Dead Ringer (1964)

"Dead Ringer" is a Bette Davis suspense/horror film reminiscent of both her old studio melodramas and the "shock" cinema wave of the era that began with Hitchcock's "Psycho." Neither element works here and the movie's glacier-like pace makes it almost unwatchable.I'm a big fan of Davis from her glory days at Warner, and I can even appreciate her camp/schlock period, with movies like "The Nanny" and "Whatever Happened To Baby Jane" but "Dead Ringer" is dead on arrival: Bette plays a dual role of twin sisters, and the movie opens with a dull, extended conversation between the two... it's Bette vs. Bette, but neither one of them has anything interesting to say."Edith" eventually kills her twin and assumes her identity, for no other reason than she was three months behind on her rent. Now Bette has to fool everyone into believing the death was a suicide, and that she is not Edith but Margaret, her sister. Confused? Good. It's such an outrageous plot twist- and handled with such indifference by the director- that it seems more like a nuisance than a heart-pounding, white-knuckled thrill ride.And a note on the direction: Actor Paul Henreid was behind the camera, and seems to have been suffering from narcolepsy. Scenes run on and on, there are extended wordless, action-free sequences, and the pace of the film is like a funeral procession. It meanders... it trods along... it doesn't seem like anyone involved is invested in the story in any way. Even the great Karl Malden shows up and can't save the movie with one of his typically-stellar performances.If you want to watch Bette Davis at her worst for two solid hours in a story that goes nowhere, this is the movie for you. Otherwise, move along.GRADE: D

Bette Davis the greatest female star in the history of Warner Bros returned to the studio to make this excellent film. ( Bette's great comeback hit, 'Whatever Happened to Baby Jane' was filmed at the old Producers Studio aka Raleigh Studios on Melrose but was released by WB).Jack Warner gave Bette Davis carte Blancha on this film after Bette's great hit in 'Whatever Happened to Baby Jane'. I liked 'Dear Ringer' a lot and Bette Davis has a field day playing both parts. Karl Malden is very professionally as always. WB contract Star Phil Carey has a small role.Paul Henried so memorable a co star of Bette's directs 'Dead Ringer' in crisp fashion and the cinematography in gorgeous black and white is first rate. I miss the B@W movies!Read that Lana Turner was offered this movie first but turned it down. Not sure if that is true or just another one of the many Bette-related stories that circulate. In any event, glad Bette Davis got the part. Fine drama. Paramount and Sony Columbia name Buildings after Film People who have made great contributions to those studio lots, Paramount has buildings named after Hal Wallis, Lucille Ball, Mae West, Marlene Dietirich, et al and Sony Columbia has buildings or stages named after Kim Novak, William Holden, Rita Hayworth, Frank Capra et al, and I wish Warner Bros would name a building on its fabled movie lot after WB's greatest female star Bette Davis.

Dead Ringer (1964)From that crazy, Gothic, overblown, fabulous last decade of Bette Davis's career, another wild one. And we get not one, but two Davis characters, twins, and the scenes where they are both shown (seamlessly) it's a kind of Bette Davis gluttony. Luckily, she's a great actress, and she pulls makes the melodrama burn. The movie makes no secret of being over the top, the plot outrageous and engaging enough to pull along all the other unlikely and exaggerated scenes.The weakest link here is possibly the direction, under actor Paul Henreid's hand (most famous as the second male lead in Casablanca). As amazing as the plot is by nature (filled with double-crossing treachery and murder), it actually drags a little at times. But not for long. The cinematography is really amazing (the great Ernst Haller at work--he did so many truly stellar movies it's breathtaking), amazing enough to study, the camera arcing around a stairway, or playing with the light turning on and off. The music is an odd mix--the harpsichord jingles are both perfect in setting a creepy mood and tacky for seeming to cheapen the drama--and it's classical conductor Andre Previn (Mia Farrow's onetime-husband) in charge. But counteracting this is some great funky early sixties organ jazz in a few scenes (the two performers are uncredited), what you might expect from a Sam Fuller movie.As awesome as this movie seems as a bit of delicious excess, something to roar about, eyes glued to the visuals, it's also a little awkward, just a shade. Like Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte, The Nanny, and What Ever Happened to Baby Jane, it's in the pantheon of cult Bette Davis movies, an early 1960s attempt to keep both her career and the old-fashioned Hollywood drama alive. It manages to do both.

Amazingly enough, this is NOT the first or only film Bette Davis played herself and her evil twin sister! In fact, the film is highly reminiscent of the very enjoyable A STOLEN LIFE that Ms. Davis made with Glenn Ford back in 1946. Here, because she's quite a bit older, the romantic aspect of the film is changed, however. Instead of Davis hating her evil sister for stealing her boyfriend and impersonating her to get him back, the film begins with the death of this boyfriend--who the sister had apparently stolen two decades earlier. Filled with justifiable anger over this and the swell life the scummy sister now has (where she is quite rich, while the nice one struggles to make ends meet), the nicer sister decides to make up for lost time--killing the wicked sister and assuming her life. While the plot is clichéd and a bit silly (especially how they try to disguise the use of doubles in the beginning), the film is enjoyable and good for laughs--as it's often over the top. It's like a fun "bad film"--great for those who love watching Davis or Crawford in their juicy 1960s roles.The biggest difference in the two films is that in A STOLEN LIFE, one sister clearly was good and the other clearly was bad. The good one only stole her sister's identity after she died accidentally. However, the "good" sister in DEAD RINGER isn't exactly good--just not as rotten as her sister. Plus, unlike the previous film, she murders her sister in cold blood--feeling entitled to what her wicked sister has. And, interestingly enough, she was pretty much right--the nasty sister's life was by all rights hers--though killing her was a bit...um...extreme. The way that it's done and showing Davis stripping the corpse of her possessions is quite creepy--with more of a 1960s grittier style. Unfortunately for the surviving sister, her plan, though interesting, isn't completely thought out and soon comes to haunt her. How this happens and what happens next is something you'll have to see for yourself.Now this brings up the biggest problem with the film. Davis' plan is just too spur of the moment and dumb. There are just too many loose ends to make it a better film. Clichés such as the dog instantly "knowing" which sister is which and the fact that the twin would have different fingerprints aren't really addressed well. I would assume that when an identical twin dies it would be standard practice to ensure which of the two had actually died--especially in cases where foul play is suspected.Overall, this is a very improbable but very interesting film. You'll probably enjoy watching it--even if it is all very hard to swallow.