|
Post by Kinky Boots on Dec 24, 2020 3:25:37 GMT -6
Why was Bosley Crowther so scathing of Joan? Not to like a film of acting is one thing, but his reviews were personal and incredibly toxic.
|
|
|
Reviews
Dec 31, 2020 23:13:38 GMT -6
Post by Admin on Dec 31, 2020 23:13:38 GMT -6
Why was Bosley Crowther so scathing of Joan? Not to like a film of acting is one thing, but his reviews were personal and incredibly toxic. I started to make a complete list of each Crowther review on BOE, with a sampling of a horrible quote from each, but it got too long! The man is, indeed, incredibly nasty, and I have no idea why, other than his own psychological problems. Oh wait, maybe I DO know why: Says Marjorie Rosen in "Popcorn Venus": "After the war, when movies regarded everything short of obliging, weak-willed femininity as a contagious social disease, she (Joan) was massacred." Crowther's extremely personal comments are usually in the same vein: that Joan is "sexless" and "cold" and "artificial." Interestingly, Crowther did NOT do the Times review of "Sudden Fear"--an especially good film and performance--although his substitute, an A.H. Weller, commented along the same Crowther lines: "A viewer not entirely a slave to Miss Crawford's brand of histrionics might argue that an excessive amount of footage is given to close-ups of the lady in the throes of mental traumas and other emotional disturbances." Unfortunately, this type of extremely sexist review from Crowther and other '50s reviewers colored Joan's professional reputation for decades afterward. Here's a partial sampling of nasty Crowther: Possessed ('47): www.joancrawfordbest.com/filmspossessed47.htm#Critics' (...For not only does Miss Crawford resemble anything so much as a water-logged cadaver at the outset of "Possessed"—and, for that matter, never looks completely dehydrated at any stage of the film—but her whole attitude throughout the drama is that of a desperate woman's ghost wailing for a demon-lover beneath a waning moon. And, indeed, the basic conflict in the story is so similar to that in "Humoresque" that the ghost aspect of the characterization seems to be almost studiously contrived.) Harriet Craig: www.joancrawfordbest.com/filmsharriet.htm#Critics' (...As a matter of fact, the poisonous woman which the lacquered Miss Crawford tries to play, under Vincent Sherman's direction, is not so much poisonous as just plain dull. Miss Crawford persists so intently in a harsh mechanistic acting style that there is simply no reason or reality in the perfunctory shrew that she parades. It is as though an over-dressed clotheshorse, without character or sex, were playing the role. Why anyone should work up interest in her is more than we can see.) Goodbye, My Fancy: www.joancrawfordbest.com/filmsgoodbye.htm#Critics' (...At least, it is loaded with tension—or a reasonable facsimile thereof—when Miss Crawford herself is posing or parading within the camera's range. For the lady is famously given to striking aggressive attitudes and to carrying herself in a manner that is both formidable and cold.) This Woman Is Dangerous: www.joancrawfordbest.com/filmsthiswoman.htm#Critics' (...But for people of mild discrimination and even moderate reasonableness, the suffering of Miss Crawford will be generously matched by their own in the face of "This Woman Is Dangerous." Remember! Big, agonizing hunks!) Johnny Guitar: www.joancrawfordbest.com/filmsjohnny.htm#Critics' (...But this condescension to Miss Crawford and her technically recognized sex does nothing more for the picture than give it some academic aspects of romance. No more femininity comes from her than from the rugged Mr. Heflin in "Shane." For the lady, as usual, is as sexless as the lions on the public library steps and as sharp and romantically forbidding as a package of unwrapped razor blades.)
|
|
|
Post by Kinky Boots on Jan 2, 2021 0:14:05 GMT -6
Thank you for such an amazing answer. I love your site and I❤️Joan! His vitriol was so over the top and unnecessary. I looked at other reviews he wrote for Joan’s contemporaries like Davis, Stanwyck, Lupino, Young, Garson,Hepburn, etc. He was far more objective and complementary. In the grand scheme of things, if you are a reviewer and going to criticize an actor as manufactured, one-note, or with limited, predictable range... Katharine Hepburn and Bette Davis, were essentially Katharine Hepburn and Bette Davis in every film they made during this same period. This is not a criticism of these other legends, but to insinuate that Joan alone is the only actress of the 40’s and 50’s who’s performing style and timbre were somehow robotic or limited to personae and not character is ridiculous. Joan, in my opinion could hold her own with Heps and Betts, and was the superior actress to many of the others, so Crowthers toxicity just had to have some personal or pathological root other than just his clear misogyny. Joan of the late 40’s was sadly struggling again to find suitable properties. So many of the parts she was playing she was too old for by that time. How I would have loved to see Joan of the Sadie or Dancing Lady era tackle The Damned Don’t Cry or Flamingo Road. One very underrated performance was Daisy Kenyon. Had the script been a little less scattered and the film a bigger hit, she could and should have secured an Oscar nod. Her performance was so understated and yet layered. The film also holds up remarkably well; then again, even in Joan’s really lousy films, she is still magnetic and entertaining. I agree with you 100% that Crowthers damaged her reputation and contributed to the nonsense that Joan was anything other than a very skilled and compelling actress. Bosley you can go suck a lemon!
|
|
|
Reviews
Apr 6, 2021 21:06:45 GMT -6
Post by Admin on Apr 6, 2021 21:06:45 GMT -6
Thank you for such an amazing answer. I love your site and I❤️Joan! His vitriol was so over the top and unnecessary. I looked at other reviews he wrote for Joan’s contemporaries like Davis, Stanwyck, Lupino, Young, Garson,Hepburn, etc. He was far more objective and complementary. In the grand scheme of things, if you are a reviewer and going to criticize an actor as manufactured, one-note, or with limited, predictable range... Katharine Hepburn and Bette Davis, were essentially Katharine Hepburn and Bette Davis in every film they made during this same period. This is not a criticism of these other legends, but to insinuate that Joan alone is the only actress of the 40’s and 50’s who’s performing style and timbre were somehow robotic or limited to personae and not character is ridiculous. Joan, in my opinion could hold her own with Heps and Betts, and was the superior actress to many of the others, so Crowthers toxicity just had to have some personal or pathological root other than just his clear misogyny. Joan of the late 40’s was sadly struggling again to find suitable properties. So many of the parts she was playing she was too old for by that time. How I would have loved to see Joan of the Sadie or Dancing Lady era tackle The Damned Don’t Cry or Flamingo Road. One very underrated performance was Daisy Kenyon. Had the script been a little less scattered and the film a bigger hit, she could and should have secured an Oscar nod. Her performance was so understated and yet layered. The film also holds up remarkably well; then again, even in Joan’s really lousy films, she is still magnetic and entertaining. I agree with you 100% that Crowthers damaged her reputation and contributed to the nonsense that Joan was anything other than a very skilled and compelling actress. Bosley you can go suck a lemon! I agree that Hepburn and Davis were pretty much one-note actresses. GREAT one-note actresses in that they were very natural, but... one-note, nonetheless. Though I wish that some of Hepburn's latter-day roles had been Joan's: African Queen, Suddenly Last Summer, The Lion in Winter. I'm still not a fan of "Daisy Kenyon." I saw it on-screen at a Preminger film fest in NYC about 10 years ago. Even given the "bump" that seeing a film with a live audience gives, the film remains flat to me... Maybe Joan's character as a "Greenwich Village artist" didn't ring true, or maybe she played it a bit too genteel, a la her carney girl in "Flamingo Road"... (But "Flamingo" had Greenstreet and an interestingly tawdry plot to liven things up, whereas in "Daisy," both Fonda and Andrews were playing it as flat as Joan was).
|
|
|
Post by Kinky Boots on Apr 6, 2021 22:38:04 GMT -6
Ughhhh. You are soooo right about Henry Fonda. Milquetoast slathered with a generous schmear of I Can’t Believe its Not Better... Acting. At least Dana Andrews was yummy to look at. I understand completely about your reservations and why some of her flashier roles had more bite, but there are little nuggets of gold in her performance that resonate. I can watch and rewatch Damned and Queen Bee just for the hoot and half fun they deliver.
|
|