What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?

Sometimes celebrity conflict can often rule a headline as much as any national or global event, and throughout the middle of the 20^th century, one of the biggest celebrity feuds was between actresses Bette Davis and Joan Crawford. Both were known for being incredibly dedicated female performers who worked within the system they were given in Hollywood and provided some juicy roles that were usually atypical of female characters at the time. The media especially liked to exploit and manipulate this animosity between the two, to the point where it became a staple of both actresses and even contributed to the stereotype and image that the two would be known for later on in their careers (just look at the 2017 mini-series, Feud: Bette and Joan for more proof). One film that was greatly hampered by this media coverage, was the 1962 film, What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? The movie follows two sisters who are forced to live together yet are greatly distressed by the other. Jane (played by Bette Davis) is an aging former child-star celebrity known as ‘’Baby Jane’’ who fell away from the spotlight and was driven to alcoholism, and Blanche (played by Joan Crawford) is a once-successful Hollywood star who lost the use of her legs after a tragic car accident left her paralyzed and forced to live in isolation within her house. Jane resents her sister for her larger success in films as well as continuing success through re-runs of her films years after her accident, while Blanche is slowly growing fearful of her sister’s violent mood swings, discovering she is forging her signature to buy more booze, and slowly starving her after she discovers Blanche plans to sell the house and essentially put her in a mental hospital. But being unable to escape, how will this madhouse end between the two sisters? Based on a novel written by Henry Farrell, What Ever Happened to Baby Jane had a lot of coverage in the media even before it was released because the press made sure to hype up how against each other Crawford and Davis were, despite the fact that in actuality that didn’t really happen. What they didn’t realize is what other impact this movie would have, for better or worse.

From initial responses from critics, the movie wasn’t incredibly well received and only managed to grow a cult following afterwards. This isn’t too surprising as outside of the subject matter being wildly different from most movies of its ilk at the time, Hollywood within this era was very adamant on not keeping actresses in films if they were over the age of 40. This was especially important for both Davis and Crawford as both were within that range and despite being very popular names of the era, they were already being forgotten by the studios they worked for years with in exchange for newer talent. A film like this starring two older actresses was definitely something different for a movie that was also very popular at the Academy Awards (being nominated five times) and it created a shift that worked both in its favor and against it, it was definitely a strange messy movie. The tragic thing is that the concept and plot behind this story is actually quite interesting and even ties into elements and ideas that would have affected its lead actresses; the idea of two women dealing with the departure from Hollywood (one forceful, the other through lack of attention and a fall from grace) and how that impacted them mentally and as a sibling dynamic. It clearly has its roots in several thriller-based stories, has visual similarities and themes that are very akin to a Hitchcock film, and even this idea of a person being unable to escape their psychotic tormentor feels like something that inspired creators like Stephen King to make stories like Misery, proving that it can really work with the right handling. That is one of the main reasons the film does unfortunately lose itself as it keeps going however, as the direction of the story goes in a less straightforward dramatic angle and instead opts for a more over-the-top melodramatic even exploitative direction. The director, Robert Aldrich, was known for mainly directing dark melodramas with a gothic atmosphere, ad you can definitely feel that in this movie. Its campy nature, black comedic aspects, and featuring of older actress in a period where they weren’t taken seriously, lead Hollywood down a road of instead of treating older actresses more seriously, decided to place them in similar films that play up the crazed old woman angle and featured mostly cheesy ridiculous situations, coining the ‘psycho-biddy’ sub-genre. Its definitely a narrative and direction that will be tied to a person’s tolerance, and how much silliness they can take, especially for a film that could have been played straight and made for an engaging watch regardless.

What did work out from this film is that it did revitalize both actresses’ career’s and showed that they could still be recognizable names over the age limit. Despite this, it was still tied to a movie and roles that were definitely on the more shrill, mentally challenged, and unstable nature that wouldn’t have painted the greatest picture, but it was still a decent chance to show off what these two were capable of. Both Davis and Crawford like playing roles that don’t generally play up the normal trends of women in the era, and both of these women are distinctly broken down in this movie. Both are pretty good and manage to (for the most part) balance that fine line of being genuine enough as well as pretty over-the-top crazy. While Crawford’s meek, wheelchair bound performance is good in its own right for what she is given (during the last act, she is mostly just knocked out), Davis is really given a lot of time to shine in this film as the titular character and the one with arguably the only amount of true depth. Baby Jane could actually be a very complex tragic character if the direction and writing didn’t take her down such a strange, oddly delivered track. Mocking the ‘’Shirley Temple’’ like child celebrity that was popular during that era and pointing out the psychological scarring that can do to a person and what it means to grow up and be successful in life when your fame came from when you’re a child is a very interesting concept, but outside of that it doesn’t really tackle that deep complicated issue. A majority of the performance is done very well by Bette Davis who can emote and show truly disgusting faces through her expressions very well. She isn’t afraid to look very ugly and quite creepy in the movie, and her piercingly white make-up and overly done up and tattered hair make her look like a demonic-possessed baby doll who came to life. It can be quite eerie and even pretty effective in certain moments, but it’s a shame that for a role that could have been truly disturbed and complexly written, it does feel more like a caricature you would find in a lower-budget movie of the era. Once and a while, there’s a decent supporting actor who pops up from time to time like Victor Buono and Maidie Norman, but everybody is held back because of the confused tone and odd direction, so its often hard to gage whether or not a performance is great as a whole or purely great within the realms of this film.

Its quite clear from the framing of a lot of shots, the stylisation of a lot of costuming and make-up and just the overall feel and topics surrounding this movie, that it wanted to be like a Hitchcock-type thriller, but it doesn’t quite reach that level of technical brilliance to make it really work. It has moments where it feels like it could have a suspenseful scene and it has all the makings for one to properly work, but not only do they overplay the same gimmick and situation over and over again, but the melodramatic nature does suck out legitimate moments that could be intense and uncomfortable because they are either at best unnerving or at worst pretty funny. The visuals are pretty well done in parts; the black-and-white adds a nice dirty filter to the film that makes it feel older and less polished, and the harsh lighting and pronounced make-up help things stand-out greatly when they need to. The camera work isn’t overly creative with its lay-out and isn’t as dynamic and intricate that a movie like this could have, but there are some moments (mainly when its kept still) when it is effective. The score composition and music done by Frank De Vol is a little too loud and overly composed in moments. Its another contributing factor to the messy tone and unneeded campiness because the music is mostly good in quieter moments, but whenever its trying to stand out, it really doesn’t fit with the movie (even within its realm of reality) and makes it feel even less fitting.

This movie is a pretty interesting experience and arguably one that should be watched. Whether or not it’s a film that you will genuinely like or not is incredibly debatable and up to the person as its campy and overly theatrical presence can be off-putting and annoying to some but could be weirdly engaging to others. Its honestly a movie that could really benefit from a proper remake within modern times as the ideas and even satire of Hollywood’s treatment of child-stars has evolved throughout the years but is still something that could be talked about in an interesting way. As a movie for what it is, it does have its shining parts, but it also has its moments that are unnerving and off-putting, but for the wrong reasons. Some of the acting is enjoyable (mainly from the two lead actresses), some of the visuals are good and the theme and actual story is pretty great, but it could have used a bit more to truly be as effective as it could be. At least worth a viewing to decide for yourself whether or not its important to know what really happened to Baby Jane?