|
||
The Bigger Star By Farr: Bette Davis or Joan Crawford?
It's funny how often the names Bette Davis and Joan Crawford get linked. Granted, as the two top female stars of the '30s and '40s, they were natural rivals. Yet over forty shared years in Hollywood, they were never friends, and made only one feature together.
In fact, the two actresses had much in common, usually playing the same kinds of roles. Good or evil, their characters tended to be strong, driven women with a defiant streak, women who dominated their men when convention dictated the opposite.
Their differences were equally striking: at Warner Brothers, Davis usually portrayed more grounded types, and was probably the better actress. Yet over at MGM, the Tiffany of studios in Hollywood's Golden Age, Crawford was undeniably sexier, projecting a more unstable, dangerous quality that made her riveting to watch.
It's difficult to say who was the bigger star. Maybe reviewing some highlights of their respective careers can help resolve this thorny question.
Bette
Davis got her start in films in the early thirties. After delivering a breakout performance in the classic "Of Human Bondage" (1934), she was given the female lead opposite English heartthrob Leslie Howard in "The Petrified Forest" (1934), a film that also brought another player to the national spotlight: Humphrey Bogart.
Jezebel (1938) was Bette's consolation prize for not playing Scarlett O'Hara. Here she's Julie Marsden, a willful New Orleans belle engaged to Pres Dillard (Henry Fonda). Julie is needy and manipulative, and soon drives Pres away. He later returns with a wife, foiling Julie's plans for a reconciliation. After stirring up more trouble with the men-folk, Julie seizes one last chance to redeem herself. "Jezebel", too often compared with "GWTW" (released one year later), stands very much on its own. Davis is glorious in a fiery role, with Fonda suitably restrained as Pres.
Several years later brought one of Bette's signature roles in the classic soaper, "Now, Voyager" (1942). Charlotte Vale (Davis), a young spinster, has one hope for happiness: to get loose from the psychological stranglehold imposed by her rigid, controlling mother (Gladys Cooper).This melodrama of transformation follows Charlotte's struggle to break free, inspired by an unexpected on-board romance with the dashing Jerry Durrance (Paul Henreid). Shamelessly sentimental, this film still tugs at your heartstrings. Given the full-blown Warner Brothers treatment-complete with Max Steiner score, and both Henreid and the predictably fabulous Claude Rains in support, Bette lands in clover again.
Then just as it seemed her time had past, Davis would get handed the role of her career when Claudette Colbert injured herself and had to bow out of a movie called "All About Eve" (1950). The film concerns aging stage actress Margo Channing (Davis), wise in the ways of fame and the theatre, who's nevertheless blindsided by an adoring fan named Eve Harrington (Anne Baxter). Eve enters Margo's orbit as awed acolyte, then slowly usurps everything Margo has in one subtle, masterful act of manipulation. Don't miss this clever, caustic take on the theatre world, and the various parasites, barracudas, and hangers-on that populate it. Eve is the wolf in sheep's clothing, a comer with the talent and cunning to penetrate Margo's inner circle and catch her when she's vulnerable and feeling her age (as Davis herself was).
Joan
Crawford, three years older than Bette, got her footing in Hollywood earlier, starting in silents and making her name as the quintessential twenties flapper in "Our Dancing Daughters" (1928).
In the 1930's she did her best work in two high-profiles releases with ensemble casts:
First , the memorable "Grand Hotel" (1932), where Joan, Greta Garbo, Wallace Beery and John and Lionel Barrymore play out several interwoven stories, mixing drama, romance and murder, all occurring among the guests at Berlin's posh Grand Hotel. The young actress plays a beautiful stenographer who must parry the advances of the industrialist (Beery) who has hired her to "work" for him. Throughout, you cannot keep your eyes off Crawford.
In 1939's "The Women", Joan gets a juicy part playing Crystal Allen, a shop girl who may be fooling around with a man above her station, namely the husband of the wealthy Mary Haines (Norma Shearer). And the whole town is talking- that is, if they're female. Based on a play by Clare Boothe Luce, this is the ultimate woman's picture (as advertised), with no men featured in the cast. Rosalind Russell is particularly memorable as Sylvia Fowler, a catty gossip whose bite is poisonous. With a sharp, fast script by Anita Loos, this film lends credence to the adage, "Hell hath no fury..."
Six years and one world war later, Joan's career sorely needed a boost. For a star who had relied mostly on her looks, forty was a dangerous age. Ironically, her comeback part in "Mildred Pierce" (1945) had first been turned down by Bette Davis. Joan was ideal for Mildred, a woman consumed with achieving material success so that daughter Veda (Ann Blyth) has all the advantages she lacked. Veda becomes a spoiled monster, but the men in Mildred's life aren't too loveable either, whether it's oily Monty Berrigan (Zachary Scott) or lascivious Wally Fay (Jack Carson). With so many treacherous types around, it's not long before foul play enters the picture. Based on a James Cain tale, and directed by the peerless Michael Curtiz, "Pierce" out-noirs most later entries, and stands as Crawford's best performance- and only Oscar. (Bette, incidentally, won two.)
Joan was quickly cast with John Garfield in Jean Negulesco's "Humoresque" (1946). Helen Wright (Crawford) is a rich, married, bored patroness of the arts who discovers rough-hewn violin prodigy Paul Boray (Garfield) and advances his career, while falling madly in love with him. With Paul's family set against the scandalous affair, Helen soon realizes her romantic prospects are doomed. Another intense Crawford showing is augmented by a steely Garfield turn (with Isaac Stern doubling on violin). Oscar Levant provides a welcome dose of comic relief as Paul's friend, Sid.
Notable among Joan's later output is the under-rated noir, "Sudden Fear" (1952) and Jean Negulesco's splashy, glamorous "The Best Of Everything" (1959).
Together At Last
In 1962, Robert Aldrich's brilliantly campy "Whatever Happened To Baby Jane?" finally brought Bette and Joan together. Baby Jane Hudson (Davis) had been a successful vaudeville child performer, but sister Blanche (Crawford) surpassed her in adulthood, becoming a movie star before a freak accident cut short her career. Now many years later, Jane cares for wheelchair-bound Blanche, but as Jane's sanity slips away, her long-simmering jealousy towards Blanche erupts into sadistic behavior. This cult classic still chills, with Jane finding assorted inventive ways to torture Blanche (some of the best fun she ever had on a set, crowed Davis privately). On-screen though, the two old troupers make weird but wonderful music together.
So, which lady gets your vote for Queen of Hollywood?
For close to 2,000 more DVD recommendations, visit www.bestmoviesbyfarr.com.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
For me, Bette Davis. I just preferred her style, her voice, her looks, and she somehow seemed more vulnerable. But Joan was great fun to watch (especially in her early films), and "The Women" is in my top ten.
Now then, howzabout Jean Arthur vs. Carole Lombard?! (For me, impossible to choose.)
Forgot to mention two lesser known Joan Crawford movies worth seeing: "Susan and God" (screenplay by Anita Loos) and "When Ladies Meet." Of course, I tend to think almost ALL Golden Age films are worth seeing, and the B (and even C!) list are in some respects often more fun than the A-list movies.
Did anyone else have the great pleasure of seeing a skit on the original Tracey Ullman show - it was a number of years ago but so memorable - where Tracey and Glenn Close play two aging movie stars a la Davis and Crawford who are teaming up to do a movie together. Needless to say, it's the battle of who has the greater number of lines, more time on camera, etc. - unbelievably hilarious. And the big surprise was Glenn's comedy. Boy I would love to see this bit again.
See John Farr's Profile
as to glenn, don't forget this is the lady who camped it up on 101 dalmations.
you can probably find this clip on youtube-I'm going to look for it myself!
thanks for mentioning it...
Of the two, Bette Davis was by far the superior actress, whose resume boasts far more classic films. The idiosyncratic Davis was also (seemingly) the less manufactured of the two icons, which, judging from the majority of comments, really counts for something. I don't disagree; in terms of hours logged watching one performer's work, over and over again, Davis is hands-down my favorite actress.
But...let's not discount Crawford's deep imprint on Hollywood. She, more than Davis, springs to mind when you think "Movie Star." She probably springs to mind more readily than any other actress. And she turned herself into a legend not by sticking to safe sex kitten or glamour puss roles in her youth, but by pioneering what has become a cinematic archetype: the working girl who, with smarts and grits, overcomes adversity and comes out somewhere near the top, though usually with considerable collatoral damage to her personal life. In this respect, Crawford foretold the future of women's roles, and she deserves credit for the trailblazing. I love both these ladies. Can't we call the whole thing off?
I agree! Davis in Jezebel and Dark Victory - Crawford in Mildred Pierce and Queen Bee. Four of my favorite movies. They were both great actresses.
See John Farr's Profile
queen bee is one i need to check out.
Last weekend I Netflixed "Flamingo Road." Crawford goes from carnival sideshow girl to waitress to prison inmate to political boss' wife in 90 minutes--and playing a character who's clearly written as 20 years younger than herself, to boot. This film always strikes me as the first in which she is The Crawford legend fully eclipses the actress, with military posture, clear diction, and a dignified walk standing in for characterization. And yet that's not a bad thing, somehow, not in this movie at least, which is extremely well made trash.
See John Farr's Profile
your insights are on the mark.
As a fan of movies from the Davis/Crawford era, I think there is no contest between the two - Bette wins hands down. When I saw this post, the only Crawford movie that immediately came to mind was Mildred Pierce, which is a great movie. But when one mentions Bette Davis, so many come to mind - Now Voyager, All About Eve, Dark Victory - true classics to name a few. And those classic scenes/lines - the lighting of the two cigarettes, the "it's going to be bumpy" and the priceless "what a dump." Bette had far greater range and impact, in my opinion.
See John Farr's Profile
BD did have more indelible roles, no doubt.
Joan was much more of a product. I think she was invented by the studio. Even when she got into "talkies", her looks rather than talent opened the doors..
Bette, being unconventional looking, had to fight every step of the way. She was a completely self-made woman. she gets my vote.
See John Farr's Profile
I agree with everything you said, but I will say in the thirties Bette was pretty stunning and the camera loved her.
Just check out "Petrified Forest".
no wire hangers
(plus...Susan Sarandon has Bette Davis eyes)
Too different to compare, but I vote for Miss. Davis.
See Jane Devin's Profile
It seems to me that it was a different type of acting then, more measured and melodramatic. They call them Bette Davis eyes for a reason -- there has hardly been a star since who could (or possibly would) communicate her character through a stare, a batting, a wink, or a twinkle. Crawford may have been the sexier of the two, but Bette had a depth Crawford did not share.
The most interesting thing for me to contemplate is whether either of these actresses would have made it in today's movies. I would guess no, or at least not as successfully. What made old Hollywood so much more interesting than today's is that even though it was so narrow (white), it seemed more inclined to let unconventional beauties like Davis and Crawford in.
See John Farr's Profile
it was before method, so stars had pre-defined personas they played (for the most part) on-screen. I think Crawford would have had a tougher time, but Davis's toughness and talent would have made her successful.
See Tallulah Morehead's Profile
"So, which lady gets your vote for Queen of Hollywood?"
ME of course! Oh shy, shrinking-violet Bette, and dangerously psychotic Joan were high in the Tree of Tallulah Wanna-bes, but I outshone them all.
What is your curiously-undefined criteria for "Bigger Star"? Box-office receipts? (That was all that mattered to Jack Warner and L.B. Mayer) Endurance? Motherhood? (Both big failures there) Acting talent? (A non-starter for most stars) Without question Bette was by far the better actress. In fact, her name Bette was taken from the word "Better". Bette COULD act her way out of a paper bag. Joan would just open the bottle in the paper bag, and settle down for some hard-drinking.
Or just plain size? In that case, Bette. She towered over Joan, who was about 2 feet tall. Judy Garland called her "Shorty."
And when Bette played someone crazy, like Baby Jane, she had to ACT! Joan could just "Be Herself".
Cheers.
See John Farr's Profile
how do you know all this? is it true judy called her shorty? I love it.
as to bigger star, it's not just about box office receipts, I'm talking about which left the bigger footprint in hollywood and in the popular culture. I think the consensus is bette...
See Tallulah Morehead's Profile
"how do you know all this?"
Because I'm The Biggest Surviving Star of their era. Joan babysat for my Tragic Daughter Pattycakes. Read my bio for Heaven's sake.
"is it true judy called her shorty?"
It's as true as I am real.
"I'm talking about which left the bigger footprint in hollywood and in the popular culture."
Ah, the Chinese Forecourt approach to star measurement. Well Joan's feet were quite petite. Bette could wield one hell of a stomp, as Joan found out in the infamous kicking-Joan-around-the-hallway scene in BABY JANE. So Bette's footprints were deeper, but Joan's had more crushed and broken bodies in them.
Cheers darling.
The talent for being no more than oneself on screen, in role after role, while still attracting the interest of ticket buyers, is often given as the definition of the movie star. And by "often" I mean by me. Bette Davis is a character actress who accidentally became a star, in the opinion of some folk. Some folk like me.
See John Farr's Profile
as great as she was, I'm not sure BD had the capacity of a character actor to subordinate her own identity in a role.
her persona was too distinctive and too strong.
The bigger star was undoubtedly Davis. She was a better actress, and she radiated Hollywood royalty to the end. Even when she was in some bad films later in life (i.e. a TV film called The Dark Secret of Harvest Home), and seemed to have such a high opinion of herself (i.e. her rambling at the Oscars), Davis always commanded the room when she appeared. Not many of today's "stars" can do that. Crawford never reached that level of respect. And she appeared in Trog. How sad.
See John Farr's Profile
agree on bette, and she was always a total professional...as joe mankiewicz said, "god bless the prepared actress".
as to joan, she took those awful parts later on because she simply had to be in front of a camera...
Crawford was considered the ultimate Hollywood pro. Always early, prepared and beloved by everyone on the set. She knew the name of every grip's wife and kids.
Since you are a Hollywood expert, I would have expected you to bring more to the table than the same old cliches, tired facts and over-exposed film examples (the same ones all the commenters mention). Even Davis, who I dearly love, towards the end of her life confessed that Crawford was an excellent actress and that the press loved the fued far more than she. Even though they were never friends and made catty remarks most experts agree that the animosity was greatly exaggerated. Who in the world could ever really compete with Davis? Crawford was a fine underated actress -the films you mention are far from her finest work , as well as the most influential fashion icon ever to grace the big screen (millions would rush to buy copies her film outfits) , and much to Davis's dismay, far more successful with men off screen.
In many ways, Bette Davis was a really terrible actress, but she is just fascinating to watch. I will say though she was not afraid to look less than glamorous in service of a character. My personal favorite Bette Davis movies are "Mr. Skeffington" and "In This Our Life." I think that Joan Crawford was very invested in looking good on screen, no matter what character she was playing. They are just very different actresses, and I love them both.
Love, love, love "Mr. Skeffington."
See John Farr's Profile
claude rains is wonderful in this too. there's a scene when he's ordering from a menu that I'll never forget.
Mr. Farr, thank you for acknowledging these two grande dames of the bygone Hollywood era. I am a fan of both Ms. Davis and Ms. Crawford. Bette Davis had once stated that she considered herself an actress and labled Ms. Crawford the movie star.
I have to agree with Ms. Davis. But, if forced to choose my favorite then Bette Davis get my staunch approval of who's the better of the two. May I add a movie that Ms. Davis starred in back in the mid 60's that people seem to overlook. "The Nanny' a riveting, horrifying tale of a cover up to a murder. Bette Davis was gripping and just out right scary in her portrayal of the nanny. Also, 4 stars to Joan Crawford in Mildred Pierce. To have to deal with that brat of a daughter Vita! Mildred would do anything in the world to give her daughter everything she wanted, and it just wasn't enough for that brat Vita!
Anyway, for me Bette Davis wins because she has more tour de force performances than Joan Crawford. Mr. Farr you should had listed the 1950's era movie 'Johnny Guitar' I do believe Ms Crawford gave a stellar performance that had me howling w/laughter during the cat fight scene with actress Mercedes McCambridge. That was one of the best westerns I've ever seen. So much drama!
See John Farr's Profile
I would have mentioned johnny guitar, but it is not available on dvd...and I tend to avoid titles which readers cannot readily see.
Available on videotape? People do still use that format.
what a great article . I was so pleased to see it. As a 30 year old distant relative of Crawford i've made my unbiased decision. I am a huge fan of the golden age of hollywood which was brought about by the song "vogue" which Madonna paid tribute to all the greats(joan was left out). So i have seen all the movies listed above,and by far hands down both of their best work came when they FINALLY joined forces came together and blew us all away with talent ,star power,sympathy and terror in "Whatever Happened to Baby Jane" what it meant at that time for those two actresses coming together was huge! It would be like Angelina Jolie torturing a bedridden Jennifer Aniston how fun!
Te real question here who is the biggest star which we know is defferent from favorite actress.
So my pick goes to JoanCrawford, with all the beauty and drama that surrounded her life and career would have made todays media go wild ! More people would have wondered what she was wearing, where she was eating ,and who she was dating. So agian my Golden Star goes to Miss Crawford!
See John Farr's Profile
yes, she was the ultimate star...It's good she had the studio system to protect her from bad publicity. can you imagine what she would have experienced today?
this is a great article; an the term "star" is a little different from "actress." Even so, my choice is Bette by a mile. Maybe she just holds up better, or maybe it's because she starred in my all-time favorite film (and obviously that of many others), All About Eve. Bette also never gave a bad movie performance, as far as i can tell, and knew had to deliver a great line better than anyone I can think of.
My personal favorite Joan Crawford role is the stenographer in Grand Hotel. She's not campy as she is in later films, and is actually quite good. And of course who ever did the lighting (Hal Rossen maybe?) knew how to show of that face of hers, which I would kill for.
See John Farr's Profile
I too think Joan was a standout in that film. i prefer her to garbo actually!
Lord, that's an easy pick...Bette hands down. All About Eve was better then all Crawford's films combined...Crawford did photograph gorgeous. I don't know how on earth she won an Oscar for Mildred Pearce. Her best performance was in Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?
Bette was amazing in several films, The Letter, The Petrified Forest, The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex, The Little Foxes, The Man Who Came To Dinner. All about Eve (seen it 20 plus times) and Now Voyager are my favourites!
See John Farr's Profile
I always thought she was wasted in "man who came to dinner". also "watch on the rhine."
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
