Mildred Pierce (1945)

[BluProofie]

I think there is a lot of truth to what Christina wrote, but I also think some of it was exaggerated.

[OneWayFilms]

Originally Posted by slimdude

It's very difficult to determine whether Christina Crawford statements and events that she had written in her book: Mommie Dearest were entirely true, fictional or even exaggerated because Joan Crawford is no longer here to defend herself to rebuttal any allegations that her daughter has made. What was Christina's motive to even write the book anyway when her Mother is deceased ( who can't defend herself) other than for the money, and the publicity. If Joan Crawford was abusive toward Christina, Joan Crawford was one out of a billion. Just because she was an actress and in the public eye doesn't make her any difference than any other abusive parent in the world who's not a celebrity. They're human beings and have personal issues like everybody else.

I completely understand what you are saying. As an victim of extreme physical and mental child abuse myself from my own mother, I understand why Christina wrote what she did. Joan was loved by MILLIONS and had believed the superficial character that she portrayed in the public eye. She wanted everyone to believe her life was PERFECT and yet, behind the scenes, it was far from it.

It had to be therapeutic for Christina to write the truth and tell her story. It also much have been very hard for her to tell the truth about a Hollywood legend, knowing how beloved she was and how people will struggle to believe these horrible accusations.

One does not need to be around to defend themselves when someone finally feels the freedom to tell the truth. She may have always wanted to arrive at a place in her life where they could be civil and loving to each other.....as long as Joan was alive, that hope stayed alive. But after Joan died and left NOTHING to her son or daughter for reasons THEY would know about.....I believe Christina NEEDED to finally share her side.

Was any of it dramatized? In the movie, yes....even Christina said they took some minor creative liberties, but they were based on REAL events.

I never read the book, but I will assume the book might be a bit more accurate.

[slimdude]

Originally Posted by BluProofie

I think there is a lot of truth to what Christina wrote, but I also think some of it was exaggerated.

There is a big difference between an assumption from the public who didn't know her personally than from someone who does. Right now, anybody (including her daughter Christina and son Christopher) can say and write anything about Joan Crawford because as I've said before, she's not here to defend herself. Besides it doesn't really matter now because Joan Crawford is gone, and those occurrences with Christina had allegedly took place 72 years ago, and Christina is now 81 year old. If someone had a tormented childhood what was the use of her continually writing books, making talk show appearances repeatedly telling and reliving that physical and emotional pain that was supposedly had been inflicted on her. What was she trying to accomplished? Other than professional counseling, there was nothing else nobody could do.

[slimdude]

Originally Posted by OneWayFilms

I completely understand what you are saying. As an victim of extreme physical and mental child abuse myself from my own mother, I understand why Christina wrote what she did. Joan was loved by MILLIONS and had believed the superficial character that she portrayed in the public eye. She wanted everyone to believe her life was PERFECT and yet, behind the scenes, it was far from it.

It had to be therapeutic for Christina to write the truth and tell her story. It also much have been very hard for her to tell the truth about a Hollywood legend, knowing how beloved she was and how people will struggle to believe these horrible accusations.

One does not need to be around to defend themselves when someone finally feels the freedom to tell the truth. She may have always wanted to arrive at a place in her life where they could be civil and loving to each other.....as long as Joan was alive, that hope stayed alive. But after Joan died and left NOTHING to her son or daughter for reasons THEY would know about.....I believe Christina NEEDED to finally share her side.

Was any of it dramatized? In the movie, yes....even Christina said they took some minor creative liberties, but they were based on REAL events.

I never read the book, but I will assume the book might be a bit more accurate.

Nobody is perfect, and if anyone tries to make other people to believe that they're perfect, they are only fooling themselves. There is only one supreme being who was perfect and that's the Almighty God. This is exactly why the fans, and the news media shouldn't put these celebrities on a pedestal and worship them as if they're Gods when they're not because, they're not perfect not by a longshot. They are just like everybody else who've go through trials and tribulations and have personal issues.

[BluProofie]

Originally Posted by slimdude

There is a big difference between an assumption from the public who didn't know her personally than from someone who does. Right now, anybody (including her daughter Christina and son Christopher) can say and write anything about Joan Crawford because as I've said before, she's not here to defend herself. Besides it doesn't really matter now because Joan Crawford is gone, and those occurrences with Christina had allegedly took place 72 years ago, and Christina is now 81 year old. If someone had a tormented childhood what was the use of her continually writing books, making talk show appearances repeatedly telling and reliving that physical and emotional pain that was supposedly had been inflicted on her. What was she trying to accomplished? Other than professional counseling, there was nothing else nobody could do.

That’s why I said “I think”. I never said I knew what happened.