Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SATURDAY, February 16, 1991 TAG: 9102160503
SECTION: SPECTATOR PAGE: S-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: ART CHAPMAN FORT WORTH STAR-TELEGRAM
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
These groups used to be generations apart, since the well-known Joan Crawford-Bette Davis movie is now nearly 30 years old.
But Sunday night on ABC, it once again becomes a contemporary tale. It has been updated, only slightly, and it is now in vivid color, with two British sisters as the stars. Neither alteration really affects the overall drama of the film, except, perhaps, to dampen just a bit the fright we found in the original.
"Baby Jane" seems to be one of those films that created much of its terror from the shadowy black and white images. Color illuminates it too much.
There will be those who insist the classic film should not be trifled with at all, but the opposing view will point out that it was never the story itself that was gripping, it was the fact that Davis and Crawford both agreed to portray such unattractive, aging stars in this "horror" film.
"Baby Jane" was something of a harbinger for films to come. It was as though Davis and Crawford legitimized the genre simply through their presence.
After their celebrated pairing, Debbie Reynolds and Shelley Winters starred in "What's the Matter with Helen?" Winters also starred in "Who Slew Auntie Roo?" and Tallulah Bankhead and Stefanie Powers brought us "Die, Die, My Darling."
Davis and Crawford were supposed to star again in "Hush, Hush, Sweet Charlotte," but by then, the well-publicized rift between the two actresses had grown too large, and Olivia De Havilland replaced Crawford.
The whole Hollywood scene surrounding the original "Baby Jane" was more interesting than this story of one invalid actress and her crazy, once-popular child-actress sister. It never quite equaled the sum of its parts.
That is certainly the case again this time around. Far more important than the story itself is the fact that the Redgrave sisters, Lynn and Vanessa, have finally found a project in which to work together.
"We've been sisters for an awfully long time, but we have never managed to work together until `Baby Jane' came along," Lynn said in a recent satellite interview.
The two sisters said they believed it would be difficult for them ever to work together, not because they didn't want to, but because it would be almost impossible to find a project that allowed significant roles for two women who resembled one another so much in appearance and voice.
Vanessa plays the part of Blanche, the wheelchair-bound sister in "Baby Jane." Lynn is Jane, smeared with excessive makeup, childlike and a Raggedy Ann in appearance.
There were persistent rumors in Hollywood at the time of the original that Davis and Crawford delighted in the rugged, violent scenes because they provided an outlet for their long-heralded dislike for one another.
The Redgraves found no such joy.
"Playing scenes which involve violence of that sort are difficult for anybody," Lynn said. "They're difficult with any actor. There's something very strange about playing hostile moments or violent moments or charged moments such as that. And they're upsetting.
"As Lynn, the sister, I wouldn't have liked to do that at all. And after we would finish a day's filming where some of these scenes took place, I would feel very upset, because then me, the human being, or Vanessa, the human being, came back into it."
By today's standards, there really isn't that much physical violence in "Baby Jane." The pain inflicted is primarily psychological.
It might not hurt your body to be served a "worm sandwich," but it is certainly unsettling to your brain. The same could be said for the doggie meatloaf Jane makes for her invalid sister. Of course, Jane keeps the leash for herself as a new belt.
For those who might not remember, Jane and Blanche both adored their father and were in constant battle for his attention. Jane was an enormously popular child actor, but Blanche eventually dimmed her sister's star with her own acting career.
Everyone believed that in a fit of jealousy, Jane once tried to kill Blanche in an auto accident, but was only successful in committing her to a lifetime in a wheelchair.
Jane has gone bonkers and drinks heavily. Blanche, however, must still depend on her, though she is thinking of selling their Hollywood home and putting Sis in a home for zonked-out starlets.
Jane finds out about the plan and takes mean steps to stop it. In the meantime, Jane runs into another Hollywood dredge who promises to put her name back up in lights. The attempt has fatal consequences.
The Redgraves said they felt that the original movie showed only Jane as the monster, when, in fact, there were others to blame for the ruination of these women as well.
"We agreed that it wasn't a question of one of the sisters being the monster and one of the sisters being a victim," Vanessa said. "It was more of a question of how the dream factories (Hollywood studios) transform people - and in particular, two actresses, both of them - into monsters. Different kinds of monsters."
The Redgraves said theirs was basically the same story, but with a fundamentally different approach.
Still, "Baby Jane" is "Baby Jane." A slightly altered point of view doesn't change it.
It was good in the beginning primarily because it allowed us, for the first time, to watch two gifted actresses working together.
It does the same thing again this time.
by CNB