Hollywood History: The Real-Life "Feud" and More

[blaase]

On 3/28/2017 at 8:37 AM, psychoticstate said:

Christina was quite full of herself, wasn't she?  Whether her mother treated people like that or not doesn't give her the right to be an ass. 

I've always felt that she believed she could slide by on the Crawford name and by way of her mother's success, be handed a stellar career.  When that didn't happen (because Christina did not have her mother's drive, ambition or talent) she grew resentful of her mother and her mother's success. 

Christina didn't have beauty either which in superficial hollywood is more important than anything. She was just bland looking as they say these days ,she was basic!

 I always felt that if Christina really was treated horribly by Joan as MD suggests she should have removed Joan from her life completely when she became an adult but Christina did not do that.

Christina definitely used Joan's name for her career and financial gain until Joan's death. 

[psychoticstate]

3 hours ago, blaase said:

Christina definitely used Joan's name for her career and financial gain until Joan's death. 

And after!  MD was published after Joan died and Christina is still the conductor of that gravy train. 

I was watching a short little docu-flick about Joan at Warners and Christina gave a few THs.  What was interesting to me was that she continually stressed "my adoptive mother," even when talking about Joan's fear and worry at leaving Warners after five years. 

[ennui]

11 hours ago, AgentRXS said:

aging naturally

We've already forgotten what that looks like, I guess. Logan's Run, "Those cracks in your face, do they hurt?"

14 hours ago, enoughcats said:

Had Bette had a stroke or TIA on her right side before this photo above was taken?

I doubt it. I think it was her face aging, and then later the stroke just made it worse. 

[TigerLynx]

To be fair to Bette and Joan, not only was cosmetic surgery not as advanced as it is today, but the effects of smoking, drinking, and tanning (being in the sun ages you even if you don't lie around soaking up the rays) were just starting to be known.  Also, most people were doing good to live to 60 or 65.  Unlike today, where more and more people live into their 80s, 90s, and 100s.

[CraftyHazel]

21 hours ago, caracas1914 said:

From TWP's recap of the last episode:

Geeze, Joan knew how to do full HW movie queen glamour, didn't she?

Not to brag, but I'm about the same age as Joan was here (and therefore older than Bette was), and I'm still taken for 40-something.  I don't smoke, drink, or tan so that's on my side, but I also don't have access to a professional makeup artist, filtered lenses (or Vaseline), money for beauty treatments, or that fabulous magic tape they all used for temporary facelifts!

[Jan Spears]

Love this photo of Joan and Norma together again at an event in 1959:

http://www.joancrawfordbest.com/59joannormawaldhwood.htm

During that period (1925-1942) when their careers overlapped at MGM, Joan and Norma were rarely photographed together -- the publicity photos for The Women being the big exception. But by 1959, passions had cooled and, while they would never be friends, I like to think that a certain conviviality had developed between these two survivors of the hothouse atmosphere that was MGM during its Golden Age.

(The man seated to Crawford and Shearer's left was Jerry Wald, who was a great friend to Crawford and produced some of her greatest films at Warner Brothers -- Mildred Pierce (1945), Humoresque (1946), Possessed (1947), Flamingo Road (1949) and The Damned Don't Cry (1950). It was Wald who convinced Crawford to take the supporting part of 'Amanda Farrow' in his 1959 production of The Best of Everything to help her take her mind off of Al Steele's recent death and because she needed the money.)

[holly4755]

Well, sure they aged, we don't drink or smoke like they did! as noted by TigerLynx. Just imagine how bad the young stars are going to look if they live long with all that nose candy or meth teeth!  

people live about 10 years longer than the 60's with the rich increasing more than the poor, today, drugs are a factor in lie span. 

[AgentRXS]

Quote

We've already forgotten what that looks like, I guess. Logan's Run, "Those cracks in your face, do they hurt?"

I'm watching Jane Fonda and Lily Tomlin's Netflix series "Grace and Frankie" . Lily looks like she's aging pretty naturally/gracefully and has wrinkles and looks good for her age. . Its just jarring to realize to see Bette look so old in her early 50s. But yeah, smoking, drinking and tanning (and genetics) all play a factor.

[JudyObscure]

I think a lot of what we call "old looking," with these old photographs are just stiff, dated hairstyles and harsh make-up.  I think they both look fine in that picture. It's natural to have a little sagging of the jawline with age, gravity pulls down on our skin every minute of the day.  I don't drink, smoke, use drugs or spend hours in the sun and I still don't look like I did at twenty.  Age happens.

[Ohiopirate02]

It's also more than just alcohol, cigarettes and tanning.  Good skin care was nonexistent for most of the 20th century.  When the only SPF available was the thick, gloopy  zinc oxide, no one would use it daily.  Almost everything we now use for our skin was unheard of back when these women were younger like vitamin c, alpha hydroxy acids, retinoids.  When Clinique came out with the 3 Step system in the 1960s it was revolutionary.

[ennui]

23 minutes ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

Good skin care was nonexistent for most of the 20th century. 

But so was makeup, so you didn't need a lot of skin care. There are older women with beautiful skin who swear by Pond's cold cream and not all the modern potions.

[psychoticstate]

Thank you for that photo, @Jan Spears.  A great one and nice to see genuine smiles on the faces of Norma and Joan.

Regarding the photo of Bette and Joan, I do agree with others that the styles of the time were somewhat aging.  Genetics certainly played a part in how both women looked, as well as their lifestyles.   Gloria Swanson had gorgeous skin but she was an early raw foods pioneer -- she not only ate a lot of raw vegetables but put them on her face as well! 

[blaase]

11 hours ago, JudyObscure said:

I think a lot of what we call "old looking," with these old photographs are just stiff, dated hairstyles and harsh make-up.  I think they both look fine in that picture. It's natural to have a little sagging of the jawline with age, gravity pulls down on our skin every minute of the day.  I don't drink, smoke, use drugs or spend hours in the sun and I still don't look like I did at twenty.  Age happens.

Dated hair and Makeup aren't responsible for those necks and hands though. Someone like Jane Fonda at 80 years old now looks about the same as these ladies did then at 54 and 58.

Of course nowadays that photo would be photoshopped to hell and back.

Although they did have manual retouching back in the 1930's.

Edited March 31, 2017 by blaase

[JudyObscure]

Quote

39 minutes ago, blaase said:

Of course nowadays that photo would be photoshopped to hell and back

 

And if you don't have time to be photoshopped you can always do this.

[ciprus]

On 13 mars 2017 at 8:43 PM, ThatsDarling said:

B.D.'s treatment of her mother was detestable. It should also be noted that Bette financially supported B.D., B.D.'s husband, and their children for many years, as they didn't like to work. My Mother's Keeper was a cash grab when she thought Bette (who was sick with cancer) was going to die and the gravy train would run out. 

Here's an interview with B.D. conducted shortly after her mother's death. She basically says she doesn't care that her mother is gone and that she has no fond memories of her. 

B.D. Hyman is a nut. I saw a video of her a few years ago, claiming Bette Davis practiced witchcraft and cast spells on people. I'm not inclined to believe anything she has to say after that.

[Growsonwalls]

Here is Bette's last interview. She's old and frail but still has tons of personality and humor. I could watch Bette Davis interviews all day.

[TexasGal]

^^ Love that!!  She was certainly a pro at avoiding topics she didn't want to talk about.

[ennui]

23 hours ago, blaase said:

Someone like Jane Fonda at 80 years old now looks about the same as these ladies did then at 54 and 58.

Jane has had a lot of work done. 

[GATenn]

Quote

I always felt that if Christina really was treated horribly by Joan as MD suggests she should have removed Joan from her life completely when she became an adult but Christina did not do that.

She eventually did. They didn't speak for the last five years or so of Joan's life.

[enoughcats]

The library had Mommy Dearest and nobody else wanted to read it.  So...for free and about five hours of my time, I did.  I really expected to scan through it, but it was a fast read.

Lots of name dropping as well as names not dropped, but hidden as Uncles.  Lots and lots of Uncles.  

Less than half a page of Mamacita and a brief mention of Hedda Hopper very close to the end. 

Most people I've known who were spoiled (not all were rich) knew that they were spoiled and took full advantage as well as became master manipulators.  If anything, the first half of Mommy Dearest emphasizes how different a life could be led as a child of movie priviledge.  And those who appreciated it may be the ones who appreciate the values of nepotism (as well as the importance of passing along the family business.)

It's a memorable book and paints a lot of images that are vivid.  

Still trying to decide if BSC applies to any or all or none.  

[JudyObscure]

I haven't read, "Mommy Dearest," but, long ago, I read a bio of Joan and, for me, it explains a lot.  Her mother was very poor and only slightly better than a prostitute, living with a series of men who would support but not marry her.  Little "Billie," Lucille's nickname, was pushed out to play on the streets with the other poor kids.  When she was about thirteen, one of the new "uncles," decided he didn't like her, so her mother kicked her out.  She then took a job as a live in maid at a fancy private school for young wealthy girls.  I can't imagine much worse at that age, than having to clean up after the privileged rich girls, wearing an ugly uniform, and then go sleep on a cot in the servants' area.  Joan finally worked her way out of that life by dancing in clubs,  doing a little bit of nude modeling and who knows what else, until she started getting dancing parts in movies.

  When Joan adopted Christina she probably thought that she was giving her  the expensive toys, fine clothes and beautiful house that she had dreamed of when she was so deprived and thought she would be grateful to have them.  Of course children don't compare their own lives with something they've never experienced so Christina didn't appreciate it the way Joan thought she should.

I don't really know what Christina or BD wanted from their mothers.  The women were big stars partly because they had big dramatic personalities, they just weren't going to be knitting on the sofa, waiting for their daughters to come home at the end of every day.  As for Joan's temper, my mother had one ,too, and I knew full well that if she had to tell me to do something (like use padded hangers) ten times -- on the eleventh she would blow up.  Yet still I went there and, just like Christina, I suffered the consequences.  Most of my generation grew-up,  looked back with chagrin and laughed at ourselves over the times we drove our mothers to the edge.  It's BD and Christina's bitterness and grudge bearing that I don't get.

[methodwriter85]

On 3/30/2017 at 3:22 PM, TigerLynx said:

To be fair to Bette and Joan, not only was cosmetic surgery not as advanced as it is today, but the effects of smoking, drinking, and tanning (being in the sun ages you even if you don't lie around soaking up the rays) were just starting to be known.  Also, most people were doing good to live to 60 or 65.  Unlike today, where more and more people live into their 80s, 90s, and 100s.

What's jarring to me is that people who were in their mid/late 60's when they died (Bowie, Robin Williams, etc) are being described as "taken too soon." That used to be reserved for the under 50 or just-50 crowd. It's a little short of an average Western World lifespan but not THAT much shorter.

[AgentRXS]

Quote

What's jarring to me is that people who were in their mid/late 60's when they died (Bowie, Robin Williams, etc) are being described as "taken too soon."

I'm guessing that most people making the "taken too soon" commentary are folks that are age peers of those stars. No one likes the feeling of getting older and seeing other people in your age group dying of natural causes at high rate.

With Bowie (and Prince), both men gave off such an air of immortality and otherworldliness that the fact that they died so relatively young, and of causes that were common,shocked everyone I believe. We were all half expecting those men to live until age 300 and then return to their home planet via spaceship.

Edited April 3, 2017 by AgentRXS

[enoughcats]

In the tedious words of Paul Harvey "And now the rest of the story"

There could have been another hour of this episode if they had included Frank Sinatra's introduction of Bette Davis who had presented TWO Oscars immediately after her loss, and Olivia D's presentation as well. Audience reaction according to the story in this link was not pro Joan in any way shape or form.

"look back at the 1963 Academy Awards ceremony makes it clear that the show was almost catered around Davis, who presented the awards that evening for adapted and original screenplays. 

When the actress walked out on the stage with host Frank Sinatra, who had dashed to her side in order to escort her to the podium, she received what was without question the longest applause of the evening, with the crowd rising to their feet."

Frank Sinatra had a major presence and this makes him seem 'real' in the rest of this story
 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4373948/Joan-Crawford-Bette-Davis-Oscars-showdown-Feud.html

[ghoulina]

22 minutes ago, enoughcats said:

There could have been another hour of this episode if they had included Frank Sinatra's introduction of Bette Davis who had presented TWO Oscars immediately after her loss

Oh wow. At the moment when you want to slink off home and have a strong drink with your friends....you have to, instead, walk on stage and be all poised and glamorous again. I can't even imagine. It wasn't just the loss, but the way Joan played a part in it all. I'm glad to hear she was received so well by the audience at least. 

[Blakeston]

18 hours ago, JudyObscure said:

I don't really know what Christina or BD wanted from their mothers.

If there was any truth to Mommie Dearest (and I strongly suspect there was), I think she wanted to be treated like a human being.

I realize that some of the treatment she describes in the book was normal for the time period, but a lot of it was seen as horribly abusive even back then.

[Inquisitionist]

2 hours ago, AgentRXS said:

I'm guessing that most people making the "taken too soon" commentary are folks that are age peers of those stars. No one likes the feeling of getting older and seeing other people in your age group dying of natural causes at high rate.

Life expectancy in the US is about 76 for men and 81 for women, and many of us know people who are far north of 80, so when a well-known person dies before 70, it does feel "too soon" to me. 

Over in the latest episode thread, Ghoulina asked:

Quote

I find that very interesting. Maybe we should take this over to the "real life" thread, but why did so many nominees not show up? I haven't watched the Oscars in a few years (I'm over modern Hollywood), but when I was a kid and young woman I watched every year and I recall that most people showed up. 

I recall when it was common for only half the acting nominees to show up.  The no-shows were usually working on a current project (film or theater) or lived overseas.  I don't think the studios were as liberal about letting them take time off and paying to fly them around back then. Plus travel took longer, and the broadcast was on Monday nights, so more disruptive to filming and theater schedules.  Remember that "Anne Bancroft" said in last night's episode that she'd have to miss 3 performances in NYC, and she didn't feel she could do that to people who had paid to see her. 

[psychoticstate]

On 4/1/2017 at 4:28 PM, Nashville Pete said:

She eventually did. They didn't speak for the last five years or so of Joan's life.

This may be true but it goes against what Christina herself said in her book and in interviews following the release of the book.  She claimed that she and Joan were in a good, friendly place at the time of Joan's death and she was floored by being cut out of the will.

I suspect that Christina was shocked at being excluded from Joan's estate, as evidenced by the fact that she quit a well paying job at Getty when she heard Joan died.  I also suspect that she and her mother were in a friendly place until Joan heard about Christina's book from friends and contacts in the publishing industry. 

I think the truth is that Christina was more than happy to have Joan in her life when it suited her purposes; i.e., Joan was footing the bill on Christina's apartment or reaching out to her contacts in order to get Christina jobs and auditions. 

Joan was clearly no walk in the park at certain times in her life but I think Christina was ever bit as willful and selfish (if not more so.) 

[Mindthinkr]

On 3/27/2017 at 3:42 PM, ghoulina said:

I didn't want to get too much into it in the episode thread, but as someone who used to have a big crush on Sinatra (as much as one can who is a teenager when the guy died), I was wondering how accurate that portrayal was. I know little and less about him as a person. Was he just a bit difficult? Or a truly horrible person?

I was enamored of Frank Sinatra and was able to see him in concert once in his older years. Some lady (in a lovely green silk suit) was complaining about him reading his lyrics off of a TelePrompTer so he threw his drink on her. His son, who was leading the band, quickly went over and tried to squash the incident as Frank seemed quick to anger and really didn't want to be singing after that. A shame that it left a sour taste in my mouth after having looked forward to seeing him most of my life. 

[Chaos Theory]

I am not saying that Joan Crawford didn't cross some serious lines when it came to her daughter and honestly I am not sure either she or Bette were built to be mother's at all but what is considered abuse changes per generation.  Hell I probably would never have been born if my parents were governed by today's laws.  My father would be in prison for stalking.  But instead they have what we all consider a hilarious tale of how my parents fell in love.   

Still I am not willing to dismiss Christina's claims all together.  Joan was spiteful and cruel so I tend to split the difference when it comes to Mommy Dearest. 

[ghoulina]

1 hour ago, Inquisitionist said:

recall when it was common for only half the acting nominees to show up.  The no-shows were usually working on a current project (film or theater) or lived overseas.  I don't think the studios were as liberal about letting them take time off and paying to fly them around back then. Plus travel took longer, and the broadcast was on Monday nights, so more disruptive to filming and theater schedules.  Remember that "Anne Bancroft" said in last night's episode that she'd have to miss 3 performances in NYC, and she didn't feel she could do that to people who had paid to see her. 

Thank you! That does make a lot of sense. And I actually appreciate how Bancroft had a commitment to her fans that took precedent over receiving an award. 

[psychoticstate]

3 minutes ago, Chaos Theory said:

I am not saying that Joan Crawford didn't cross some serious lines when it came to her daughter and honestly I am not sure either she or Bette were built to be mother's at all but what is considered abuse changes per generation.  Hell I probably would never have been born if my parents were governed by today's laws.  My father would be in prison for stalking.  But instead they have what we all consider a hilarious tale of how my parents fell in love.   

Still I am not willing to dismiss Christina's claims all together.  Joan was spiteful and cruel so I tend to split the difference when it comes to Mommy Dearest. 

I believed MD wholeheartedly for quite a while.  I was still able to watch Crawford movies and appreciate them while thinking that personally JC was a mess. 

However, I changed my mind after reading about how Christina would chase after people with a wire hanger (and gift them) during appearances; how some who knew Joan, including two of her former husbands, disputed the claims; how Cindy and Cathy completely denounced the book, sued Christina and won (for Christina's claim that the two were not related, much less twins; they were indeed twins);  how Christina accused her mother of murdering Al Steele; how Christina later admitted that the infamous wire hanger scene did not happen.  

These things make me question the legitimacy of the book as a whole.   Joan was certainly no angel.  She was competitive, a maneater of sorts, could be passive aggressive and was an alcoholic in her later years.  And as you pointed out, @Chaos Theory, ideas of child rearing, parenting, relationships, etc. certainly change over the decades.  I have no doubt that Joan followed many, if not all, the "normal" prescribed parenting methods of the 1930s/1940s/1950s. But I simply cannot swallow whole the image of the drunken, out of control monster that Christina wrote about in her book.

[enoughcats]

5 minutes ago, Mindthinkr said:

 

On 3/27/2017 at 3:42 PM, ghoulina said:

I didn't want to get too much into it in the episode thread, but as someone who used to have a big crush on Sinatra (as much as one can who is a teenager when the guy died), I was wondering how accurate that portrayal was. I know little and less about him as a person. Was he just a bit difficult? Or a truly horrible person?

I was enamored of Frank Sinatra and was able to see him in concert once in his older years. Some lady (in a lovely green silk suit) was complaining about him reading his lyrics off of a TelePrompTer so he threw his drink on her. His son, who was leading the band, quickly went over and tried to squash the incident as Frank seemed quick to anger and really didn't want to be singing after that. A shame that it left a sour taste in my mouth after having looked forward to seeing him most of my life. 

 

The additional information on the night of the Oscars http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4373948/Joan-Crawford-Bette-Davis-Oscars-showdown-Feud.html

Made me like Frank Sinatra for pretty much the first time since reading about him decades ago.

[enoughcats]

Joan Crawford' grandson talks about the Grandmother he knew as a "Stereotypical Grandmother" who lived in NYC and who babysat he and his sister when his Mother would take them to visit.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4375684/Grandson-actress-Joan-Crawford-speaks-TV-s-Feud.html

[Growsonwalls]

34 minutes ago, psychoticstate said:

 

These things make me question the legitimacy of the book as a whole.   Joan was certainly no angel.  She was competitive, a maneater of sorts, could be passive aggressive and was an alcoholic in her later years.  And as you pointed out, @Chaos Theory, ideas of child rearing, parenting, relationships, etc. certainly change over the decades.  I have no doubt that Joan followed many, if not all, the "normal" prescribed parenting methods of the 1930s/1940s/1950s. But I simply cannot swallow whole the image of the drunken, out of control monster that Christina wrote about in her book.

Joan seems to be the type who probably had very few examples of how to actually parent, and so my suspicion was that, along with her pre-occupation with her career, along with her drinking problem, along with her very controlling personality, made for an extremely "difficult" mom. I think the difference between the twins and Christina was that the twins probably just accepted the difficulties as such, while Christina rebelled. It does seem as if the relationship between Christina and Joan deteriorated into a very toxic one. I think Feud very wisely doesn't take sides with regards to Mommie Dearest. It shows all of Joan's issues, but doesn't specifically spell out egregious abuse. 

[Pete Martell]

On 3/19/2017 at 6:23 PM, psychoticstate said:

At the time Garbo and Shearer retired, I don't think either considered their careers a top priority any longer. Garbo had threatened to retire many times so perhaps she never really did.  Shearer had recently remarried.  I think both had other things while for Joan, her career was often the only thing.

I think Garbo was hurt by the public backlash against her (although I may just be basing it on the David Shipman book), and I think she was also accused of being unpatriotic because of salary or some other reason during WWII's cutbacks. She was also getting older, and she must have known her career was on the wane. She probably did want a break and then retirement became a fait accompli as she got older and the comebacks continued to never happen for one reason and another and another. 

Shearer must have known she was on the way out, in part because of Louis B Mayer's reported disdain for her (and taking out his resentment of Irving Thalberg on her) and because she was getting older and her type of film was going out of fashion. 

Crawford must have been disoriented at the changes at MGM, as it didn't really do anything to help her, but just opened up opportunities to new people, like Greer Garson as mentioned (and Garson truly came out of nowhere compared to the way many stars had been built up in those years - I don't know how Crawford felt about her but I don't think Gable was all that fond of her). 

Speaking of Shearer, there is, from what I remember, a saucy anecdote or claim about her in the very good biography of William Haines (Joan's longtime friend and decorator), Firecracker (Haines is, like Joan, oddly comparable to present day onscreen and in many of the life decisions he made, but also, like Joan, very much a part of his era - I can see why they were so close). Shearer was supposedly quite a...different woman before she married Thalberg. I think that book also mentions the Christina stuff a bit but not much. 

As for Christina, I can believe some of the claims, I can believe that Joan was perhaps not suited to be a mother and that her oldest children bore the brunt of her own psychological problems, but I think there were probably a lot of exaggerations, and I think Christina liked having the control that she never had during her relationship. Is it a coincidence that as years have passed and people have stopped paying attention, we're now getting these claims that Joan also killed her husband (which I just don't believe)? 

I have mixed feelings about all of that but I just feel disgust about Bette Davis and her daughter. I can't imagine what that was like for Bette. I wish they had just pretended she didn't even exist in this show, realistic or not. 

Edited April 4, 2017 by Pete Martell

[Wings]

17 hours ago, psychoticstate said:

I believed MD wholeheartedly for quite a while.  I was still able to watch Crawford movies and appreciate them while thinking that personally JC was a mess. 

However, I changed my mind after reading about how Christina would chase after people with a wire hanger (and gift them) during appearances; how some who knew Joan, including two of her former husbands, disputed the claims; how Cindy and Cathy completely denounced the book, sued Christina and won (for Christina's claim that the two were not related, much less twins; they were indeed twins);  how Christina accused her mother of murdering Al Steele; how Christina later admitted that the infamous wire hanger scene did not happen.  

These things make me question the legitimacy of the book as a whole.   Joan was certainly no angel.  She was competitive, a maneater of sorts, could be passive aggressive and was an alcoholic in her later years.  And as you pointed out, @Chaos Theory, ideas of child rearing, parenting, relationships, etc. certainly change over the decades.  I have no doubt that Joan followed many, if not all, the "normal" prescribed parenting methods of the 1930s/1940s/1950s. But I simply cannot swallow whole the image of the drunken, out of control monster that Christina wrote about in her book.

I had not heard Christina said the wire hangar scene did not happen.  I googled and couldn't  find it.   Did she mean that the movie did not depict the incident accurately or that Joan never went off, in any way about wire hangars? 

[caracas1914]

Perception is perception is perception.

TBH, I do think that both Joan and Bette have "embellished" their recollections of past events  for entertainment reasons, so while Christina Crawford may have exaggerated certain things, Joan doesn't strike me as the most truthful person that ever lived either.

I wish the show would really bring up the snubs (imagined or real) that made up a lot of what Joan's persona was trying to compensate for.

They say that when she married Douglas Fairbanks Jr. It was months before they were invited to Pickfair (the home of Douglas Sr. and his wife Mary Pickford, Jr's. Step mom) Afterwards when they did go, reputedly Mary Pickford openly snubbed Joan by not coming down to even greet her when Father/son were bonding, playing golf, etc. 

Alot of the hypocritical HW crowd couldn't forget Joan was the ex-chorine and I'm sure there were rumors about her background swirling around.

 It just seemed Joan couldn't ever "relax" and even her devotion to her fans was mocked by other stars who thought she played the move queen too desperately or needily.  

Edited April 4, 2017 by caracas1914

[ruby24]

This show makes me want to see other stories from Old Hollywood, and other eras. I wish that had been the theme- Hollywood Scandals, and they could pick a different era for each season and some famous event that happened, besides just celebrity feuds in general (I don't think Charles and Diana is a very good idea for next season). They could do the Fatty Arbuckle story from the silent era, maybe the Natalie Wood/Robert Wagner situation, Alfred Hitchcock's terrorizing of his actresses. Stuff like that.

[larapu2000]

22 minutes ago, ruby24 said:

This show makes me want to see other stories from Old Hollywood, and other eras. I wish that had been the theme- Hollywood Scandals, and they could pick a different era for each season and some famous event that happened, besides just celebrity feuds in general (I don't think Charles and Diana is a very good idea for next season). They could do the Fatty Arbuckle story from the silent era, maybe the Natalie Wood/Robert Wagner situation, Alfred Hitchcock's terrorizing of his actresses. Stuff like that.

Count me in.  I'm enjoying this discussion thread so much, keep these amazing stories coming!  I've been keeping Wikipedia busy.

[holly4755]

the difference between Christina and the twins is easy explained  = different generations are treated differently, there was 13 years between myself and my brothers and I had an older sister that many neighbors would hint they thought they were her kids, ugh, stupid neighbors.  Anyway, we were raised very strictly with a somewhat at home mother ( she worked school hours or at nights in a grocery store when my father was home ), my brothers were raised with a full time office working mom and were frequently trusted at home because us girls turned out so well behaved, Since 5 years of age, I was put on a weekly  allowance and had to learn how to budget my needs and that included on vacation when you want to spend money and have fun, Once my sister turned 8 we would take the bus to movies by ourselves, go on the boardwalk by ourselves, etc.  Brothers got money when they asked and needed rides everywhere, I don't think they could take a bus today. They stole stuff from that house and sold it to friends, would steal from my parents wallets, smoked, did drugs, got arrested, the whole caboodle. They also failed in school.  It was a great disappointment to my parents, I went from the worst child ever, to the best child ever  pretty quickly.  Situations change, people change over time, so I don't think that should be a consideration in judging parents, they could have had two different parents as much as it mattered. 

In this case I think Christinas brother had the same experience as she did and was also left out of the will. 

LIKE DAUGHTER, LIKE SON CHRIS

I am not saying they are correct, just that the same ages agree. what ever happened, it is not good, Unlike Davis who was still good with her son of the same age as her daughter. 

Edited April 5, 2017 by holly4755

[Jan Spears]

20 hours ago, Pete Martell said:

I think Garbo was hurt by the public backlash against her (although I may just be basing it on the David Shipman book), and I think she was also accused of being unpatriotic because of salary or some other reason during WWII's cutbacks. She was also getting older, and she must have known her career was on the wane. She probably did want a break and then retirement became a fait accompli as she got older and the comebacks continued to never happen for one reason and another and another. 

Shearer must have known she was on the way out, in part because of Louis B Mayer's reported disdain for her (and taking out his resentment of Irving Thalberg on her) and because she was getting older and her type of film was going out of fashion. 

Crawford must have been disoriented at the changes at MGM, as it didn't really do anything to help her, but just opened up opportunities to new people, like Greer Garson as mentioned (and Garson truly came out of nowhere compared to the way many stars had been built up in those years - I don't know how Crawford felt about her but I don't think Gable was all that fond of her).

I don't know that there was one particular thing that spooked Garbo into permanent retirement. Ostensibly, she was still on the roster at MGM during the war years. And she did commit to a project with the producer Walter Wanger in 1948. (The movie was never made due to financing problems.) My guess is she came to the realization that her era had come to an end and that she would never enjoy again the kind of lavish treatment she had enjoyed as one of MGM's foremost stars from the mid-20s to the early-40s.

As for Shearer, I suspect that life at the studio was a whole lot less fun after Thalberg died at the age of 37 in 1936. She had to contend with LB Mayer and the studio brass, who tried to cheat her out of the percentages -- worth millions of dollars -- Thalberg had earned from the pictures he had produced and to which Shearer was entitled as his widow. (Shearer got Mayer & co. to back down when she went to Louella Parsons with the story.)

Also, many of the people Shearer had known at MGM from its inception were gone: Thalberg was dead. His trusted confidante Paul Bern was either a suicide or a murder victim. Bern's wife, Jean Harlow, had died unexpectedly and senselessly. Thalberg and Shearer's friend (and Garbo's former paramour) John Gilbert had died in 1936 with his career in a shambles. Shearer's friend Ramon Novarro was let go in 1935. In addition to Garbo, many of Shearer's contemporaries who had helped build the studio into what it was had transitioned or were transitioning out: Marion Davies, Myrna Loy, Jeanette MacDonald, Roz Russell. For all intents and purposes, it was a different studio by the early 40s.

Finally, Shearer wasn't as astute in choosing vehicles for herself as Thalberg had been. She turned down Susan and God (1940) because she didn't want to play the mother of a teenaged daughter. (The part went to Joan Crawford, who wisecracked that, "I'd play Wally Beery's grandmother if it's a good part!") She also turned down Mrs. Miniver and Now, Voyager (both 1942); the former winning Greer Garson a Best Actress statue and the latter gaining Bette Davis a Best Actress nomination. So, Shearer may have realized that she wouldn't necessarily have been the best steward of her own career absent Thalberg's help.

Regarding Gable and Garson, the 1945 movie they appeared in together -- Adventure (which, interestingly, also featured Joan Blondell) -- was a big success but, by all accounts, Gable and Garson didn't enjoy working together.

Edited April 4, 2017 by Jan Spears

[Spartan Girl]

Regardless of whether MD was true, I don't think Joan was a good mother. At best, she was too damaged. At worst she was a bottomless pit of misery and ego. 

I'm on Team Bette. Whatever her faults were, she seemed at least more down to earth and up front than Joan was. And after that Oscars stunt Joan pulled, I don't blame Bette for hating her.

[Pete Martell]

7 hours ago, caracas1914 said:

They say that when she married Douglas Fairbanks Jr. It was months before they were invited to Pickfair (the home of Douglas Sr. and his wife Mary Pickford, Jr's. Step mom) Afterwards when they did go, reputedly Mary Pickford openly snubbed Joan by not coming down to even greet her when Father/son were bonding, playing golf, etc. 

Alot of the hypocritical HW crowd couldn't forget Joan was the ex-chorine and I'm sure there were rumors about her background swirling around.

It's ironic as Pickford (although married) reportedly spent her last years lonely and unhappy, alcoholic, mourning lost loves, and she also adopted children but seemed to have no real idea on how to be a mother to them.

https://hollywoodessays.com/2013/03/30/the-perfect-family/

I suppose Pickford working for pennies on the stage, then as a bit player in movies, working and working to help her mother and brother (only to see her brother become an alcoholic and die a young death) would have looked down on someone like Joan, who had no real family and hadn't had the same path that Pickford did to stardom.

3 hours ago, Jan Spears said:

Regarding Gable and Garson, the 1945 movie they appeared in together -- Adventure (which, interestingly, also featured Joan Blondell) -- was a big success but, by all accounts, Gable and Garson didn't enjoy working together.

One of those Shipman books said Gable also disliked the tagline for that movie ("Gable's back and Garson's got him.")

So apparently Joan showed her affection for Greer in her usual Joan way.

http://franklymydear-blog.blogspot.com/2011/12/dueling-divas-greer-vs-joan-when-ladies.html

"Joan was completely nonplussed that I refused to feud with her," said Greer. Apparently Joan grew more irked during filming when she perhaps realized how Greer's character was steeling the film, and it was not a "thankless" role as she had anticipated. About eight years later, Joan would seek revenge by embarrasing Greer at a dinner party. Joan seated Greer's then time beau (and later husband), Buddy Fogelson, at the main table with herself, and sent Greer to sit at the studio electricians table, "Because you get along with everybody, dear!"

Edited April 5, 2017 by Pete Martell

[toodles]

On 4/3/2017 at 7:32 AM, AgentRXS said:

Bowie (and Prince), both men gave off such an air of immortality and otherworldliness that the fact that they died so relatively young, and of causes that were common,shocked everyone I believe. We were all half expecting those men to live until age 300 and then return to their home planet via spaceship.

Keith Richards will live to at least 300 and will be called to the home planet with a cigarette in one hand and a glass of scotch in the other.  Sorry.  I couldn't resist.

[qtpye]

10 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Regardless of whether MD was true, I don't think Joan was a good mother. At best, she was too damaged. At worst she was a bottomless pit of misery and ego. 

 

22 hours ago, wings707 said:

However, I changed my mind after reading about how Christina would chase after people with a wire hanger (and gift them) during appearances; how some who knew Joan, including two of her former husbands, disputed the claims; how Cindy and Cathy completely denounced the book, sued Christina and won (for Christina's claim that the two were not related, much less twins; they were indeed twins);  how Christina accused her mother of murdering Al Steele; how Christina later admitted that the infamous wire hanger scene did not happen.  

Quote

the difference between Christina and the twins is easy explained  = different generations are treated differently, there was 13 years between myself and my brothers and I had an older sister that many neighbors would hint they thought they were her kids, ugh, stupid neighbors.  Anyway, we were raised\very strictly with a somewhat at home mother ( she worked school hours or at nights when my father was home in a grocery store), my brothers were raised with a full time office working mom and were frequently trusted at home because us girls turned out so well behaved, Since 5 years of age, I was put on a weekly  allowance and had to learn how to budget my needs and that included on vacation when you want to spend money and have fun, Once my sister turned 8 we would take the bus to movies by ourselves, go on the boardwalk by ourselves, etc.  Brothers got money when they asked and needed rides everywhere, I don['t think they could take a bus today. They stole stuff from that house and sold it to friends, would steal from my parents wallets, smoked, did drugs, got arrested, the whole caboodle. They also failed in school.  It was a great disappointment to my parents, I went from the worst child ever, to the best child ever  pretty quickly.  Situations change, people change over time, so I don't think that should be a consideration in judging parents, they could have had two different parents as much as it mattered

. 

I think the truth was somewhere in between.  I think Joan was a pill of a mother who probably would have been competitive with any high spirited child, particularly a girl.  I think Christina had her own issues and is probably not the nicest person in the world.  They most likely had a toxic relationship all their life.

When Joan adopted Christina and her brother she was just labeled box office poison.  When she adopted the twins, it was arguably one of the happiest times of her life.  She had just married Steele and for the first time felt secure personally and financially.  The twins were also probably naturally just more docile and less rebellious. Think of the difference between Lorelai Gilmore and Rory.

Christina thought her mother was a nasty shrew and Joan thought her daughter was eternally ungrateful.  When Christina decided to become an actress, things probably got worse.  She was most likely somewhat entitled and thought her name would open doors for her.  Joan could of probably helped her more, but why should she...Christina never appreciated anything.

I mean this is supposed to be a sympathetic portrayal of Joan and I think she is a nasty petty bitch and I would not be surprised if her daughter was the same way.  That does not mean that both women did not have bad childhoods, but there is a certain point we have to take agency for our own actions.

Also, it disappoints me that Lange had no interest in getting inside the head of Joan, in a non superficial way.  She is just pathetic and I actually like Faye's gorgon a lot better.  At lest the nasty lady in Mommie Dearest was a force of nature and not a mopey sad sack.

[JudyObscure]

I'm putting this here because I know it's real history as well as on the show.  Please help me understand.  Keep in mind I watch this show on the FX site the day after and it usually cuts out about 3/4 the way through an episode.

I saw enough to know Joan was going to accept the award for Ann Bancroft and I've seen the real clip of her doing it.  My question is why is this repeatedly called, "brutal," and "nasty?"  Accepting an award for some one, whether it's by a Native American (Marlon Brando,) or a friend or relative is not a big deal and in no way makes the acceptor on a par with the actual winner, particularly back in the day when the Academy Awards was not as big a deal as today and the speeches were just a few words of thanks.  I look at the old clips and it looks like my company's annual Christmas dinner with a few awards handed out.  Bette  Davis was nominated for her performance and nothing Joan did took that away from her. It just doesn't seem brutal to me that Joan was on the stage for about thirty seconds to pick-up another person's Oscar.

I'm not on Joan's side in the feud.  I love both actresses but it bothers me how this show is racking up more hate for Joan than, "Mommie Dearest," did.

Seeing Joan on the Merv Griffin clip above, just reminded me of how damaging and wrong Lange's portrayal is.  Unlike Lange, Joan  still had a  big eyes, beautiful strong features and a slim figure  at the age of the feud.  At no time did she speak in a breathy phony sounding voice that Lange uses and, at least in public, she seemed kind and good humored.  I can't know what she was like in private, but so much seems to be made up with people saying, "Well maybe it didn't actually happen but I wouldn't put it past her."  Did she really intimidate a great stage actress like Geraldine Page?  Was she really rude to Patty Duke? If so I'd like to know but if not I think the show is going too far to say she did.

Edited April 5, 2017 by JudyObscure

[sugarbaker design]

2 minutes ago, JudyObscure said:

I'm not on Joan's side in the feud.  I love both actresses but it bothers me how this show is racking up more hate for Joan than, "Mommie Dearest," did.

Well, there's the show and then there's the hate.  While JC and HH did wage a phone campaign for the Best Actress race, I'm not convinced it was that effective.  While I appreciate the show and what it's trying to do, it's totally undercutting Anne Bancroft's performance, she was fucking amazing.  And while BD was also amazing, BD already had two Oscars for Chrissake.  AB totally won that Oscar fair and square.

Even though BD won, after the ceremony she was home, albeit miserable, but she was home with friends and family.  JC went home to a big, empty house.  Who really deserves the pity here?  After watching this episode I admire BD more than I ever did, and I feel sorry for JC more than I ever did.

[JudyObscure]

1 hour ago, sugarbaker design said:

While I appreciate the show and what it's trying to do, it's totally undercutting Anne Bancroft's performance, she was fucking amazing.

I agree and it shocks me that Bette was shocked when she lost.  Bette's performance was brave and startling, but it didn't have the subtle, sensitivity that Anne's did.  Bette should have compared her  performance in WEHBJ with her own sensitive, awesome performance in "Now Voyager," and realized it really wasn't her all time best work.

[Inquisitionist]

Interesting bit of trivia (well, to me, anyway):  When Geraldine Page finally won an Oscar for The Trip to Bountiful in 1986 (after 7 prior nominations), Anne Bancroft was among the other nominees -- as was Jessica Lange!