Good story, Not enough for a whole film

everything you have heard about this movie is true.

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

While she scored better in 1964 with a Tennessee Williams like heroine in "Hush, Hush Sweet Charlotte", Bette Davis also shined with dual roles (for the second time in her career) in this update of the type of film she had been appearing in for 20 years. Having played rivals of sisters, cousins and old acquaintances of such divas as Olivia de Havilland, Mary Astor and Miriam Hopkins, she now finds the toughest competition of them all-herself! A re-tread of "A Stolen Life" (where she also played two twins, one good and one bad), here the rivalry is one more evenly matched. Maggie is a wealthy widow with many secrets; Eadie is the well-liked owner of a pub in a poor section of Los Angeles where she is known for giving hand-outs to those less fortunate than herself. (And believe me, she is not so fortunate, so this is supposed to tell us that she is extremely kind hearted). When she goes to the funeral of her sister's husband (who happened to be the love of her life), all the old resentments come out, and Eadie decides to play just like her to get even for all the past hurts. Those include man-stealing and lying, especially about what caused the late husband to marry Maggie in the first place.Davis is convincing in making us believe the differences between each of the sisters. Neither is alike in common characteristics. Davis fans will be amused by the wealthy Maggie's declaration that she quit smoking years before while Eadie puffs like a locomotive. It is the poor but resourceful Eadie who gets the upper hand, taking over her sister's life and discovering that Maggie had a few horrifying secrets of her own that render her actually quite evil.As the police officer in love with the simple living Eadie, Karl Malden is excellent, her down-to-earth protector who is awestruck when he meets "Maggie" after Eadie has assumed her life. Peter Lawford is the hideously sleazy gigolo lover of Maggie's who guesses the truth and uses it to his advantage, his life eventually literally going to the dogs. A religious freak in-law played by Estelle Winwood, a pre-historic looking butler played by Cyril Delavanti and a gossipy socialite played by Jean Hagen round out Maggie's social set, with director Paul Henreid's real-life daughter playing Maggie's suspicious maid.Davis helps the plot rise above the obviousness of it, especially with how she arranges to switch lives, something too delicious to spoil. The result shows how an apparent kindly woman can turn to ruthlessly evil when pushed to the edge. While Davis is matronly looking as both characters, she makes you realize that neither character is someone that you'd want to mess with. Thanks to her performance, this film rises above predictability and silliness and is totally satisfying with a delightful denouncement at the ending.

There's a lot to like about this movie, and some things to not like about it. But after watching this film a second time, I have to admit it's better than I remembered it being. I think part of the problem I had with the film is that it seemed like quite a step down from Bette Davis films from the 1940s such as "Dark Victory", "The Letter", and "In This Our Lives". Instead, this is a bit noir-ish and has its own set of attributes.Interestingly, it was directed by Paul Henreid, once one of Bette Davis' costars.A mature Bette Davis kills her rich twin sister (a double role) for a variety of reasons. The question is, will she get away with it? Davis turns in a strong performance, as does the boyfriend of the "poor" sister, cop Karl Malden. I'm not a fan of Peter Lawford, but this is one of a few films where he turned in a strong performance, sleazy though his character may be. Other supporting stars simply do their jobs...nothing notable.This is the second time Bette Davis played twin sisters, the other time was 1946's "A Stolen Life". "A Stolen Life" is undoubtedly the better film, but this is not a remake. It is a different story all together.What I didn't like in this film was the early dialog between the two sisters. Frankly, it seemed a bit childish. The rest of the script -- in terms of dialog seemed fine. And, there are several quite delicious plot twists. Make no mistake, this is not a who-done-it. We know who done it from beginning to end, although, as mentioned, there are some surprises along the way. This is a neat little thriller in Davis' later common character -- the witch...or something that rhymes.Although I haven't raised my rating from the original "7" I gave it, on review it's a very strong "7", rather than a very weak "7".

"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.