'CHARLOTTE" REVISITED

"Hush ... Hush, Sweet Charlotte"

HUSH...HUSH, SWEET CHARLOTTE (1964). Director: Robert Aldrich.

NOTE: My original review read as follows: 

"She's not really crazy. She just acts that way because people expect it of her."

This film seems to get better with the passage of time. Originally this was meant to be a follow up to What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? re-teaming Bette Davis with Joan Crawford (who would have been great in the picture and should have completed it) but Crawford quit the production and Olivia de Havilland stepped in -- with happy results. As others have noted, watching sweet "Miss Melanie" of Gone With the Wind doing the things that de Havilland does as Miriam gives it all an added kick.

Olivia De Havilland and Joseph Cotten

Charlotte Hollis (Bette Davis) lives alone in a forlorn mansion that is about to be torn down to make way for a bridge. She calls on the only family she has left -- cousin Miriam Deering (de Havilland) -- to come and help her, but Miriam has other things on her mind. For most of her life Charlotte has been the chief suspect in the mutilation murder of her lover, John Mayhew (Bruce Dern), a supposedly sensitive soul who wrote a love song to Charlotte (the title tune) and put it in a music box. Charlotte is haunted by her lost love and by her feeling that it was her father (Victor Buono in a bravura turn) who killed him.

Bette Davis as Charlotte

Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte takes a cast of golden age stars and character actors and places them in a classy production with a sop to the teen audience via the graphic, well-executed (pun intended) murder scene that almost opens the picture, and which is actually bloodier than the Psycho murder of 1960 (we never do learn what became of the poor man's head and hand, which were apparently carried off by the murderer). This alone predisposed many 1964 critics to dismiss the film out of hand, although the rest of the film is entirely tasteful. Not only tasteful, but extremely well done. Aldrich's direction and handling of the suspense scenes is far superior to his work on Baby Jane. Joseph Biroc's cinematography is consistently outstanding and the production values first-rate -- this is one good-looking movie. (Frank) DeVol's musical score is extremely effective. One could argue that Baby Jane had a kind of cheapjack feel to it, but that is definitely not true of Charlotte. The screenplay by Henry Farrell and Lukas Heller, while it may at one point borrow a plot gambit from Diabolique, is suspenseful and full of great dialogue. Most scenes, such as a murder on a staircase and the bitter arguments between the neurotic principals, are handled with great dramatic flair.

Olivia de Havilland

And then there's the acting. Davis gives one of her finest latter-day performances, getting across the pathos of the character as well as her mania. (Her pantomime at the end as she reads a letter with tremendously important information in it is marvelous.) As Miriam, Olivia de Havilland is on target from her entrance until the final moments. Witness her wonderful delivery of her rejoinder to Dr. Bayliss. "You were always free with your compliments. It was your ... intentions... that were a little vague." As the charming if reptilian Bayliss Joseph Cotten offers another dead-on characterization. Agnes Moorehead almost walks off with the picture as the unfortunate housekeeper Velma. Mary Astor, Cecil Kellaway, and others offer highly superior supporting performances.

Hush...Hush deserves to be recognized as a certified classic.

Verdict: Fascinating! ****.

2020 UPDATE: Oddly, although the plot line isn't as original as in Baby Jane, Hush ... Hush is, I believe, the better picture, even if I might take one half star away from my verdict. Although she is very good, there is no way Davis would ever have received an Oscar nomination for this film as she did for Baby Jane -- her scene on the staircase when she supposedly descends into gibbering madness is more comical than anything else. It doesn't make much sense that Charlotte would stay in town where everyone thought she was a cleaver-wielding lunatic just to cover up for her father (who she thinks is the real murderer) -- she could have gone anywhere and everyone would have still thought "she done it." Then we have the question of the murder itself. It takes a great deal of strength to cut off a man's hand with a meat cleaver with just one blow, not to mention a head with a few whacks. How could anyone think Charlotte could have done it, let alone the real killer, maniacal strength notwithstanding? (And why on earth did the killer walk off with the head and hand?) Also the two villains of the story had to count on an awful lot happening, on Charlotte falling in with their plans, for things to work out as they do. On close inspection the whole Gaslight plot seems highly suspect. But these are quibbles -- as the movie is extremely entertaining if you just suspend disbelief. A scene with a corpse falling sideways and threatening to reveal itself to a reporter at the door of the mansion is terrific!

Verdict: Diabolical story of resentment and revenge --- lots of classy if ghoulish fun. ***1/2.