MartinHafer I love classic Hollywood films of the golden era and not surprisingly I also love biographies of that talk about these stars. Unfortunately, most of them frankly leave a lot to be desired. They usually only talk about the good points of the celebrity or only discuss their films and as a result, you get a very one-dimensional view of the person. Occasionally, you also get some that are all dirty--and once again you only get a one-dimensional portrait. I was absolutely thrilled when I watched "Joan Crawford: The Ultimate Movie Star" because it managed to do something quite rare--balance the great talent with the human being. As a result, it's one of the best celebrity biographies I've seen.Angelica Huston narrates this made for Turner Classic Movies film. It combines her nice voice with some lovely interviews, photos and film clips to talk about her life from birth to death. You get a discussion of her major films as well as her personal life--and this is where the film shines. While it does talk quite a bit about her abuse of her children and affairs (and there were many), it tried to explore WHY--what about her caused her to be so screwed up and out of place off-camera. And, it seemed less angry in doing so. So, despite many clips of Christina Crawford discussing her mom, it did not come off as a recapitulation of "Mommy, Dearest". Plus, it balanced this with genuine respect and admiration for her talents and tenacity. Together, all these factors create a rich tapestry--and make it a must-see of fans of the genre. See this one.By the way, as Bette Davis and Joan Crawford had a bit of a rivalry, I should point out that the TCM biography of Crawford was superior to the one they produced on Davis. It was longer, more complete and more interesting--warts and all.

billpappas-1 I can appreciate both Joan Crawford's intense drive over a very long career and her messy personal life as being totally believable in one person. I love watching her 'act' in any movie, whether it's 'Mildred Pierce', 'Whatever Happened to Baby Jane', 'The Damned Don't Cry' or even 'Trog'. Her every move, every look, every word wasn't left to chance for her.She had something captivating although, except for some of her early 'looks' I didn't think she was as beautiful as she was portrayed in her films. She had a skinny, boyish figure, not at all feminine. Surprisingly, she became a handsome woman in her later years when the effects of alcohol weren't too apparent.One thing rarely, if ever mentioned, is Crawford's voice. She could sound witchy in one scene and lower it to sound worldly and wise in the next. And those eyes. You knew exactly what she was thinking. She was 'living' those parts she played.In her interview with the young British guy, I was impressed when she acknowledged that everything she learned in life she got from the movie business. She said that if she didn't know a word in a script, she would look it up. Surprising honesty for a 'big star'.To me, it was both sad and admittedly entertaining that her alcoholism affected her later years. She still had a hard work ethic and I couldn't understand why she couldn't find roles for an older actress as some others her age did, like Olivia de Haviland and Joan Fontaine, etc. I guess her problem was that she wanted to maintain that 'Joan Crawford' persona from an earlier time and it was the 1960s, after all.I would have loved meeting her and talking about 'her' and her career even though I can believe that she might have been a real horror as a mother. She was hard on herself and I assume just as hard on her children. After 'Mommie Dearest' came out, I was eating some weird dish made with tofu and said "I think this is the kind of stuff Joan Crawford ate". He deadpanned, "She probably made her kids eat it".

Neil Doyle JOAN CRAWFORD: THE ULTIMATE MOVIE STAR is far from being a glowing tribute to the film star, as most of these comments seem to suggest. It shows just how sad, how tragic her life really was behind all the glamorous facade of Hollywood phoniness.Like Bette Davis, her personal life was a mess. Both of them had bad relationships with their fathers resulting in a lifelong distrust of men, which killed any chance for happy marriage relationships. Joan went about choosing men to marry based on her own insecurities as a woman from a dubious background who wanted to learn from the men she married and cultivate herself with knowledge she otherwise would not have.We learn that her marriage to DOUGLAS FAIRBANKS, JR. was an open marriage that lasted about four years; her marriage to FRANCHOT TONE was happy as long as they stayed in the Hollywood limelight and again she was educating herself because he was a worldly, sophisticated mate, but again the marriage fell apart because of infidelities in another open marriage; she had torrid romances with most of her leading men, including director VINCENT SHERMAN, always willing to talk about his affairs with the many actresses he directed.Nor are the comments about her--not just those by Christina Crawford--on the positive side all the time. I'd say half and half. A word of praise followed by the "but she always had to be in control" kind of statement, from people who knew her, like LIZ SMITH, BETSY PALMER, CLIFF ROBERTSON, MARGARET O'BRIEN and others.Far from being a paean to her glory as "the ultimate movie star", it's really more of a "warts and all" confessional that fans of Crawford seem to be in denial about. Her life off screen was full of venom and hateful feuds with just about every co-worker, all the while giving the viewers a few chuckles about how she slapped everyone in films because--well, "because I do that in all my films".So you have to take the good with the bad, all the way through this documentary, which is essentially a tribute to Crawford's longevity as a name above the title film star. The only one who looks worse than Crawford is Bette Davis, whose cruelty during the aborted filming of HUSH...HUSH, SWEET CHARLOTTE reached new lows, even for Bette. Those two divas really hated each other.It's definitely a monument to her longevity, but can't exactly be looked at as a glowing tribute to the actress or her thespian abilities. The kindest, most perceptive comments on the real Joan seem to come from Hollywood columnist BOB THOMAS.Almost painful to watch are the clumsy dancing sequences showing how she made her start in early MGM films, just about the clunkiest exhibition of dancing ever performed on camera. She looks like a dancing windmill. It's a howl.But, hey, it's the Joan Crawford we all remember from the '40s that really counts. She left a rich legacy of film noir/soap opera stuff that became legendary: MILDRED PIERCE, HUMORESQUE, POSSESSED and some of the lesser Warner films (FLAMINGO ROAD, THE DAMNED DON'T CRY) in which she came into her own. But behind all that glory, it's really an awfully sad success story when it comes right down to it.Trivia note: I loved the perceptive comment by BETSY PALMER who admits feeling sorry for children in any marriage involving actors/actresses. "Beware. We're a different species," she says with a mischievous grin.

nycritic Turner Classic Movies, the channel responsible of all films Classic, played this documentary on August 22, on their salute to Joan Crawford, and aptly sandwiched it between her worst movie at MGM, ABOVE SUSPICION, and her Oscar winning MILDRED PIERCE which has become to be regarded as a classic of soap-noir.The documentary, narrated by Anjelica Huston and with commentaries by numerous actors and directors who worked with Crawford as well as some darker tidbits by (who else) Christina Crawford, brings forth what is essentially the exact thing Joan played on-screen: a rags-to-riches life, a Cinderella story, the story of the ingénue who evolves from playing bit parts (and double to Norma Shearer at the very start of her career) to become one of the most powerful screen presences of last century regardless of the material offered to her. Suffice it be to say that her beginnings were humble. That she never met her father until much later in life. That eventually she became estranged from her brother Hal LeSueur. That despite every possible obstacle thrown upon her from feeling like an outsider amongst Hollywood royalty to pressure from MGM who pushed her out into the cold, she managed to stay in the game long after many top stars and "rivals" Greta Garbo and the aforementioned Shearer had passed on into early retirement by moving to Warners and assuring her resurgence as an actress and a well-deserved Oscar for MILDRED PIERCE. I find that the document in itself reveals quite a lot about Joan the person and from here on, Joan the Movie Star and Overall Big-Screen Persona. The comments from her co-stars and former directors are interestingly helpful in establishing how she faced acting in general while vary from pure praise (Cliff Robertson) to initial indifference turning into an apparent, reluctant admiration (Anita Louise), to open support (Diane Baker) when she was much older and alienated in a world/time which was much different than her early years in Hollywood. Everyone conceded that she brought something "intangible" to the table, an untouchable essence, even in her later years when it was clear that her career was long over and she was accepting parts in films like STRAIT-JACKET, I SAW WHAT YOU DID, BERSERK, and TROG. Co-workers from these films admit she played her parts as if she was still working on MILDRED PIERCE -- essentially saying she still had that which was considered "It;" the ability to transcend the mediocre (or at least, less than stellar) material. A shame Hollywood of the 60s stopped calling, but such were the times; while today many actresses keep busy, it's notable that these actresses start accepting smaller and smaller parts (one only has to see Anne Bancroft's career once the 90s came around: hardly a co-starring role in sight, all guest appearances, or the "small but pivotal role".). Joan, on the other hand, wouldn't have less than the title role, and sadly, parts aren't written with older women in mind.Now, I can't judge what transpired between her and Christina, but I noticed Christina seemed all too eager to bring forth the darker side of Joan -- how she forced the children to do the cleaning, the wire hanger incident, taking over her role in "The Secret Storm" and all I sense from Christina is an incessant need to repeat to the public how nasty Crawford was. The damage has been done already with the book and MOMMIE DEAREST, isn't it time to move on? Wouldn't it have been best to talk about all this while she was still alive? It's the only headache in the entire documentary.This one stumbling stone aside, JOAN CRAWFORD, THE ULTIMATE MOVIE STAR reveals a person who simply put, needed people, needed acceptance, and couldn't understand a life of quiet retirement. And while the sordid details of any actor/actress is public fodder, I find it better to focus on an objective source of information and put aside the sensationalism, and thankfully, this documentary is what MOMMIE DEAREST should have been and could not come at a better time, if it's twenty years too late, but late is better than never. It may not restore her name completely -- too much damage has been done and the scavenging of the monster MOMMIE DEAREST created has been lampooned to the death, most recently in Tyler Perry's DIARY OF A MAD BLACK WOMAN -- but at least it brings facts, not lurid details, to the forefront. And that's all that matters.