Why so much hype?

It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

Back in 2012, Kathy Lee Gifford produced and wrote the songs for a musical about Aimee Semple McPherson's life called "Scandalous". While it was a huge bomb, it won a Tony nomination for its terrific leading star, Carolee Carmello, and I found it to be hugely underrated, if not a masterpiece. Kathy Lee said in an interview that she did a ton of research on Aimee Semple McPherson's life, including watching this well received TV movie, but commented that it only focused on Aimee's scandalous kidnapping claims in 1928 which were questioned by the Los Angeles district attorneys as being fraudulent. The musical surrounded its story of Aimee's entire life with the kidnapping trial, having Aimee continuing her Pentecostal services in spite of the pending verdict, and the aftermath of that verdict to which was famously said, "Let her be judged in the court of public opinion". One thing struck me about the casting of both Aimee and her mother, Mildred Ona Pearce Kennedy, was the resemblances of both the TV Aimee (Faye Dunaway) and the stage Aimee (Carmello) to the real deal even though they do not resemble each other. On the other hand, Bette Davis and the stage Mildred (Candy Buckley) highly resembled each other, and in other stage vehicles I've seen Ms. Buckley in, she seems to be the only woman female impersonator who does Davis, both seriously and comically. Interesting to note that Mildred's maiden name was Pearce, considering the fact that Davis was offered (and turned down) the Joan Crawford Oscar winning vehicle "Mildred Pierce". Davis made it clear that she found Dunaway difficult to work with and not a very good actress, and as much as I agree with Ms. Davis on some things, Dunaway not being a good actress is NOT one of them. Perhaps demanding in real life, Dunaway has always been commanding in her performances, and she is someone you never take your eyes off of. Her beauty was made for the movie camera, and before she went down the road of camp as Crawford in "Mommie Dearest", she had a sincerity and femininity like few other 1970's stars. Even in her melodramatic or bitchy roles ("Chinatown" and "Network"), there was always something alluring about her. As Aimee. she does command every moment where she is on the podium preaching, and when she reveals the claims about her kidnapping, she is so sincere that you too begin to wonder "How can she be lying?" even when it seems that there is no way that she could be telling the truth.A Dunaway/Davis pairing, even with the alleged animosity, is filled with sparks. Davis commands the screen with those eyes; Dunaway's mouth is what drives you to watch her. They have mostly warm scenes together, but when Davis confronts her over the possible lies, you get the hints that Mildred Kennedy did not know for sure. Hugs between the two are heated as well, making you want to check out both of their hands for knives. As the attorneys involved in the case, James Sloyan and James Woods have a disgust on their face towards McPherson that reveal so much more than whether they believe her to be lying or not, just their disgust over her entire existence and the manipulation of the public that crammed into McPherson's services. The 1920's details seem perfect as well. I was surprised that the Emmy's totally snubbed this as it seems to be the type of film that would get as much glory at Hollywood award shows as Aimee would feel on the platform that allegedly cured many as well as the thousands it brought to righteousness.

Where fiction leaves off, truth is stranger still. See this movie, then find a good biography, whichever you choose I recommend "The Verdict is In" by Raymond L.Cox as a companion volume. The REAL mystery is why Asa Keyes the prosecutor and Assistant District Attorney, Joseph Ryan were so intent on going after Aimee and her mother. They are supposed to uphold the law and not use the newspapers to abuse their position.The Mayor of Douglas AZ, and almost all citizens there confirmed Aimee's initial condition as being consistent with the ordeal she claimed to have suffered.Five Carmel California witnesses were obtained by Ryan. He wanted to prove Kenneth Ormiston and Aimee Semple McPherson were shacked up together in a seaside cottage there. First Ryan searched for people who at least got a brief glimpse of the couple living in the said cottage particularly the "woman with Ormiston," the assumed Aimee Semple McPherson. Ryan had a stack of varying Aimee photos as provided by the newspapers and then showed them to the prospective witnesses one photograph at a time. Once the witness finally agreed that a photo resembled the "woman with Ormiston," Ryan would have his "identification" that Aimee was seen in Carmel, with Ormiston. At least three other witnesses, the landlord for one, the town sheriff for another, who were less than 30-100 feet away, more like 8-10 feet; who saw the "woman with Ormiston," without her driving goggles and hat i.e. they actually got a good look, testified she was NOT Aimee.As for the grocery slips, the police had photo-stats, their hand writing expert said it was Aimee's; the defense testified and demonstrated with a hand writing expert of their own, the slips were "doctored." The slips also were in the cottage yard two months surviving dew, fog and lawn maintenance before they were "found."

A bigger budget and an expanded narrative might have made "The Disappearance of Aimee" a dandy theatrical mystery. In 1926, Protestant female minister--and popular radio evangelist--Aimee Semple McPherson disappeared from the waters off a Southern California beach and remained missing for just over a month. She later turned up in Douglas, Arizona telling a wild story about being kidnapped for a $500,000 ransom. Because two men drowned in the ocean while searching for McPherson's body, an unstoppable prosecutor called her before the court, believing she was actually dallying with a married man. Faye Dunaway's lead performance is good, not great; she has a lengthy monologue in her hospital room which could be called a mini tour de force, yet her religious exaltations before her adoring believers are rote, and her relationship with her hovering mother (portrayed by Bette Davis) is sketchily drawn. This TV production, once considered eventful programming, now looks puny in scope, with an uncertain direction and variable performances. We often don't know how to take the characters, and the editing is so shapeless that the flashbacks, in particular, fail to make much of an imprint.

"Superb." "Spellbinding." Those highly complimentary adjectives can be ascribed rightly to the 1976 made-for-television movie "The Disappearance of Aimee", which covers the trial (and the circumstances leading up to it)of celebrated evangelist Aimee Semple McPherson, whose disappearance for over a month from May to June in 1926 sparked a nationwide manhunt. (At first, it was presumed that she had drowned; then, that she had been kidnapped.) Round-the-clock prayer vigils were held for Aimee's safe return, and Aimee's mother, ever the opportunist, capitalized very profitably upon her daughter's "probable watery demise."However, a less-than-desirable reason came to light for Aimee's vanishing act. Aimee was apparently involved romantically with her radio engineer Kenneth Ormiston, a married man. Another unfortunate by-product of the rescue effort for her were the drowning deaths of two of the searchers.Therefore, a bill of indictment was returned against Aimee and her mother, Minnie Kennedy, charging them both with obstruction of justice.The movie itself is an interesting collage of silent movie titles, newsreel-type snippets, and is filmed in black-and-white, as well as in color. The sets and costumes are authentic; the filming itself redolent of the style used in the 1930's and 1940's. The most outstanding feature, though, is the deportment of the actors; they do not slouch, mumble, use obscenities nor any other incongruous expressions. They behave, and express themselves faithfully in accordance with the mores of that period.The film switches very smoothly between the testimony of the sensational trial and the equally peculiar events leading up to it. the cast of characters is "a marriage made in Heaven"; each individual player fits perfectly in the role, and suitably complements the others.Faye Dunaway is dynamic as the flamboyant female evangelist, Aimee Semple McPherson. the electricity of her performance at a revival service is almost palpable, and Ms. Dunaway captures to perfection all of the nuances (conniving opportunism, ecstatic exaltation, counterfeit wounded innocence) of Aimee Semple McPherson's complex, carefully-constructed stage persona.Bette Davis (as Minnie Kennedy, Aimee's mother) adds a new dimension to the term "control freak." Her performance as the cold, calculating, domineering mother is masterful - and pure Bette Davis.James Sloyan is excellent as the hard-hitting District Attorney Asa Keyes, whose ruthless, unrelenting style of cross-examination seeks to disclose all of the sordid details of the supposed kidnapping. James Wood (who plays the Assistant District Attorney, Joseph Ryan) gives his usual taut, tense performance, culminating in a courtroom screaming match from the witness stand with Sister Aimee when he becomes exercised over her obvious lies.Lelia Goldoni (as Emma Shaffer, Sister Aimee's secretary) is convincingly prim and pious: unshakable in her testimony (while being pounded with embarrassing questions by the prosecutor), and unswervingly loyal in her devotion to her employer and mentor, Aimee Semple McPherson.Barry Brown (as Wallace Moore, a young reporter for the Santa Barbara Press) certainly does not disappoint, turning out his usual talented, professional performance as a nervous, eager-beaver, very kinetic newspaperman who is deployed by his city editor to wait at a spot nearby on the Pacific Coast Highway for the advent of Kenneth Ormiston and Aimee Semple McPherson (both of whom are reported to be traveling that stretch of road south from San Luis Obispo, after hiding out together in a secret "love nest" in Carmel.) Moore is then to confront, and identify the runaway lovers - thus scoring a master coup for the local newspaper.In his youthful eagerness, however, Moore (who has waved down Ormiston's car) bungles the event, and does not get a clear look at Ormiston's passenger. First, he is pressed by the prosecutor for an identification of the mystery woman (which he cannot supply.)Afterward, when the defense attorney grills Moore as to whether or not he identified the female passenger in Ormiston's car to his city editor as Aimee Semple McPherson, the fidgety Moore's nerves break, and he practically wails, defensively: "Yes! I said in my opinion that it wasn't Aimee!" - thus causing one of the first significant defeats for the prosecution's case.William Jordan (as Kenneth Ormiston, Sister Aimee's lover/radio engineer) is a man very sure of himself, and unctuously agreeable (particularly to Aimee's mother, who hates him and fires him, perceiving rightly the threat that he represents to Aimee's (and her)lucrative ministry.Other actors of note are John Lehne (who plays the deceptively soft-spoken, yet resolutely cynical Police Capt. Herman Cline; Severn Darden (as S.I. Gilbert, the defense attorney for Sister Aimee and her mother); and Sandy Ward (Judge Blake, who presides over the proceedings.)After a enervating two-month trial (at which critical evidence important to the prosecution cannot be introduced, since during the Grand Jury hearing prior, a female juror sympathetic to Aimee had stolen and destroyed it), District Attorney Asa Keyes wearily moves to drops all charges against the defendants (citing lack of evidence), and on January 10, 1927, Sister Aimee and her mother are, in effect, exonerated (at least in the eyes of their devoted followers.)The movie very skillfully describes a vignette from the life of a celebrated pre-Depression-era religious leader/performer, and also affords the viewer a glimpse into the world (sometimes gloomy, sometimes colorful) of the evangelist - before the age in which evangelism became a televised media event.Still vibrant after an absence of 30 years, "The Disappearance of Aimee" is truly a rare, sparkling gem of a film; definitely do not miss this excellent movie.