The Crawford Formula: Real and Reel 

Indeed

Can I say thank you for that great, honest comment. Yes, finally.

@@CaliChaos99 Us Crawford fans will win the fight. Hateful tell-alls written by the children of Bette Davis, Bing Crosby and an unflattering one about Marlene Dietrich have not altered the statuses of those stars. Yet Joan Crawford is a "demonic child-abusing narcissist", and God forbid anyone like her. People can be fans of Joan Crawford if they damn well want to. I believe more of B.D. Hyman's book than I do of Christina's.

"Joan Crawford's face was a performance". alec baldwin

@@thomassperduti4500 her eyebrows were

Same here. I mean I love Bette and she had her moments, but Joan's subtle and non-theatrical acting I feel is way ahead of her time. Even in Baby Jane I find her acting more convincing than Bette's.

BUT ONLY when she was playing roles that were a lot like her. Bette was the MUCH superior actress; Joan was the better 'star'.

@@jaymesguy239 I believe that is just another of the overused canards designed to merely perpetuate the largely mythical notion that actors who were not physically attractive in the classical sense (see Bette Davis), must conversely be extraordinarily gifted in the skill set and gravitas we generally associate with the craft of acting. The flip side of that myth would of course suggest that actors who are physically attractive (see Joan Crawford), must accept that their talents will most likely be seen as somehow secondary to their looks. In reality, it was in fact Davis's acting technique, given its highly histrionic/theatrical style, which naturally suited her for roles which were theatrically driven, as in stagy, affected, or mannered, i.e., Margo Channing and Baby Jane Hudson, to name her two most often acclaimed roles. Crawford's acting was nowhere near as theatrically or histrionically affected, which is why her roles still seem subtly nuanced and highly believable some 70-80-90 years later, whether she is playing the catty and manipulative Crystal Allen, the eternally selfless and devoted Mildred Pierce, or the powerless and victimized Blanche Hudson, to name three of her most often acclaimed roles. None of those three Crawford roles have become histrionic cartoons with the passage of time, while the bulk of Davis's have. Ultimately, however, i believe it was Crawford's gift for 'audience identification' as well as the fact that she was a 'straight forward' creature and creation of the world of motion pictures that allowed her to read much more naturally on film. Sadly for Davis, one could say that she perhaps believed and in fact bought into her own hype, which ultimately trapped her in her own myth, while Crawford always remained acutely and humbly aware of her fans and of their changing demands. Stardom is a different animal altogether, and i just think that Crawford simply devoted infinitely more discipline, care, and effort to hers than anyone else in Hollywood. As a creature of motion pictures from such a young age, being a star is essentially all she ever knew how to be. Of course, her legendary glamour, beauty, and magnetism did not hurt. Crawford remained primarily devoted to her fans while Davis remained devoted to her ego. Food for thought.

@@valsainking I would like to heart this comment ;)

@@fliplinefungus Thank you kindly! :-)

Now THAT'S a pithily interesting assessment!

Having made the break from silent pictures to talkies, she had a innate advantage of expressionism. She was exceptional. I'm so glad that we live in a day and time where we can see her work.

Spot on.

@T Z I agree, Stanwyck is VERY under appreciated by the so called experts!

Crawford + Stanwyck + Swanson= All better than Davis.

You might wanna watch Davis in Now, Voyager or The Man Who Came To Dinner. Or, Mr Skeffington.

and yet she was nominated 3 times for best actress wining for the 1945 film mildred pierce

William Caron, I agree to disagree with you. Watch "A Woman's Face", "They All Kissed the Bride", "Possessed" (1947), "Susan and God, as well as "The Women". Quite a range and not narrow!

She was fine in a Woman's Face.

"Joans range wasn't wide but within her range she could out do any of her contemporaries". steven speiberg

Sudden Fear, Humoresque

N arrow range ... hardly watch Sudden Fear...Bette could never do that closet scene.... Joan was an excellent silent actress and she brought this talent to every movie she did

Well, she was detested within her industry for the most part, and she's globally remembered as a freak now, but if worldly goods is one's goal...then Yes, she did do well for herself. Yay for her.

lol. .. . nominated 3 times for best actress winning for the 1945 film mildred pierce... highly respected as a professional .. . ...even betty davis acknowledged her being a professional ….. detested within the industry...lol...and respected and admired within the industry.... now..let's view you...note your vile..posting… which speaks clearly of your lack of character.. .

You are much better of a person, spreading your love (hatred) on videos that you shouldn't watch if you don't like the person in them. Your username is "nurse", but nurses heal the sick and try to make things better...they don't spread crap and troll dead people. I hope. If they do, our medical systems are in jeopardy.