What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?
Bosley              Crowther in              the New York Times
November 7, 1962
Joan Crawford and Bette Davis make a couple of formidable freaks in the new Robert Aldrich melodrama, "What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?" But we're afraid this unique conjunction of the two one-time top-ranking stars in a story about two aging sisters who were once theatrical celebrities themselves does not afford either opportunity to do more than wear grotesque costumes, make up to look like witches and chew the scenery to shreds.
As this pair of profoundly jealous has-beens who live alone in an old Hollywood house, where one of them (Miss Crawford), a cripple, is confined to a wheelchair as the result of a long-ago vindictive "accident," they do get off some amusing and eventually blood-chilling displays of screaming sororal hatred and general monstrousness.
Especially Miss Davis. As the mobile one who is slowly torturing to death the helpless sister whose fame as a movie actress eclipsed her own as a child vaudeville star, she shrieks and shrills in brazen fashion, bats her huge mascaraed eyes with evil glee, snarls at the charitable neighbors and acts like a maniac. Indeed, it is only as a maniac that her character can be credited here�a sadly demented creature who is simply working out an ancient spite.
If you see her as that and see this picture, which opened yesterday in several score neighborhood theaters, as a "chiller" of the old-fashioned type�as a straight exercise in studied horror�you may find it a fairly gripping film.
The feeble attempts that Mr. Aldrich has made to suggest the irony of two once idolized and wealthy females living in such depravity and the pathos of their deep-seated envy having brought them to this, wash out very quickly under the flood of sheer grotesquerie. There is nothing particularly moving or significant about these two.
Miss Crawford does have the less malevolent and more sympathetic role. As a poor thing stuck in a wheelchair, unable to counter or resist her diabolic sister when she delivers a dinner tray bearing a dead pet canary or a scalded rat, she might earn one's gentle compassion. But she is such a sweetly smiling fraud, such an artlessly helpless ninny, that one feels virtually nothing for her. No wonder her crazy sister finds her a deadly bore.
Of course, she does have her big chance to chew some scenery when she has to drag herself to the telephone and when she later thrashes about in pop-eyed terror with her hands tied and a tape across her mouth.
Victor Buono gets a nice chance to do some elaborate acting, too. He plays a fat piano player who is invited into the house. But his weirdly epicene intruder is little more than a colorful buffoon, a bit of comic relief, in the proceedings. He takes a fast powder toward the end.
Maidie Norman also gets in for a few tense scenes as an anxious maid, and Anna Lee burbles occasionally as the woman who lives next door.
Of course, we won't tell you how it comes out. But the revelation at the end would be enough to tag the whole thing synthetic and a contrivance, if nothing else did� which it does.
 
Paul V. Beckley in the New York Herald Tribune (1962):
    If  Miss Davis' portrait of an outrageous slattern with the mind of an infant has  something of the force of a hurricane, Miss Crawford's performance could be  described as the eye of that hurricane, abnormally quiet, perhaps, but ominous  and desperate.
 
Variety (1962):
    Miss  Crawford gives a quiet, remarkably fine interpretation of the crippled Blanche,  held in emotionally by the nature and temperament of her role. Physically confined  to a wheelchair and bed throughout the picture, she has to act from the inside  and has her best scenes (because she wisely underplays with Davis) with a maid  and those she plays alone. In one superb bit, Miss Crawford reacting to herself  on television makes her face fairly glow with the remembrance of fame past....  A genuine heartbreaker.
 
Motion Picture  Herald (1962):
     In  playing their rather implausible roles the two old-pro actresses have a field  day under the direction of Robert Aldrich....[Miss Davis] acts throughout...with  all her well-remembered bite and venom intact, while Miss Crawford plays it  beautifully and nobly, as of yore.
 
of 5
 
This review will focus on the professionalism and poise Miss Crawford displayed during what must have been an extremely difficult experience working with Bette Davis on "What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?" It is no secret today that these women did not get along, but back when this film was made their rivalry was just speculation. In today's world, actresses would never handle themselves in a manner in which their reputation and the work were put first over ego. Miss Crawford and, to some extent, Miss Davis were able to create a cinematic masterpiece. Much is made of Davis' performance, but Joan shines here in a way she hadn't up until that point. In this film, she is the sympathetic, in many ways pathetic, straight man to Davis' over-the-top power-house role. Joan has to mute herself in order to avoid the wrath of Bette's character, in a way we moviegoers were not accustomed to seeing her onscreen. Joan is in next-to-no makeup and doesn't have any big over-the-top scenes; instead we get a true character onscreen who has tricked herself into believing she is the victim. We follow her on this journey until the truth is revealed in the end.
This is not my favorite film of Joan's; however, as stated in the opening line, I believe the integrity with which she handled this role is important. People love to air their dirty laundry in the modern-day technology              and Facebook era to such an extent that I wonder if strong personalities like those of these two stars would ever put their differences aside to work together on a project that could benefit both of them. I say it day in and day out: we could learn a lot from Joan Crawford, and indeed we did.
 
of 5
 
Even when one overlooks  the legendary real-life animosity between its two leading dames, What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? still  retains its glorious hybrid of celebrity psychosis, batshit-hysteria and satire  of Hollywood stardom. Bette Davis illuminates the screen with a no-holds-barred  psychic portrait of child-star- turned-formidable-freak while Joan Crawford makes  for a glamorous punching bag. To cut their feud short, it was Davis who won the  battle by bagging the Oscar nomination for her performance -- but Crawford  satisfactorily won the war by ensuring she would accept the award on behalf of  the eventual winner.
 
In a tale of grotesque sibling  rivalry, Bette Davis plays Baby Jane Hudson, a popular (and horridly tempered)  vaudevillian child star whose fame fades as she grows older. Joan Crawford plays  her sister, Blanche; overshadowed as a child, she enjoys success as a serious  actress in her adult life. Though Blanche was able to source work for her sister  (in spite of her lack of talent), Baby Jane winds up an embittered and often  volatile alcoholic. This supposed jealousy is the catalyst for a brutal car  accident that leaves Blanche bound to a wheelchair. In their old age, with their  careers a thing of the past, both sisters are confined to a decaying mansion:  Baby Jane as the nurse/prison warden, Blanche as the dependent  invalid/prisoner.
When discovering that her sister intends to sell the  house and potentially have her committed to psychiatric care, Jane's mood swings  develop into cruelty towards Blanche. Between incessant verbal put downs, Jane  cuts Blanche off from the world by withholding her fan mail, then sets on a  campaign of psychological torture. At the height of her mental degeneration,  Jane's delusions of grandeur include an attempt to revive her child act by  enlisting the help of crooked pianist Edwin (a wonderful Victor Buono) while  becoming progressively more violent towards her declining sister.
Robert  Aldrich supposedly invented the rivalry to inject some much needed hype (and  money) into a project that, at first glance, inspired little more than cursory  cynicism. Davis and Crawford were in their 50s, their careers recycled more  times than a spare tire, with the dust long settled on their marquee days. The  �washed up� undertone becomes a frequent thing of mockery, delivered with bitter  irony. It's Davis' Baby Jane who is sent up as the faded novelty act while  Crawford's Blanche is empowered as the once revered actress; early in her career  Davis established her acting chops with a series of acclaimed, and Oscar  nominated, roles while Crawford tirelessly fought to overturn the impression she  was little more than a glamorous mannequin of the movies.
To her credit,  Davis commits to the role of Baby Jane without a modicum of vanity. Beyond the  demented shrieks and venomous drawls, her physical transformation is beyond  ghastly: she adorns chalk-white foundation and a ridiculous blonde ringlet wig,  with a slash of scarlet lipstick on her patented wide mouth. Davis turns Jane  into a crusty, sullen-faced clown whose dialogue fires off with the rapidity and  bite of a machine gun. Later, as the madness unfurls, the clown's infant mind  comes to the core in jolts of panic and genuine fragility. Davis knew she had a  meatier role than her arch-nemesis and she attacked it with all the subtlety of  a sledgehammer. Founded entirely on desperation, her performance is a  success.
Against her usual style, Crawford's interestingly plays her hand  with utmost subtlety. This sets up the festering guilt Blanche contains for  eclipsing her sister's fame, not to mention the ironic finale. Her get-up is  weird, too, with a hairstyle and wardrobe that can be best described as a kabuki  warrior in retire. (Somewhere, a young Faye Dunaway was scribbling down  character notes.) That the film exposes her face in the full throes of weathered  age adds some sincerity to the scene where Blanche's eyes glisten while watching  herself as a young actress on TV. (The clip provided is Sadie McKee; "It's still a good picture," Blanche poignantly mumbles.) Most of Crawford's  best scenes are private, alone with the fear instilled by Jane's recurring  torture.
Yet there's a plethora of other wonderful things about Baby  Jane away from the two dynamic leads. It�s scored to chilling effect; the  scene where Jane drunkenly loses herself in the memory of stardom and sings                                                  is tragic and fearsome both at once. Then, during an impromptu performance as  Edwin plays the piano, the mansion suddenly converts into a theatre stage with  accompanying footlights. Baby Jane is also peppered with neat and  self-effacing exposition to convey the essential theme of narcissism:  ironically, Bette Davis�s daughter plays a neighbour relishing clips of Crawford  in the period of her cinematic peak; the sheer fact these stars belonged to a  classic Hollywood that was now being sold to TV.
Aldrich has a blast directing  his two leading women, in spite of the perpetual lore of on-set feuding. His  true triumph, however, is how he creatively mines into his material, planting  subversion at the heart of his aesthetic here. Hag horror at its utmost  delicious, What Ever Happened to Baby Jane succeeds on gothic  overtures but offers a more chilling portrayal of the aftermath for stars when  their careers inevitably curdle.
 
Gabriel              Neilson  (August 2010)
 
As I was reading through the other reviews of this film                  [below], I came upon a brief note made by Michael Lia in October of 2009.  He wrote, "The rest is history and folklore, but the movie did one thing: It gave Miss Crawford about a million dollars.  Today, I was saying to my mate that I need a "Baby Jane� -- of course  meaning I need a hit, a bang, some good big cash! I need a �Baby Jane�  to come to the rescue!) I am happy it gave Miss Crawford that success  and I will leave it at that."
I tend to agree with this notion, most in the "physical" perspective. (Regarding money, careers, etc.) I did enjoy  the movie. It was, in my opinion, well acted and thought provoking. It  has since become a cult-classic and a bit over-done in some instances.  However, I find it most worth seeing.
Most notable to me, however, is how  this film has become a "gay-cult classic." As we all know both Miss  Davis and Joan to be notable gay-icons (and much much more, of course!)  it is easy to see how this film became that. How many times have we seen  parodies of Baby Jane done by gay men? So much so it's nauseating!  But even so! For myself, this is an important aspect of the film as it  is what led me to find Joan. Being gay opens doors to new things --  without Baby Jane, the door to Joan wouldn't have been opened to me (at  least for now). Thus, this picture does own (however unpretentious)  a fragment in my heart.
So  how do you rate something like that? It transcends that. Not that the  film is one of Crawford's or Davis's best performances. It is not. It is  neither the most emotional. It really isn't much more noteworthy for  much other than that it did star two immortal and powerful actresses.  But for me, it personifies much more. I do think that others like  me hold that in common with this film.
All  in all, a good movie, not great -- but inspirational work done by Joan,  who never left her craft. A woman who lived, breathed, and died for  movie-stardom, her fans, and her love for so many things -- a passion  unlike any other's.
 
of 5
I absolutely adore What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? for many reasons.
My mum told me about her favourite film about two years ago. It was called What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? I coincidentally saw it while I was in a film shop and we bought it, and watched it that night. From the beginning onwards I was engrossed.
The film actually introduced me to Miss Crawford and Miss Davis, respectively, and ever since I have loved them both with a passion. But the film itself is a work of art -- it is definitely one of the most classic films ever made, as it  combines suspense, wit, tension, black comedy and talent; and it is now my favourite film.
Crawford gives a fantastic performance as the tormented cripple Blanche Hudson, although it seems to be very much underrated. Davis manages to give one of her best performances ever and steals nearly every scene from the cast. But Joan does overshadow Davis in quite a few scenes -- for instance, when she drags herself down the stairs to get help and builds up the tension throughout the whole of her scene. I couldn't help but sympathise with her, even when we find out what she really did at the film's climax. I will always remember the terrifying bird and rat on the supper tray scenes and when Blanche is violently beaten, as they are terrifically played.
It has been said that there was a feud between the two ladies while filming this. I don't think there was really a "feud" on set, though. I think the feud officially took place on the set of Hush... Hush, Sweet Charlotte, in which Joan was replaced by Olivia De Havilland (another of my favourite actresses), mostly because of Bette's behaviour. I think on the Baby Jane set it was really friendly rivalry.
This is one of the films that should be shown to a Crawford fan, as it portrays one of her greatest films and performances. I think without a doubt Bette Davis should have won the Academy Award for Best Actress, and Joan should have been nominated.
Favourite Lines:
Blanche: You wouldn't be able to do these awful things to me if I weren't still in this chair.
Jane: But you are Blanche. You are in that chair!
 
Jane: Then you're an idiot.
Blanche: We're sisters, Elvira. We know each other very well.
Jane (to Blanche): You mean all this time we could have been friends?
Blanche (to Jane): You weren't ugly then. I made you that way.
Jane: Blanche... You aren't ever gonna sell this house. And you aren't ever gonna leave it either.
Jane (to Elvira): I won't and you can't make me. I'm not afraid of you.
Jane: He's going to tell.
Jane: He hates me...
Jane: Blanche. You've got to help me.
 
Mrs. Bates: That Jane Hudson makes me so mad, I could kill her!
Liza Bates: Gee, that's a good idea. What will we use? 
Jane: Oh, Blanche. You know we got rats in the cellar? 
Jane: You miserable bitch!
Blanche: It's still a pretty good picture.
 
My thirteenth review              for this site --  how fitting!
 
When I asked my Mom about �Baby Jane� with Bette Davis and Joan Crawford, she let out this tragic, tired sigh and said, �Oh, that was so sad."
 
I think Miss Crawford thought so, too.
 
For my mother, Joan and Bette were still remembered for their past glories and glamour. My mother was of the opinion that it was a come-down. I think Miss Crawford thought so, too. Because where did she go from there?
 
My partner also despises the movie for some of the same reasons as my mom. It is a cult classic however, and I am sure that is how I found it -- you could not miss this movie in San Francisco! Not to mention the parodies of the movie played out on the street or              in the theatres.
 
I watched and I loved it, then I watched it again about thirty or forty more times, and I do not think I like it anymore. The pairing of Joan and Bette remains the reason for seeing this movie. It ranks and it reeks at the same time. It suddenly seems like an implausible movie and it does go on too long. I can actually watch The Spiral Staircase or The Cat and the Canary with more fright and interest than I do "Baby              Jane." But if you�re a film fan you have to know this movie.
 
Robert Aldrich              (Autumn Leaves ) directed and hustled this movie deal like a ringmaster.              Oh, if the script were a little better, tightened up a bit, Mr. Aldrich could have come close to real suspense and cut some of the 132 minutes of film.
 
Victor Buono is excellent in his screen debut, and the scenes with "my gal" Marjorie Bennett and Buono are full of comedic turns and well worth the pairing (they could have had a series). Bennett also appeared as the waitress in Autumn              Leaves.  Aldrich and Joan liked her, too! She was fresh air compared to the "goings on."
 
Same for Maidie Norman. She appeared with Joan in Torch              Song as Joan�s secretary. Here she plays her scenes as professionally as Hattie McDaniel would and with as much force and meaning. She is really good and gets my attention.  (As a              kid  I was sorry she died.) It was still tough being a black actress then, but she hung on!
 
Bette Davis�s big fat mean boring �Christina�- like daughter is AWFUL, period.              Ann Barton has a steady history and plays with some interest --  tough luck she had to play against a piece of wood like Little Davis. Nepotism is no good this time.
 
I can watch Miss Davis and be fascinated. There are moments you feel sad for this woman, and her acting and characterization are very good. Madness is creeping in fast. She is a killer. For me, it still has to be a dark night              -- lots of rain and cold -- and then I am ready for some �Baby Jane."
 
The rest is history and folklore, but the movie did one thing: It gave Miss Crawford about a million dollars. (Today, I was saying to my mate that I need a "Baby Jane� --  of course meaning I need a hit, a bang, some good big cash! I need a �Baby Jane� to come to the rescue!) I  am happy it gave Miss Crawford that success and I will leave it at that.
 
On a personal note: I was once able to ask an old-time publicist and Warner Brothers� employee (Frank Casey) about the �feud� with Joan and Bette.              We were in the lobby of the Park Hyatt hotel in Chicago. I was a bellboy, and Mr. Casey had just dropped off  Tom Cruise, promoting Risky Business (he is short). Anyway, Mr.              Casey answered very candidly and said gruffly: �I would pick Crawford up at the airport and take her to  the hotel, and then I would pick up Davis at the airport and she would just say, �Ohh, you were with her!� It was all very simple, sarcasm at its best! Like a running joke.              (Mr. Casey did have a beautiful photograph of he and Miss Crawford from about 1955 on his entry hall table, signed, of course!)
 
of 5
 
What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? is definitely a classic motion picture. Stemming from the 1960s horror macabre, Baby Jane is definitely one to give you chill bumps. Unlike modern day horror & thriller films with the blood and gore, Baby Jane is a film that gives you chills without showing anything outrageous. Watching Jane (Bette Davis) go from cruel to Blanche (Joan Crawford) to sweet and subtle to Edwin Flagg (Victor Buono) is definitely a spine-tingler in itself. You can definitely tell Jane has mental issues, which you can decipher by watching the film. However, watching Blanche's character is definitely one to get you sympathetic. You feel for her because, first off, she's crippled and can't do anything without Jane's assistance, really. Then you see how Jane mistreats Blanche, and how it progresses to a frightening stairs-and-telephone-call scene where Jane stands at a hallway door as Blanche is on the telephone pleading for help. The ending is very surprising and lets you decide what happens.  What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? is definitely one of                  Miss Crawford & Miss Davis' finest works, and as a fan of BOTH actresses, Joan & Bette should have won the Academy Award for Best Actress that year. A fine, fine film and definitely a recommendation to anyone.
 
Some of the best lines include:
Blanche:  You wouldn't be able to do these awful things to me if I weren't still in this chair.
Jane:  But you are, Blanche! You are in that chair!
 
Jane (to Blanche):  You mean all this time we could have been friends?
 
 
Susan              White  (December 2008)
I am 50 years of age ... saw this movie when I was about 7 years old and was              terrified by it.  When I was around 30, I invited a friend over to watch it (she never saw it) ... I rented it from Blockbuster ..... from the very              beginning with the 'accident' scene and the music playing ... I had to stop              the movie and apologize to my friend that I couldn't continue watching the              movie because I was already scared.
Very, very good movie!!!!!
Dennis              Jones   (June 2008)
I              never miss the opportunity to see this film (and I�ve seen it several times). The acting, especially by the two principals, comes as close, to me, as being some of the finest ever on film. Miss Davis� deranged character performance  proves why she was designated the 2nd best actress of all time. Miss Crawford plays her part just as well. I simply can�t imagine any else coming remotely close to what these two achieved with these roles. And although the film was made in 1962, a lot of people that I know still discuss this picture, not just for Davis� or Crawford's performance, but for the believability these two titans of the silver screen conveyed with their outstanding performances. We have but very few actors these days that can match--on a consistent, career basis--the caliber of excellence you�ll find in these two great performers. If you haven�t seen �Baby Jane� yet, your �great movie viewing� is incomplete!