Tina Crawford spilling tea on Joan in 1960

I was aware of the Redbook article that prompted this interview of Christina Crawford by Mike Wallace. Frankly, the article reads like an early draft of the first half of Mommie Dearest. Many of Joan's abuses of Christina are detailed. They went to Joan for comment, and she denied all of them.

The very strange thing is, neither this interview or the Redbook article are mentioned at all in Mommie Dearest. Knowing what we know about Joan, they must have caused an enormous rift. Frankly, if don't understand how Tina ever even expected to be in the will after giving those interviews, tearing down her mother's carefully crafted image.

Anyway, this is a fascinating listen. Christina speaks as if she just got out of finishing school. And she sounds a bit crazy. Very much on edge is if she's about bounce around the room going "woo hoo woo hoo" like Daffy Duck.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 180April 30, 2021 4:42 AM

Why must EVERYTHING be a CONTEST?

by Anonymousreply 1April 21, 2021 3:24 AM

Anyone have a digital link to the article?

by Anonymousreply 2April 21, 2021 4:09 AM

Didn't Barbara Please work for Redbook?

by Anonymousreply 3April 21, 2021 4:13 AM

You know where to find the article AND the link!

by Anonymousreply 4April 21, 2021 4:13 AM

Ask and ye shall receive.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 5April 21, 2021 4:22 AM

I miss intelligent interviews- and interviewers. Now we have fawning and canned questions and blaring bands. It's why I listen to NPR, though they have few celebrity interviews.

Nobody was doing celebrity tell-alls back then. I wonder if Joan thought 'any publicity is good publicity'? Scandal had revived Lana Turner's career; both actresses were able to find work through the 1960s.

Somehow, Christina was able to grow-up to be an intelligent, articulate woman. Maybe she was able to glean the best from her experiences?

by Anonymousreply 8April 21, 2021 4:55 AM

I think Tina sounds rather tightly wound here. Lots of sort of inappropriate bursts of laughter and such. But definitely well spoken and articulate. Is it possible she had absolutely no idea how much this article would piss off her mother? Could her inability to read her mother's moods, or understand her illness be the reason their estrangement was exacerbated? Maybe the twins were just better at navigating Joan.

I mean, the article is crazy. Joan lies about Christina left and right. She tells the reporter that Christina was expelled from Chadwick. This is absolutely untrue. And that only a convent would take her. Joan heavily implies that Christina was a rabid, alcoholic slut, which was pretty much what Joan herself was.

All this said, as I said, it's crazy that Christina ever thought there was a chance she'd make the will after that Redbook article. And I'm really curious as to why the publication of that article isn't mentioned at all in Mommie Dearest.

by Anonymousreply 9April 21, 2021 5:15 AM

I believe the article is mentioned in Christina's original, poorly-written, and more sensational manuscript. It should still be in the files of her publisher. The manuscript was so bad they had it completely rewritten and played up the wire hanger story but tamped down Joan's lesbianism, etc.

by Anonymousreply 10April 21, 2021 2:14 PM

The first version of the book is surprisingly homophobic. She talks about Joan's proclivity to hang out with gay men in a negative light. But that language is taken out of later editions of the book.

by Anonymousreply 11April 21, 2021 3:53 PM

Tina is an ungrateful b*tch.

by Anonymousreply 13April 21, 2021 4:10 PM

I suppose the article is one of the reasons known to her.

by Anonymousreply 14April 21, 2021 4:20 PM

R14 Exactly. And Christina claims not to know why. She said the thing that surprised her was that it was done several years before she died.

She had to know that what she said in that article was the ultimate betrayal. It doesn't appear to me that the article made much of an impression, but still. I can't imagine Joan ever forgiving her for it.

You can actually see it in this clip from the MDA telethon 8 years later. Joan did not like her. At all.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 15April 21, 2021 8:11 PM

Joan was a talentless old cunt

by Anonymousreply 16April 21, 2021 8:47 PM

Joan should have won a second Oscar

by Anonymousreply 17April 21, 2021 8:56 PM

[quote]The first version of the book is surprisingly homophobic. She talks about Joan's proclivity to hang out with gay men in a negative light. But that language is taken out of later editions of the book.

She also painted Joan's "lesbian proclivities" as gross and icky.

by Anonymousreply 18April 21, 2021 9:01 PM

[quote]I think Tina sounds rather tightly wound here. Lots of sort of inappropriate bursts of laughter and such

SHE'S ONLY 21 YEARS OLD

by Anonymousreply 19April 22, 2021 12:45 AM

That article helped me to understand Christina better. Joan was a liar and mean to her.

by Anonymousreply 20April 22, 2021 12:47 AM

Are the early versions of the book available?

by Anonymousreply 21April 22, 2021 1:30 AM

Joan was such an artifice, I don't think there was any real human being left behind her facade.

by Anonymousreply 22April 22, 2021 1:30 AM

R21 you can borrow it (and the later edition) at the internet archive. I once posted the original passage dealing with gay men, and the later one, right here on DL. I'll see if I can find it.

by Anonymousreply 23April 22, 2021 2:04 AM

R20 I agree. Joan is 100% exposed as a liar in the Redbook article. Which must have angered Joan all the more.

by Anonymousreply 24April 22, 2021 2:06 AM

Found it. Original passage from 1978 of Mommie Dearest:

"I knew why she didn't want me at home anymore. She knew at age twelve I was old enough to understand, to see what was going on in the madhouse. I was witness to the beatings she gave my brother, the revolving boy friends who came and went at all hours of the night, her increasingly serious problem with alcoholism, and all of the homosexuals she constantly surrounded herself with."

Revised passage from 1998 20th Anniversary edition of Mommie Dearest:

“Now there weren’t too many men around, except for the assortment of homosexuals she’d known for years who served as 'dates' when she had to make public appearances, or wanted to go somewhere and couldn’t go alone because it wouldn’t fit in with the image of the glamorous movie star.”

by Anonymousreply 25April 22, 2021 2:14 AM

So, in the first edition, Christina lumps gay men in with beatings, Joan being a slut with many men using her, and alcoholism. You can see why they changed it, especially because Mommie Dearest was so embraced by gay men.

by Anonymousreply 26April 22, 2021 2:21 AM

How could that piece of trash article appear in Redbook? I thought the magazine was always on my side for puff pieces. Movie star manages to have it all. Career, home and famileee you know. Barbara must’ve retired because she always took care of me.

by Anonymousreply 27April 22, 2021 2:32 AM

Who were they gay men Joan entertained?

by Anonymousreply 28April 22, 2021 2:52 AM

She was lifelong friends with William Hanes since their silent movies days until his death in 1973. He was out before anyone dared to be. When he could no longer could be cast he became in interior designer.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 29April 22, 2021 3:10 AM

William Haines, designer to the stars.

by Anonymousreply 30April 22, 2021 3:15 AM

That queen who runs The Concluding Chapter of Crawford is nasty piece of self-loathing work. His research is impeccable, but he refuses to see Crawford as anything less than a goddess who was above reproach. The people in his Facebook group are the same sort of sycophants. They all hate Christina, of course.

by Anonymousreply 33April 22, 2021 3:41 AM

J: You know that's not true! C: Maybe just a little true.

by Anonymousreply 34April 22, 2021 3:45 AM

Deleted scene to be included on upcoming Blu-ray, out in June:

Joan: Redbook. Red. Book. REDBOOK!!! More like Trashbook!! Even if there was no toilet paper, I wouldn't wipe my ass with that TRAAAAASH!!! Christina, how could you do this to ME??? How could you speak of me that way? And to a REPORTER???

Helga, get me Mike Wallace on the phone. It's time for Hollywood Royalty... to make a statement.

by Anonymousreply 35April 22, 2021 4:13 AM

R33 Come on, be fair. You don't know that that guy is self loathing or nasty. But if he trashes Christina and praises Joan, he's wrong.

A person can still enjoy JC, even admire her, while acknowledging she suffered from mental illnesses that made her wanting as a parent.

Christina may not be perfect, but she was a victim. It IS funny how some guys get very defensive about their favorite icons. I remember years ago meeting an older gay guy who loved MGM. I mentioned how awful Louis B. Mayer was to Judy Garland, and this guy got VERY offended. He defended Mayer to the hilt, and told me how "naughty" and difficult Judy could be.

I also love the old gays who are dyed in the wool conservatives. Mark Harris, the guy who married Martha Raye was that way. "I'm an AMERICAN, first and foremost! Gay or not!" Some of these guys think they're Ginger Rogers' mother or something.

by Anonymousreply 37April 22, 2021 5:38 AM

Christina comes across as extremely articulate in that interview. She’s very well spoken, and doesn’t trash her mother the slightest bit.... which is quite gracious, considering what she COULD have said.

by Anonymousreply 38April 22, 2021 5:43 AM

Look, she tells the truth. Mike Wallace asks if she was expelled like Joan says. Christina laughs and says "certainly not." She may not "trash" Joan, but she is in no uncertain terms calling her a liar. Which, Joan absolutely was.

by Anonymousreply 39April 22, 2021 6:02 AM

I think it's interesting that so many people posting here assume that Christina's version of events is true, when none of us were present in the Crawford household. There are lots of people, including Christina's sisters, who have said unequivocally that her version of events were lies. On the other hand, there were also people who knew both Joan and Christina who felt that Christina's version of events had some elements of truth.

I think there is a good deal of evidence that in the last 15 years of her life, Crawford was alcoholic. (Interviews in which she was clearly drunk, and so forth). Very likely she was a heavy drinker before that time, but we don't have documentary evidence of that. We also know that her childhood was horrible and that she always felt self-conscious about her lack of formal education. However, she was obviously quite intelligent, and was able to learn how to speak and write beautifully. She was complimented on her complete professionalism on set by directors, fellow actors, and even by rivals such as Bette Davis. I would also say that she created the persona which we know of as the movie star Joan Crawford, and didn't ever show in public any of the kind of complexity and vulnerability that a person living an authentic life would show. So there was personal and public neuroticism at play.

On the other hand, long before her book was published, Christina was thrown out of Graceland for throwing a drink in Elvis Presley's face in a bid to get attention, was panned by Myrna Loy and fired by Neil Simon from Simon's play Barefoot in the Park for incredibly unprofessional behavior. She was written out of her soap opera. She had a terrible reputation as being very difficult to work with and very unprofessional. So I wouldn't bet the bank on her version of events being 100% accurate. I think the truth lies somewhere in between. Joan Crawford was not the model parent she tried to convince the world she was, and Christina Crawford was far from a model child.

by Anonymousreply 40April 22, 2021 9:54 AM

" There are lots of people, including Christina's sisters, who have said unequivocally that her version of events were lies."

How the hell would 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙮 know, r40?

by Anonymousreply 41April 22, 2021 4:02 PM

That Redbook article was, clearly, used as a source in the movie.

And it is very clear that Joan is called out as a cruel, vindictive liar in it.

That the couple who ran Christina's school basically say, "Ur, we've dealt with that bitch before and it isn't worth it to cross Joan so we will make no comment" says it all.

Also, the fact that Christina maintained a good relationship with the couple undermines Joan's lie that they threw her out for being a slut.

by Anonymousreply 42April 22, 2021 5:41 PM

[quote]Joan Crawford was not the model parent she tried to convince the world she was, and Christina Crawford was far from a model child.

Here is the difference: If you listen to that interview, Christina is very candid about not being a model child. She comes across as honest. Joan, on the other hand, always tries to come across as absolutely 100% correct about everything. But she comes across as both a liar and a horrible parent.

by Anonymousreply 43April 22, 2021 5:43 PM

Any old DLers remember this article when it came out? Did it make any kind of splash at all? Because, when Mommie Dearest was released, the shock from the Hollywood community is well documented. But a good deal of the "revelations" in the book had already been exposed 17 years earlier in the article.

I guess Joan was at a career low point in 1960. It was two years before Baby Jane revived her career.

by Anonymousreply 44April 22, 2021 5:48 PM

Thank you for that, R25, that's fascinating!

So the Redbook article isn't mentioned in her book? Is this because she wanted to make Joan look more petty and cruel for leaving her out of her will?

by Anonymousreply 45April 22, 2021 5:50 PM

[quote]Joan with Cesar Romeo

Oh, dear.

by Anonymousreply 46April 22, 2021 5:53 PM

R45, the Redbook article was mentioned in Mommie Dearest. Tina says she basically did the interview ("to go on the record about why my mother wasn't supporting me") and Redbook, wanting to get both sides of the story, called Joan for her takes on Tina's quotes and then added Joan's responses into the final interview.

by Anonymousreply 47April 22, 2021 5:57 PM

That video of Joan at the Telefon is hilarious.

The poem sh reads is rubbish -- and she is so drunk she can't even recite it.

And when Jerry mentioned her daughter, Joan is NOT happy. "Oh, you've been told about her."

And when Jerry starts giving Christinas attention, Joan grabs her -- another adult -- and pulls her away midsentence.

Drunk cunt.

by Anonymousreply 48April 22, 2021 6:00 PM

Christina was a troubled child and turned into a troubled adult, and some of that manifests in stories in the book that don't pass even the mildest scrutiny. She is obviously the kind of person who equates Joan beating her children with Joan having gay friends. As many have pointed out, she obviously knew damn well why she was written out of the will, but has said for years that she had no idea.

That doesn't mean Joan didn't abuse her. I'm certain she did, there are too many witnesses to it. The problems are that what we consider abuse today wasn't considered abuse back then, that Christina sometimes lied and exaggerated, that the movie version turned Joan's abuse into cartoonish camp that no one believes is real, that Christina is an unpleasant little shit, and that Joan is a beloved movie star.

I think a lot of what people get mad about on these threads is that there are quite a few people like me, who believe Christina was abused, but dislike her so much that we don't give a damn. She couldn't be a more unappealing little homophobic nutball if she tried.

Joan was also a nutball but she worked like crazy to make her life better, to improve herself, to not be stuck in the past where she was a victim. She tried. She failed spectacularly in some cases, but she tried. Christina never tried. Every time she started trying something, she wore out her welcome very quickly, getting fired and kicked out of places on the regular. Eventually, she made her name by making herself a permanent victim.

This isn't an easy situation to assess for a lot of people, and those who say it is are more concerned about coming across as right and righteous and justified, than they are about acknowledging human nature.

by Anonymousreply 49April 22, 2021 6:20 PM

r49 Excellent summary, thank you...

by Anonymousreply 50April 22, 2021 6:25 PM

R40 Neil Simon was a notorious asshole. A friend of mine was in one of his plays many years ago and has numerous fist hand accounts of his rages and shit fits, flying off the handle on a moments notice. My actor friend says he was the WORST person he ever had to endure in the theater and he has worked with some of the most difficult personalities (Jerry Lewis was another). And no one could stand up to him as he was "Neil Simon".

by Anonymousreply 51April 22, 2021 6:28 PM

Thank you, R47. I hadn't remembered it bring mentioned. Still, I would've thought it was a bigger deal.

Say what you will about Joan, but she certainly has the fiercest last words of ANY diva. If Christina is to be believed.

A couple of nurses, realizing the end was near, began praying. First silently, but louder as the end drew closer. Joan hears it, lifts her head, and clearer and louder than she'd been able to speak in weeks said:

"Don't you DARE ask GOD to help ME!"

She was gone within the hour. If I'd been there, I would've snapped a Z.

by Anonymousreply 52April 22, 2021 7:00 PM

R49 I hear you, but I'm a bit more charitable to Christina. The homophobic language in Mommie Dearest was par for the course at the time. To call her homophobic is wrong. I doubt she is.

Joan did some cruel things to her that are corroborated in any number of places. I have to assume these things contributed to her mental illnesses.

All this said, I still admire Joan and enjoy her persona. She was flawed, but as you say she really pulled herself up by her own bootstraps. She COMPLETELY invented herself out of whole cloth, and tried never to let people see her reality.

To sum up, I hope Tina has been able to let go of her bitterness, and is happy somewhere. And I hope Joan continues to rest in peace.

by Anonymousreply 53April 22, 2021 7:09 PM

Why is everyone assuming that the Redbook article was the reason for the disinheritance?

Christopher wasn't behind it. And he got disinherited.

by Anonymousreply 54April 22, 2021 7:13 PM

About 10 years ago there was a short lived series called the will where famous people’s wills were gone over and discussed with some of the parties who were involved somehow.

Christina and Joan’s grandson Casey were interviewed. Casey claims the will was altered in late 1976, because Joan knew a book was in the works. Christina and Christopher sued the estate I think claiming Joan wasn’t of sound mind when she revised her will. They got a settlement close to what the twins got and Christina gave her share to Christopher.

by Anonymousreply 55April 22, 2021 7:33 PM

R54 Christopher and Joan had a falling out when Joan called his kid a bastard and he never spoke to her again. It wasn’t just the Redbook article, it was multiple things, that in Joans mind she felt she wouldn’t give them anything after she died. They were two strong willed kids that grew up to be strong willed adults. No one can say that Joan didn’t abuse them. People like the twins and various friends weren’t in that house when Christina and Christopher were growing up. Now, is Christina above lying and embellishing certain things? Hell no. The truth is in the middle when it comes to Joan and Christina.

by Anonymousreply 56April 22, 2021 7:36 PM

I never said I was the Redbook article. I just asked how Christina could be surprised by her exclusion, when she'd torn down her mother's carefully crafted image in such a public way.

by Anonymousreply 57April 22, 2021 7:49 PM

It was a disgrace for Christina to talk so shamefully about her generous mother who saved her from abject poverty!

by Anonymousreply 58April 22, 2021 8:05 PM

I think they both were extremely strong, willful, and stubborn people. They both had to have their way and make their point and they lost their relationship in the process. I'm sure some of what was written in MD is true, but not all. There were other people in Hollywood that came to Joan's defense, as there were others who saw some of the abuse. I've no doubt TINA was at times, an awful brat and jealous of Joan.

"This is the thanks I get! When I work and work!"

I hope Christina didn't get a dime.

by Anonymousreply 59April 22, 2021 8:18 PM

[quote]I think they both were extremely strong, willful, and stubborn people. They both had to have their way and make their point

She who makes her point last makes her point best.

There is no doubt that Christina was successful in turning her mother into a punchline. Although, in fairness, the crazy, camp movie did far more damage in that regard than the book.

by Anonymousreply 60April 22, 2021 8:28 PM

R59 Christina and Christopher contested the will and got a share like r55 said. It’s really incredible that Christina has milked this for over 40 years. You would think she wouldn’t discuss it anymore. But whenever someone brings up the subject of Joan, it’s payday time. So she continues to play the perpetual victim to her grave.

by Anonymousreply 61April 22, 2021 8:29 PM

[quote]So she continues to play the perpetual victim to her grave.

If half of what she says is true, she IS a victim, of child abuse.

That will always be true. It won't change. So you expect her to not talk about the thing that people are most interested in?

by Anonymousreply 62April 22, 2021 8:32 PM

Christina is now nearly 10 years older than Joan was when she died.

by Anonymousreply 63April 22, 2021 8:41 PM

Wasn't Joan an abused child too? If all of thus horrible treatment towards Christina is true, maybe we should give Joan a but of a break because of her own life.

Not making any excuses for Joan, but it sounds like she couldn't cope properly with some of her own trauma, hence the alcohol problem she had.

Hope she's at peace now.

by Anonymousreply 64April 22, 2021 9:02 PM

No wonder Joan cut her out of the will. She should have kept her mouth SHUT until after she got her inheritance!

by Anonymousreply 65April 22, 2021 9:03 PM

Had no idea Christina and Christopher received cash settlements from the estate.

That's news to me.

by Anonymousreply 66April 22, 2021 9:08 PM

Hey, OP, thanks for posting this! Never heard of it before but it was a very fun (ok, sad, but interesting) read.

by Anonymousreply 67April 22, 2021 9:10 PM

Just out of curiosity— anyone else besides me find Joan and Christina both unlikeable? Two damaged drama queens fightinf for control

by Anonymousreply 68April 22, 2021 9:11 PM

[quote]Wasn't Joan an abused child too?

Yes. Her stepfather was fucking her. And I can't imagine that this made her mother very nice to her.

by Anonymousreply 69April 22, 2021 9:41 PM

R62 but it HAS been talked about. Ad nauseam. For over 40 fucking years! To anyone who has a checkbook that is willing to listen to Christina anymore. There comes a point where it’s time to move on. Christina is old now. But she allows Joans abuse define her entire life. For money and attention.

by Anonymousreply 70April 23, 2021 12:25 AM

[quote]That video of Joan at the Telefon is hilarious.

It is.

[quote]The poem sh reads is rubbish -- and she is so drunk she can't even recite it.

True and likely. Poem probably her choice, and I'm sure she was thinking of Christina as she recited it.

[quote]And when Jerry mentioned her daughter, Joan is NOT happy. "Oh, you've been told about her."

I read that as Jerry Stealing Joan's thunder... Joan wanted to introduce her.

[Quote]And when Jerry starts giving Christinas attention, Joan grabs her -- another adult -- and pulls her away midsentence.

I read that as a sign of love.

{quote]Drunk cunt.

OK, yeah, she was drunk.

by Anonymousreply 71April 23, 2021 3:07 AM

[quote]There comes a point where it’s time to move on.

You are saying that about someone who LIVED this, and yet YOU are still posting about it when you didn't?

OK.

by Anonymousreply 72April 23, 2021 4:19 AM

[quote] Christina was thrown out of Graceland for throwing a drink in Elvis Presley's face in a bid to get attention

Just for that I'm Team Joan.

by Anonymousreply 73April 23, 2021 4:26 AM

[quote]R40 there is a good deal of evidence that in the last 15 years of her life, Crawford was alcoholic. (Interviews in which she was clearly drunk, and so forth). Very likely she was a heavy drinker before that time

Ya think?

by Anonymousreply 74April 23, 2021 4:51 AM

Let's face it: Christina would be living in a trailer park on medicare if Joan Crawford hadn't adopted her.

Start caring about actual victims for a change.

by Anonymousreply 75April 23, 2021 4:58 AM

R72 Christina must be posting here. If you want to keep reliving shit that happened to you 60 and 70 years ago either for money or your psychologically damaged by it, either way it’s pathetic. To make money off it for over four decades is bad enough. If you’re tortured by it, you’ve had more than enough time to seek professional help.

by Anonymousreply 76April 23, 2021 5:27 AM

[quote]Christina was thrown out of Graceland for throwing a drink in Elvis Presley's face

Brava for her putting that repugnant child molester in his fat place.

by Anonymousreply 77April 23, 2021 5:27 AM

At least smoke some decent weed. It's better than booze or pills for that sort of thing.

by Anonymousreply 78April 23, 2021 5:29 AM

I doubt Christina needs the money at this point unless she ran through it. She made millions from the book and movie rights to the movie and has lived in Idaho for 40 years.

by Anonymousreply 79April 23, 2021 5:39 AM

She couldn't cut it as an actress so she undermined her mother's reputation once she was no longer around to defend herself.

The movie skirted over Joan's affairs with women entirely and cut out all her gay friends, but they found plenty of time to depict the nuns at the boarding school she stuck Christina in.

by Anonymousreply 80April 23, 2021 5:51 AM

It's a shame we never got a scene of Christina throwing a drink in Elvis' face in Mommie Dearest.

by Anonymousreply 81April 23, 2021 6:02 AM

What exactly is going on in that Telethon video? Jerry starts to introduce Tina, and Joan interrupts "Oh you've been TOLD about her!" So I gather that Joan didn't want Tina introduced at all. And then Christina starts telling Jerry about coming to the Telethon when she was little, but Joan rips her away. Right off the stage.

Sorry, this is just not normal behavior. It reminds me of her usurping Bette Davis at the Oscars. Or, my God, I just remembered what she did to that screenwriter couple.

Joan had been friends with this couple- they were so close, that Joan was the godmother to their daughter. The couple wrote the screenplay to The Star, a movie about a washed up, booze ridden old hag. For some reason, Joan became convinced it was about her. The movie starred her longtime rival Bette Davis. I don't think Joan ever mentioned it to the couple, but she was pissed.

The couple's daughter was 16 and had fallen for a 23 year old used car salesman, who aside from his age, they couldn't stand. The two were planning on getting married. The older couple called on Joan to have a word with their daughter. To convince her that she'd be throwing away her life marrying this man. Joan happily agreed.

At about 1am in the morning, Joan phoned the couple. The woman answered. Joan said "I have WONDERFUL NEWS for you, Kathleen! We brought a Justice of the Peace into my home, and Kirby and Joan are now married! I've paid for their hotel tonight and for their honeymoon! Isn't it wonderful dear?"

Of course, the screenwriter couple never spoke to Joan again. Joan got them back for having written The Star. Revenge is a Dish. Best. Served. COLD.

by Anonymousreply 82April 23, 2021 6:02 AM

[quite]R58 It was a disgrace for Christina to talk so shamefully about her generous mother who saved her from abject poverty!

[quote]R75 Christina would be living in a trailer park on medicare if Joan Crawford hadn't adopted her.

I take it you two have no idea how in demand healthy white infants have always been on the adoption circuit.

by Anonymousreply 83April 23, 2021 6:02 AM

Fun fact: Joan originally named Christina Joan Jr.

by Anonymousreply 84April 23, 2021 6:34 AM

Helen Hayes, who was friends with Joan in the 1930s and '40s, discussed witnessing the abuse in her autobiography. Dinah Shore, who also knew of the abuse and was horrified by it, approached Helen and asked if she could try to intervene.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 85April 23, 2021 6:50 AM

June Alyson also witnessed Crawford abuse Christina.

Everyone in Hollywood knew Joan was bonkers, and it didn’t surprise them one bit that her concept of parenting was criminal.

Unfortunately, everyone in the industry is out for themselves and none did anything to stop it.

by Anonymousreply 86April 23, 2021 8:37 AM

Actually, June Allyson witnessed Joan Crawford give Christina a time out. She wasn't allowed to attend a party she wanted to go to because she has misbehaved, and her mother didn't talk to her. That was not common parenting in the 1940s , but it's pretty much standard parental discipline now.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 87April 23, 2021 8:40 AM

R82 is referring to small-time actress Joan Evans who married the used car salesman. The marriage apparently lasted until at least the 1980s, when the couple were part of a small tribute to Joan Crawford in Daily Variety, but the screenwriter father Dale Eunson said in an interview later that his daughter remained close to Crawford "for a while," which implies a falling out. (He also said Crawford "was not too intelligent" but "knew how to manipulate people.")

It's amazing the people who went along with Joan's crazy schemes. I get that Evans was only 17 and probably didn't know better, but Anne Bancroft going along with Joan and the Oscar shenanigans always made me think less of Bancroft.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 88April 23, 2021 11:50 AM

R88 the way Anne told it, Crawford either called or showed up in person to ask if she could accept the Oscar if she won. She did the same thing with Geraldine Page. It’s unknown if she approached Kate Hepburn. Lee Remick and of course Bette were at the ceremony. Anne wanted Patty to accept because there was no one else representing the film at the ceremony. The Academy nixed it because Patty was a nominee, could possibly win, and would complicate press coverage ( kind of lame, but it was the Academy’s call ) Anne (Geraldine too) just thought why not. Have a big Hollywood movie star accept your award. I don’t believe Anne or Geraldine knew, or were privvy to Joans machinations to stick it to Bette and the rivalry between them. I’m sure they couldn’t have cared less.

by Anonymousreply 89April 23, 2021 3:35 PM

You can tell from the Jerry Lewis clip that Joan was a drunk and mentally ill.

Just imagine how she treated Christina in private if she treated her like that in front of TV cameras.

by Anonymousreply 90April 23, 2021 4:27 PM

“Why can’t you give me the respect that I am entitled to?!” 🤡

by Anonymousreply 91April 23, 2021 4:40 PM

[quote] You don't know that that guy is self loathing or nasty.

I certainly do. I’ve had the displeasure of interacting with him on more than one occasion. He also snobby and prudish, and he takes himself and his Crawford fan-gurling way too seriously.

by Anonymousreply 92April 23, 2021 8:10 PM

Maybe he feels he is defending Joan. He obviously cares about her reputation. I am glad he has posted all the stuff he has.

by Anonymousreply 93April 23, 2021 8:39 PM

The stuff he’s posted is interesting, archeologically, but his perception of the drunk, child abusing, old battle axe is skewed.

(speaking impartially, of course)

by Anonymousreply 94April 23, 2021 8:50 PM

[quote] I am glad he has posted all the stuff he has.

Look, he’s a wonderful archivist and his site is a treasure. Really. But the guy is an unbelievable asshole.

by Anonymousreply 95April 23, 2021 9:49 PM

And, r92, I bet he doesn't have a personalized signed photo of Joan...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 96April 23, 2021 11:44 PM

Joan Evans stayed close to Joan Crawford until Joan Crawford's death. Evidence in the interview below, given after Crawford's death.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 97April 24, 2021 6:51 AM

Angela Lansbury was robbed by that upstart Patty Duke on the same night Bette was robbed by Bancroft!

by Anonymousreply 98April 24, 2021 7:25 AM

I don't know about his personality, though I sent him a note praising his site, and he wrote a gracious note back. But every iconic star should be lucky enough to have someone as devoted and and completest as he is with Joan Crawford. And, he doesn't censor anything. He lets his opinions be known, but he posts things both positive and negative about Joan.

I'm one who tends to be critical of Joan regarding Christina. But you can't deny that his site is a trove of fascinating information about Joan Crawford and the Golden Age of Hollywood.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 99April 24, 2021 7:40 AM

Jesus, the JoanBots are still active and the woman has been dead for nearly half a century.

by Anonymousreply 100April 24, 2021 7:52 AM

R100 Not a Joan bot at all. I think she was terrible, at times, to Christopher and Christina. But I find her to be an endlessly interesting and complex figure.

by Anonymousreply 101April 24, 2021 8:03 AM

Did Joan ever show her tits or bush on film?

by Anonymousreply 103April 24, 2021 9:29 AM

I interacted with him a few years ago as well, R92, he was incredibly nasty. A lot of the older fan website/blog owners tend to be just awful, but he was particularly rude, and later when I was in a position to help him with something he pretended like we were old friends.

by Anonymousreply 104April 24, 2021 9:44 AM

Interesting, R97, the quotes I found made it sound like her dad was implying they hadn't stayed close.

It's a little weird that a grown woman would look back on this stunt and think it was a nice gesture, because surely if nothing else, an adult Joan Evans would have realized that icing out her parents on her wedding was an act of hostility.

by Anonymousreply 105April 24, 2021 9:47 AM

[quote]Did Joan ever show her tits or bush on film?

She is alleged to have done a "stag" film when she was still a prostitute.

Joan became sexualized very early by having an "affair" (her word) with her stepfather when she was in her early teens.

by Anonymousreply 106April 24, 2021 2:38 PM

I agree that a lot of what Christina wrote about in MD rings true, and that Joan was at times abusive (though I do believe Tina amped everything up for the book).

But if you read the 1998 expanded version, a lot of their conflicts seem more along the lines of typical parent/teen-early 20s relationships, even now. One thing that always gets me is how Christina constantly complains about not having a large enough allowance (in COLLEGE) even though Joan and Al Steele were paying her tuition, room and board, plus her "miserly" allowance. She whines about it repeatedly, yet it never occurs to her to get a part-time job to get by.

And THEN she talks about getting "island fever" from being at school in Manhattan so long, so she saves up and takes a cruise to England where she stays for a month or 2. Seriously? Barely scraping by yet going on a trip across the Atlantic? I'm wondering if Mommie and Daddy Steele didn't pay for that as well.

Crawford was a fucked up basket case (there was no way she could have grown up as anything else with her childhood) but Christina was a spoiled child of privilege.

by Anonymousreply 107April 24, 2021 3:12 PM

If Christina had treated Joan with respect and dignity when she was treated so well then she wouldn't have had it so hard.

by Anonymousreply 108April 24, 2021 3:22 PM

R108 = Joan, still drunk and angry.

by Anonymousreply 109April 24, 2021 3:42 PM

Lots of different thoughts after listening to this. It's a good interview -- the type they still do on CBS' Sunday Morning. I also thinks it is incredibly dated and sexist. Wallace is pushing a narrative of two women jealous of each other - an old trope. Yes, mother-daughter relationships can be fraught with tension. Christina sounds at times as if she were abused -- calling herself a troublesome child (seemingly blaming herself at what is hinted at). Yet, Joan Crawford sounds like a normal parent too -- telling her daughter - well, if you want to drop out of college, you're on your own. I don't know what to think. Do Christina's insecurities stem from her sense that her mother doesn't love her enough? Or about her being adopted? Christina sounds like a spoiled brat, yet there's also more than a few hints that Joan Crawford was more than just harsh to her daughter.

But sharper than a serpent's tooth...

by Anonymousreply 110April 24, 2021 3:53 PM

[quote] I think it's interesting that so many people posting here assume that Christina's version of events is true, when none of us were present in the Crawford household.

How odd, on a gay gossip forum!

The veracity of Joan's abusive behavior towards Christina and Christopher has been attested to by many of Joan's Hollywood friends, including Nathalie Schafer (a very close friend), Lana Turner, June Allyson, Betty Hutton, and Helen Hayes.

by Anonymousreply 111April 24, 2021 4:02 PM

Why are you on Datalounge if you think all gays just excuse child abuse as a matter of course, R111?

by Anonymousreply 112April 24, 2021 4:04 PM

[quote] Did Joan ever show her tits or bush on film?

No. She offered to if she got the lead in Disney's "The Happiest Millionaire," but unfortunately that part went to Greer Garson.

by Anonymousreply 113April 24, 2021 4:06 PM

What a stupid transparently leading question, r112. Why not just ask me if I've yet stopped beating my wife?

You must think I just fell off the turnip truck. I have nothing but contempt for you and your ridiculously obvious argumentative tactics.

by Anonymousreply 115April 24, 2021 4:09 PM

There's no question in my mind that Tina was abused as was Christopher, and really, it's not so surprising seeing that Joan was an abused child. That said, Christina grew up to be a lot like Joan, as much as she fought against her mother for doing things that Christina later did herself. A friend of mine played opposite her in Summer Stock in the sixties and says she was the worst by far of anyone he ever acted with. So, basically...they were BOTH horrible people.

by Anonymousreply 116April 24, 2021 4:10 PM

[quote]But sharper than a serpent's tooth is an ungrateful child.

I had that needle-pointed on every throw pillow in my Christian home.

by Anonymousreply 117April 24, 2021 4:11 PM

[quote]So, basically...they were BOTH horrible people.

Yes, but Joan was one of the most successful movie actresses in history.

Christina couldn't even make it on TV.

by Anonymousreply 118April 24, 2021 4:12 PM

[quote]Crawford was a fucked up basket case (there was no way she could have grown up as anything else with her childhood)

It's hard to imagine today the kind of poverty Crawford grew up in. Barbara Stanwyck, too. That kind of poverty doesn't exist in the US anymore.

by Anonymousreply 119April 24, 2021 4:20 PM

[quote]That kind of poverty doesn't exist in the US anymore.

Are you serious?

by Anonymousreply 120April 24, 2021 4:23 PM

Well, R115, you're on the Dan Levy thread saying all gays are "openly needy, overemotional, narcissistic, shallow, and unable to form long-lasting emotional attachments."

At this point I'm just exhausted by negative bitches like you, you're just a worthless waste of time, it doesn't even matter if you're a troll or a self-loathing fuckup or an all-around miserable cunt who thinks you're just tellin' it like it is.

by Anonymousreply 121April 24, 2021 4:31 PM

I had already blocked R115 for reasons which are well known to them.

by Anonymousreply 122April 24, 2021 4:34 PM

Abused children quite often grow up to be troubled, difficult, unpleasant people.

by Anonymousreply 123April 24, 2021 4:47 PM

I assisted Joan at board meetings in Purchase for a short period. I was required to have a "𝘭𝘰𝘰𝘬", and know where to find booze and the boys.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 124April 24, 2021 5:09 PM

r120 there were no social services back then, among other things. Poor people today aren't like poor people back then.

by Anonymousreply 125April 24, 2021 5:25 PM

[quote] A lot of the older fan website/blog owners tend to be just awful

I think he’s in his 30s or (at most) 40s, actually. Like I said, his site is fantastic and provides a lot of valuable info. But if I saw him coming, I’d cross the street.

by Anonymousreply 126April 24, 2021 5:43 PM

I think anyone who dedicated themselves to making a comprehensive Joan Crawford website would be a bit of an odd personality, but I really appreciate the effort put into it.

by Anonymousreply 127April 24, 2021 9:52 PM

Katharine Hepburn was aware that she was too selfish and self-involved to have children. She would've been a terrible mother and she knew it, and she never regretted her decision to remain childless. It's too bad Joan and Bette didn't have that same self-awareness.

by Anonymousreply 128April 25, 2021 1:28 AM

Where's the comprehensive Dixie Dunbar website?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 129April 25, 2021 1:45 AM

R128 Bette wasn’t perfect, but she bent over backwards and worked her ass off for her ungrateful daughter and BDS lazy husband. Joan really had no business having any children in the 1940s. I believe she loved them in her own way, but came from an extremely dysfunctional background and there was no one to really model what a loving mother should be before Christina and Christopher. Apparently she had calmed down enough at least from the twins perspective in the 1950s onward. But they were compliant and willing to do anything to please her.

by Anonymousreply 130April 25, 2021 2:05 AM

Bette's daughter BD Hyman and BD's husband were a couple of useless leeches who drained Bette's finances for 20 years. BD has never mentioned the fact that Bette supported them at a fairly lavish level for two decades because neither one of them wanted to work. When Bette had her strokes it was feared she wouldn't live long so BD wrote the book solely because she had no other way to make money. If Bette hadn't cut BD off when she did, she would've died flat broke.

by Anonymousreply 131April 25, 2021 2:15 AM

R128 I remember hearing Hepburn in some interview assert that women really can't do both serious career and motherhood well. While that is certainly up for debate, there are some shades of hard truth there.

by Anonymousreply 132April 25, 2021 1:19 PM

R132 lot of women do it every day. I do give credit to Hepburn for acknowledging her shortcomings though.

by Anonymousreply 133April 25, 2021 3:44 PM

R133 And a lot of women aren't cut out for it, but do it anyway, with mixed results. As you say, Hepburn acknowledged her own shortcomings but suggested others ought to as well.

by Anonymousreply 134April 25, 2021 4:51 PM

[quote] lot of women do it every day.

Do they though? My sister has a very successful career. But it takes her out of town/country quite a bit.

I don't think she realizes how much her children have suffered because of that. It didn't help that she was leaving them home with an alcoholic.

by Anonymousreply 135April 25, 2021 4:54 PM

Well it depends on the women involved and the family situation. I got the feeling Hepburn was blanketing ALL women by saying you can’t have both, which is false.

by Anonymousreply 136April 25, 2021 5:21 PM

Greta Garbo and Katharine Hepburn never had children or other relatives and husbands to leech off of them and consequently lived very comfortable lives doing whatever the hell they wanted and had millions in the bank until the day they died. They were both pretty damn smart. Most of their female contemporaries had husbands, kids and parents/siblings who were nothing but constant drama and drained their finances. Good for Greta and Kate for not falling into that rabbit hole.

by Anonymousreply 137April 25, 2021 5:46 PM

Marry me, r129...

Look at how subtly pissed DD is at newcomer Judy stealing the damn movie out from under her! I would also f*ck Johnny Downs until my dick blistered.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 138April 25, 2021 8:20 PM

One of the most interesting things about Joan was how hypocritical she was. In public, she was so haughty. Being critical of Marilyn Monroe, humiliating the young wife of a supreme court justice for not knowing which spoon to use. Yet, the woman was an honest to goodness slut.

Here's an account of her affair with Jackie Cooper when she was 34 and he was 17:

At the time, Cooper was 17. Crawford, fresh from her marriage to Tone, was 34. As he tells it, Crawford was friendly with Cooper’s mother, and allowed the teenage Jackie to play badminton on a court she had installed on her property.

Jackie recalled: “The court was right off the pool house, and one day, sweaty from an hour of exertion, I went to the pool house with Joan. I was thirsty, she poured me a Coke. As she bent over, I looked down her dress.

“‘You’re growing up, aren’t you?’ she said….I made a move toward her. "Young man, I think you'd better go." She stated. I refused to leave, and she stood up, looked at me appraisingly, and then closed all the drapes. And I made love to Joan Crawford. Or, she made love to me.”

The affair lasted for about six months on and off, after which Crawford bestowed a final kiss on her teenage paramour with the admonition, “put it all out of your mind, it never happened.” Cooper did exactly the opposite – he cherished the memory of the steamy encounter with the star until the day he died in early May of this year, at age 88.

by Anonymousreply 139April 25, 2021 8:26 PM

Anyone have a link to the original version of Mommy Dearest? The version R10 mentions? I'm specifically interested in any mention of Joan's "lesbian proclivities".

by Anonymousreply 140April 26, 2021 1:19 AM

[quote]R137 Greta Garbo and Katharine Hepburn never had children or other relatives and husbands to leech off of them and consequently lived very comfortable lives

Well, both were primarily dykes, so....

by Anonymousreply 141April 26, 2021 2:27 AM

Also true r141. I think Garbo was strictly into pussy after she left Hollywood.

by Anonymousreply 142April 26, 2021 2:31 AM

Cecil Beaton said they had a longstanding affair - - which is really almost too much to take in.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 143April 26, 2021 3:48 AM

There’s a beautiful portrait of Brooke Shields that’s a homage to this Cecil Beaton pic of Garbo:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 144April 26, 2021 5:30 AM

I had a super violent mother who is now, thank god, dead. I believe every fucking word from Christina Crawford, the more outlandish the more accurate, I think. It has the ring of truth to me. Joan was borderline/psychopathic, and every word of the description of abuse is totally believable to me.

by Anonymousreply 146April 26, 2021 6:15 AM

Tidbits from a much longer article circa 1955

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 147April 26, 2021 6:29 AM

"As crusty as an east side rye bread."

by Anonymousreply 148April 26, 2021 9:11 AM

I never laid a hand on the fucking little bitch.

by Anonymousreply 149April 26, 2021 9:28 AM

About the Crawford super fans and Facebook groups, I was following several for a while and quite shocked how ruthless they can be by sending in moles to report everything and get groups shut down. There were a couple meme groups along the way that bitthe dust because they dared to mock Saint Joan. The blinded fan worship is really obsessive, and the gaslighting against Christina is unreal. Imagine in real life in 2021 telling a first account abuse survivor they are a liar, yet they unabashedly do it . Is it really so difficult to believe Joan Crawford was both a terrible person and a good actress? There are countless creative greats in the history of acting, writing and art who fall into this category. Regardless, Christina should be thanked by these people because she undeniably prolonged Joan’s legacy for better or worse.

by Anonymousreply 150April 26, 2021 9:52 AM

(The Chadwicks do not wish to discuss the matter. In answer to a request for an interview they wired the following message: "From experience with Christina's mother, we consider it unwise to involve Chadwick by making any public comment. Very sorry." The telegram was signed, "Margaret Lee Chadwick.")

by Anonymousreply 151April 26, 2021 12:17 PM

R150 these people are really fascinating, aren't they? I can remember back when IMDB had message boards, Bette Davis fans would constantly be in Celeste Holm's board, saying what an awful cunt she was. I'd anyone tried to defend her, that person would be cyber bullied.

Joan suffered from mental illness, and was cruel to her first daughter and her son. Joan had a mesmerizing screen persona, was a great star, and was more mellow and kind to the two girls she adopted 8 years later. Both these sets of facts can be true.

If Christina is bad somehow bad, she's certainly no worse than Joan.

by Anonymousreply 152April 26, 2021 12:30 PM

The difference is, Celeste Holm WAS an awful cunt.

by Anonymousreply 153April 26, 2021 12:39 PM

The thing about the Redbook article is that both Joan and Christina are lying about why she left Chadwick. Joan took Christina out of there because she was making out with the stable boy, by Christina's own admission later in Mommie Dearest. Joan says Christina was expelled (she wasn't) and Christina says she was taken away for no reason (also not true).

Or maybe the Redbook story is true but the Mommie Dearest version is the lie. Who knows.

And don't forget one of the twins sued Christina for lying and won.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 154April 26, 2021 12:51 PM

R153 But Christina wasn't expelled. Chadwick did not force Christina to leave, Joan did. Christina is telling the truth. But for Joan, Christina would've stayed in Chadwick.

by Anonymousreply 155April 27, 2021 12:34 AM

Betty Anne, wife of Sterling Hayden: "There is nothing too bad to say about Joan Crawford. If I ever see her again, I'll probably strike her face."

by Anonymousreply 156April 27, 2021 12:45 AM

R154 Here's the actual article. Christina had been going around saying the girls weren't actually twins. She thought that was the truth. Apparently she was wrong. So, she wasn't exactly lying.

That said, good for the two other sisters for standing up for themselves.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 157April 27, 2021 12:47 AM

Christopher and the twins are all dead, Christina is the last surviving child and she's 82 now.

by Anonymousreply 158April 27, 2021 1:21 AM

Christina is right that she wasn't expelled. I already said that Joan lied about her being expelled, because she was not expelled.

But Christina has told two different stories about why Joan took her away. The Redbook story is that Joan got into a power struggle with her (and with implications that she was jealous that the Chadwicks were acting as her surrogate family) and forced her to leave. Strangers came and picked her up and took her to a convent school immediately.

The Mommie Dearest story is that she was making out with a stable boy and Joan found out and furiously dragged her away herself, no strangers picked her up, and there was some time between Chadwick and Flintridge Sacred Heart.

Don't tell me Christina isn't a liar. As I said, she lied about the twins, was sued by one of the twins and the twin won. She also claimed the twins influenced Joan into cutting her out of the will because she had no idea why she would have been, when, as we've said repeatedly in this thread, Christina was going to the press about Joan's abuse YEARS before Mommie Dearest and knew full well why she was disinherited.

In this case, Christina has told two completely different stories about Joan taking her out of Chadwick, with a lot of differing details.

YES of course Joan was an abuser and a liar, that doesn't mean Christina wasn't also a liar.

by Anonymousreply 161April 27, 2021 12:04 PM

She was mad at the twins because she decided they had gotten her disinherited, R157.

[quote]Though being estranged from (and no longer financially supported by) their famous mother for years, in November 1977, Crawford and her brother sued Joan Crawford's estate to invalidate their mother's will, which she signed on October 18, 1976. Cathy LaLonde, another Crawford daughter, and her husband, Jerome, the complaint charged, "took deliberate advantage of decedent's seclusion and weakened and distorted mental and physical condition to insinuate themselves" into Joan's favor.

This was after years of Joan having cut off contact with Christina and no longer supporting her, and long after Christina went to the press with details of Joan's abuse. She knew damn well why she wasn't in the will, but she sued her siblings, claiming they'd manipulated a drunken and sick old woman to cut her out.

Then a couple years later while on the Mommie Dearest publicity tour, she told all sorts of tales about the twins that weren't true. "Well, she was told" isn't an excuse. It was her job to check, but she didn't want to check, she wanted to ruin their reputation. She was badmouthing them on purpose, saying they were picked by Joan to look like twins for the publicity, implying that they continued the charade as they grew up and realized they weren't really twins. She also violated privacy laws by revealing information about the twins' adoption without authorization. That's a pretty shitty thing to do.

I'm not sure why you're linking to "the actual article" when I already did. I linked to a legitimate news article. You linked to a blog that had a copy of an article with fewer details.

But if the only source you'll take is a blog, then fine. Here.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 162April 27, 2021 12:15 PM

R150: There was a Celeste Holm message board? Even in that era, she would have been considered an old supporting player from a different era. The only thing to discuss was her being ga-ga and her much younger gold-digging bf.

by Anonymousreply 163April 27, 2021 12:31 PM

Was Joan particularly close to the twins near the end? The story has always been that was a recluse swilling gin in NYC. One never hears about devoted twin daughters visiting her or calling her.

by Anonymousreply 164April 27, 2021 12:40 PM

She was closer to one than the other. That’s the one she left her her personal possessions to - the real value of her estate.

That she could pit “twins” against each other is unconscionable.

by Anonymousreply 165April 27, 2021 4:08 PM

[quote]The story has always been that was a recluse swilling gin in NYC.

That is a scurrilous lie! How dare you suggest I was a drunk who swilled gin?

It was vodka.

by Anonymousreply 166April 27, 2021 5:21 PM

R162 hey scumbag! Click in the link you provided. It doesn't work. That's why I provided the actual article.

Go fuck yourself you insane, delusional queen.

by Anonymousreply 167April 27, 2021 8:30 PM

According to July 1979 press reports, Christina and Christopher accepted a settlement of $55,000 each from Joan's estate to not throw out the will and cut off other charities like the SAG Old Folks Home.

In addition, Christina paid her brother a mere $1,500 to use his name and likeness in any movie portrayal. He was rooked.

by Anonymousreply 168April 27, 2021 8:48 PM

In the fall of 1974, Joan attended a party for Rosalind Russell in the Rainbow Room at Rockefeller Center. When the pictures were published in the next morning's newspapers, Joan was horrified at how she looked and never attended another public event again. She became a recluse in her apartment (Imperial House on E. 69th St.) and even refused to see long-time friends. She quit drinking the following year after passing out drunk while alone in her apartment and seriously banging up her face. She remained passed out on the floor for hours. She was so shaken by that incident she quit drinking cold turkey after decades of alcoholism. Two years later she died from pancreatic cancer in her apartment. She was believed to be in her mid-70s, her exact age has always been a matter of dispute.

by Anonymousreply 169April 27, 2021 11:17 PM

What was Christina's relationship with her father like? (I admit, I don't even know who he was).

by Anonymousreply 170April 28, 2021 1:15 AM

Christina didn't really have a father. Phil Terry, Joan's third husband, was only married to Joan for about three years when Christina was a baby and Joan didn't marry again until Alfred Steele (the Pepsi guy) when Christina was almost grown and had been away at boarding school for years.

by Anonymousreply 171April 28, 2021 1:35 AM

Not on film, but producer Herman Cohen tells of Joan proudly hauling out her then 60+-year-old tits for his inspection prior to the commencement of production of BERSERK, even though in the finished film she doesn't show them, or even show any cleavage really. This is the film where her neck shadow is so frequent and obvious it almost deserves billing.

"What about these?" JC asked, according to Cohen. "And no operations on 'em, either." she added--though that was probably not true; most sources say there was augmentation and/or a lift in the mid 1950s, when her look really hardened.

Think about your 60+ year old gran hauling out her funbags at work and what kind of reaction she'd get and you see how bizarre these displays were.

She always believed in fucking the director to really get him on her side, and did just that as often as not in the prime years of her career. Of the casting couch, she once said, "Well it sure beat the cold hard floor." Married director Vincent Sherman both admits to hitting her and (at another time) fucking her on a screening room floor while they were watching rushes.

Even for a gay director like Charles Walters, she shucked off her robe and stood before him stark naked saying "I just wanted you to see what you've got to work with" before they began shooting TORCH SONG.

I don't believe the "Marilyn made her shriek like a maniac" story but all of the above incidents are well documented and told by firsthand witnesses.

by Anonymousreply 172April 28, 2021 1:46 AM

Even when she was post-menopausal and looked hard as nails, Joan still thought she was hot shit!

by Anonymousreply 173April 28, 2021 3:00 AM

Imagine the eyebrows on her snatch.

by Anonymousreply 174April 28, 2021 3:35 AM

Joan kept it shaved. She was always ready!

by Anonymousreply 175April 28, 2021 3:46 AM

I'd like to apologize to the person I snapped at earlier. That was not cool of me to lose my temper like that, and the things I said to you only reflect badly on me.

I would put the post numbers here, but I'm too embarrassed to go back and look at what I wrote.

by Anonymousreply 176April 28, 2021 9:08 AM

[quote]hey scumbag! Click in the link you provided. It doesn't work.

It works for me. You just don't like the information in the article, that's why you're having a meltdown again.

[quote]Go fuck yourself you insane, delusional queen.

The second you crazy women get disagreed with on here, the homophobia comes out. Go fuck yourself.

by Anonymousreply 177April 28, 2021 5:50 PM

[quote]R176 I would put the post numbers here, but I'm too embarrassed to go back and look at what I wrote.

Just have a little nip of 100 proof Smirnoff and you’ll be fine, dear.

No one here who likes old movies tends to take things too seriously. (Except those gdamn, clueless Lana Turner FAAAAANNNNSSSSS!!!!)

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 178April 28, 2021 7:05 PM

You just know Joan’s rare roast beef floppy pussy smelled like a combination of White Shoulders cologne and Pine Sol.

by Anonymousreply 179April 29, 2021 8:01 PM

Yeah, for whatever reason, the on the browser I'm on or whatever, it that link didn't work for me. That was the only reason I looked for it elsewhere and reposted it.

by Anonymousreply 180April 30, 2021 4:42 AM

ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7pa3TmqOorZ6csm%2BvzqZmraCimq6le5FxanBoYmV%2Fbq3MmrGippdis6q6w2aroqaRYrCzrdafpqucXai9qrjLoqWgZaSarm67zWahqJmeYraveZBybWk%3D