Reviews (4)
Difficult to watch portrayal of mental illness
The one reason to get this movie is to get an idea of the timely sociology of mental illness. The overall movie is a disappointment. Most of the glimpses into mental illness are a bit antiquated and not at all convincing. Lorna (Polly Bergen) is at times hystrionic in a way that is just ineffectual to the viewer, there's only so much madness that one can take in this type of movie, which in the end actually kind of turns out to be a propaganda-driven view of psychiatry. If you are watching it for Joan Crawford's sake, then you'll be pleased with the Judo scene of course and the various "don't [mess] with me fellas" moments, but all in all, it's not a great classic, and worth watching mostly for the sociological implications behind the film itself.
Flawed, but with a fabulous cast it is worth a look!
I won't say that "The Caretakers" is the greatest film ever made, but it is certainly not the worst. "The Caretakers" is the story of the struggle between a progressive doctor (Robert Stack), who wants to create a "day hospital" for "borderline" patients, and the old regime headed by Nurse Lucretia (Joan Crawford) and her team of nurses (including the terrific Constance Ford). All of the actresses who portray borderline patients are fabulous. Polly Bergen is Lorna, the woman tormented by the death of her son. Janis Paige plays Marion, the stubborn, hard tempered patient who encourages mischief among the others. Barbara Barrie is the mute patient who nearly burns the clinic down. Particularly good is Sharon Hugueny, who plays Connie, the sweet, lonely girl who, in a particularly poignant scene, pretends to read a letter from her mother, filled with lines about how much her family loves and misses her, only for the letter to be brutally exposed as a fake by Marion. Diane McBain and Susan Oliver are good as borderline nurses. There are many good scenes in "The Caretakers", but the overall film seems campy (the music seems better suited to "Batman" than a film about mental illness) and a bit anti-climactic, but still I recommend watching it to see the great performances given by Crawford, Ford, Paige, Barrie, and Hugueny!
Great Cast, Great Movie
I was intrigued by this movie long before I ever saw it. I had read many reviews of it (unfortunately, many disparaging ones), which whetted my appetite, and because I am a die-hard Joan Crawford fan, I eventually ordered it. I thought, "How bad can it be?" Well, I'll say this right off. It isn't as bad as everyone seems to think. In fact, it's really quite good. It is true that Joan Crawford's role (as a tough, conservative head nurse at the psychiatric hospital in which the film is set) is small, but her strong presence is still remarkable. Everyone is very good, including leads Robert Stack (as a progressive-minded doctor at odds with Crawford) and Polly Bergen, as the patient through whose eyes the story unfolds. Excellent, also, is Janis Paige as a loud-mouthed nymphomaniac in the ward. The direction is good and the theme (progressive care for mental patients vs. strait-jackets and shock treatments), manages to triumph in the end despite a few admitted cliches in the story. The moody, atmospheric photography and evocative score by Elmer Bernstein do their parts in making this a film worth seeing, especially if you like to watch good acting and have a general interest in psychology, as I do.
Mental illness portrayed for shock value
Like "The Snake Pit" more than a decade earlier, "The Caretakers" takes little care in attempting to present a responsible view of mental illness. As the patient, Polly Bergen overacts hysterically in what seems to be a desperate bid for an Oscar nomination (sorry, Polly, it didn't work), while grim-faced doctor Robert Stack swaggers about as if he were still playing Eliot Ness. The cinematography is excellent but all those dark, shadow filled corridors are more appropriate for a horror film. Then again, that's what this film is: a horror film that portrays a serious medical condition for nothing more than shock value.
... Read more
|