Bette Davis is reason enough to see any film and was always worth watching regardless of what the material was like, although she had a lot of great material in her career she did have some that was not worthy of her talent or gave her not enough to work from. She had a fair share of magnificent performances and was seldom bad. Have always been fond of Max Steiner, Glenn Ford was always watchable and Walter Brennan was always a pleasure (especially in the curmudgeonly kind of roles).
'A Stolen Life' doesn't see either at their absolute best. None of them come off too badly at all, with Davis of course coming off best, though all did work that was a lot better and stuck in the mind much more. Is 'A Stolen Life' worth the look? Yes it is and namely if one is a fan of Davis and wants to see as many films of hers as possible or wants to see everything left to see of hers (the case with me). Is it an essential? To me, it wasn't quite and could have been better than it was.
The best thing about 'A Stolen Life' is Davis, who is absolutely marvellous in her not-easy-to-pull-off dual role that she brings a lot of authority and pathos to. She is helped too by some of the best use of trick photography on film, expert use of split-screen. It is a very nicely filmed and made film, the interiors and the eerie lighting really standing out. Steiner's music score brings out a lot of emotion without going too overboard, well it is Steiner overall so that wasn't a surprise.
Script mostly is thought-provoking and when 'A Stolen Life' picks up in the second half, with the Kate's deception subplot, it is very entertaining. The cast generally do quite well, though nobody is properly up to Davis' level. Brennan comes closest tied with charming Charles Ruggles. Was slightly more mixed on Ford, although slightly uncharacteristically gormless he does quite well with what he has.
Conversely, 'A Stolen Life' does take a little too long to get started and the first part meanders. It can be a bit silly and the ending is sappy and too convenient.
Dane Clark's performance is also very weak, he has a role that one really questions the point of and he injects very little personality to it.
All in all, decent if not mind-blowing. See it for Davis. 7/10
'A Stolen Life' doesn't see either at their absolute best. None of them come off too badly at all, with Davis of course coming off best, though all did work that was a lot better and stuck in the mind much more. Is 'A Stolen Life' worth the look? Yes it is and namely if one is a fan of Davis and wants to see as many films of hers as possible or wants to see everything left to see of hers (the case with me). Is it an essential? To me, it wasn't quite and could have been better than it was.
The best thing about 'A Stolen Life' is Davis, who is absolutely marvellous in her not-easy-to-pull-off dual role that she brings a lot of authority and pathos to. She is helped too by some of the best use of trick photography on film, expert use of split-screen. It is a very nicely filmed and made film, the interiors and the eerie lighting really standing out. Steiner's music score brings out a lot of emotion without going too overboard, well it is Steiner overall so that wasn't a surprise.
Script mostly is thought-provoking and when 'A Stolen Life' picks up in the second half, with the Kate's deception subplot, it is very entertaining. The cast generally do quite well, though nobody is properly up to Davis' level. Brennan comes closest tied with charming Charles Ruggles. Was slightly more mixed on Ford, although slightly uncharacteristically gormless he does quite well with what he has.
Conversely, 'A Stolen Life' does take a little too long to get started and the first part meanders. It can be a bit silly and the ending is sappy and too convenient.
Dane Clark's performance is also very weak, he has a role that one really questions the point of and he injects very little personality to it.
All in all, decent if not mind-blowing. See it for Davis. 7/10