominated and won the Award for "Dangerous." Even Bette considered it a consolation prize; she thought fellow nominee Kate Hepburn should have won that year for "Alice Adams."
Joan Crawford and Bette Davis only worked one movie together. I always imagine how it would of been like if Joan & Bette worked together in a couple of movies when they were young, specially if they were to always worked against each other.
At 1:10 it was stated that Bette got an Academy Award nomination for Of Human Bondage, but I don't believe that is true. The Academy snubbed her that year by not nominating her, which created quite a stir in Hollywood.
I loved Bette in "Of Human Bondage" 1934. I also loved Joan in "Rain" 1932. Both showed they were capable of playing wise talking, hard women - women who weren't "nice."
can you reference the books where you've read this? The reason I ask is because I've read just about every book about Joan, MGM, Mayer, Cukor, Shearer and everyone else connected to The Women, as well as countless interviews, and I have never heard that before.
Joan always wanted to look good even if she went to the grocery store.... because Joan didn't want to look ugly. There's nothing worse than someone walking up to you and saying....you look better on film than in person.
I've always felt "Of Human Bondage" was Bette's best movie. She looked wonderful (sweet and vulnerable) and behaved so badly (vicious) towards Leslie Howard that it was shocking. Joan was wonderful in "The Unknown" of course she had the master, Lon Chaney, to play against and another favorite of mine is "Rain" with Walter Huston. IMO, these were two of the best actresses ever to grace the big screen.
Not really an accurate assessment. While I agree more of Bette's films are bonafide classics (although probably fewer than you think), Joan is in several classics where she is NOT "imitating Bette" (everything pre-Mildred Pierce). The "not a top female star at MGM" comment is ridiculous & defies all logic or evidence. Her films didnt get the big budgets of Shearer or the highbrow art of Garbo, but she consistently outgrossed them both. She was one of MGM's biggest stars, male or female.
Love the documentary..it is some flaws firstly Warners did groom their female stars first it was Ruth Chatterton who was queen of the lot usurped by Kay Francis usurped by Bette Davis when Joan Crawford came she was never the queen of MGM but shared it with Norma Shearer and Greta Garbo..But Norma had Irving Thalberg behind her and Greta Garbo was a prestige Actress and her films were the biggest overseas especially in Europe..When Greta and Norma retired in the early forties .the crown went to Greer Garson ..
I didn't think you knew what you were talking about and then you brought in Jennifer Lopez which proved to me that you didn't. As for Shearer and Garbo being the top stars at MGM....Shearer's career took a downward curve after her producer/husband Thalberg's death and Garbo was never as big a star in the states (after a certain point) as she was in Europe.This is basically why she retired from film ...cause the European market was closed during the war.
Bette Davis will long be remembered and her films are still highly watchable. Joan's films are largely forgotten except when she is trying to imitate Bette. Joan was not a top female star at MGM Garbo and Norma Shearer were the top females. Jennifer Lopez seems to have emulated her in many ways career and private life.
I loved Joan but she did appear to be slightly unbalanced - or maybe the kinder way to describe her would be damaged - probably because of her back ground and what she came up against trying to get to and stay at the top - Bette Davis was a good actress but basically a bitch but clever enough to work with other women she didnt like because she recognised their talent was on a par with her own and at the end of the day she wanted the picture to be good - like her films with Mirrium Hopkins - who she despised but when Mirrium Hopkins is on screen you cant take your eyes of her .Joan was the bigger star but a bit dumb - Bette was the bigger actress and very very clever
Joan was hardly dumb. She came from nothing but learned the technical part of the business and enjoyed a 45 year career. You'd have to be pretty intelligent to pull that off.
