Home > Drama >

Jezebel

Jezebel (1938)

March. 26,1938
|
7.4
|
NR
| Drama Romance

In 1850s Louisiana, the willfulness of a tempestuous Southern belle threatens to destroy all who care for her.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

Moustroll
1938/03/26

Good movie but grossly overrated

More
Maidexpl
1938/03/27

Entertaining from beginning to end, it maintains the spirit of the franchise while establishing it's own seal with a fun cast

More
StyleSk8r
1938/03/28

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.

More
Lucia Ayala
1938/03/29

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

More
TheLittleSongbird
1938/03/30

The main point of interest in Jezebel is that it's the film that garnered Bette Davis her second Oscar. Her performance is also the best thing about the film, although Jezebel still has more to it than Davis' performance.Davis is superb here in a performance that ranks among her best as one of her most flawed but truly fascinating characters. Personally would have given her two Oscars (or at least two more than what she got) for her performances in Now Voyager and All About Eve but cannot deny that she commands the screen superbly, brings complete, blistering conviction to her lines and she is also at her most luminous. She is supported by an excellent cast, with the standouts being the compassionate also Oscar-winning turn of Fay Bainter, who provides the film's moral compass in a way, the always great Donald Crisp who is suitably humble and George Brent in the honourable but also arrogant sort of role. Spring Byinton similarly excels, and Richard Cromwell and Margaret Lindsay make the most of their secondary roles.Jezebel does have more to it than great performances though. It is brilliantly directed by William Wyler, who not only immerses one into the setting but makes one feel like they're part of it. It's also beautifully shot in sumptuous black and white and the 1870s Southern setting is evoked very authentically and elegantly (who can't help love the gowns?). Max Steiner's music score is gloriously romantic and spirit-rousing, while the script is thoughtful, poignant and crackles with fiery tension and the story is completely absorbing in how it's told and how well done the atmosphere is. The characters are all well-written and with remarkable realism, they are flawed characters but with a number of good traits.My only complaints with Jezebel are the ending, which felt out of character and too ambiguously resolved, and a wooden Henry Fonda in a role that was in need of a more formidable touch. Otherwise, it is a very good film indeed that had all the ingredients to be even greater. 8/10 Bethany Cox

More
vincentlynch-moonoi
1938/03/31

First off, to those who criticize comparisons made between this film and "Gone With The Wind". Too bad. Such comparisons are valid. Stop and think -- Bette Davis' Julie is not unlike Scarlett in many ways: frivolous, but when it really counts bucks up and faces overwhelming odds to do what is needed. Take the speech by Henry Fonda's Preston about why the South would lose a civil war...it could have been written by the same screenwriter as Clark Gable's Rhett's speech on the same topic. And, after all, this film was a plum to Bette Davis when she didn't get "GWTW". Some people confuse elements of this film (along with "Band Of Angels") to "GWTW".But there are two things about this film that make it pale in comparison to "GWTW". First, from beginning to end, it pretty much depressing. A leading female character prone to plotting and tantrums. As the tide turns in her life toward the negative, she falls into mild depression. Buck (George Brent) is an ass who constantly engages in duels. And then, yellow fever hits and those who fall ill are sent to a swampy island to die (eventually including the leading male actor -- Henry Fonda). Nothing upbeat here.Second, there's hardly a sympathetic character in the film, making it very difficult to really like almost any of the actors. Bette Davis' character redeems herself only in the last 5 minutes of the film (although that is not to say that Miss Davis' performance is any less fine than many of her others). Henry Fonda's character (and his acting) probably come off best. George Brent's character is so unlikable that I didn't even enjoy Brent's performance (and usually I do). Faye Bainter (as Aunt Belle) and Donald Crisp (as the doctor) are likable enough, but don't get a lot of screen time; they're simply a tool to move the main plot forward. It's nice to see Spring Byington and Eddie "Rochester" Anderson, but they have little to do here.I often enjoy a film in "glorious black and white", but here the difference between the brilliant color of "GWTW" and the drab black and white of "Jesebel" (filmed just one year apart) seems to characterize the memorability of "GWTW" and the comparatively forgotten "Jesebel". Sorry, but "Jesebel" is just another picture...not a bad one...but one to be savored and remembered. I struggle to give it a "7".One thing I find inappropriate in this film is much of the musical score. Frankly, there are many places where it is simply too modern for a period piece.

More
Red_Identity
1938/04/01

After my first Davis film was Al About Eve, I wanted to see some younger Davis. Seeing as how she won the Oscar for this it was only fair. Davis is magnificent. Funnily enough, it did remind me a lot of Scarlett O Hara in Gone with the Wind, and fair enough after I finished it I read that the studio offered Davis this role as an apology of some sorts because she didn't get the now legendary Gone with the Wind role. As it is, I could definitely see Davis as O Hara, and many of the same traits lie in Julie. This is a very good film, although it never really hits greatness, it's still very much worth watching and it's a strong addition to Davis' filmography.

More
zardoz-13
1938/04/02

Bette Davis gives a memorable performance as the eponymous character in director William Wyler's "Jezebel," a tragic tale of rivalry and romance in antebellum Louisiana about a treacherous dame who defies society and flaunts custom to get what she wants. Miss Julie wants handsome banker Preston Dillard. Temperamental, vain, and sagacious, Julie lives to please only herself and to the devil with anybody else. Basically, this is a classic treatment of girl wants guy, girl loses guy, and girl wins guy back of the most unorthodox kind. ScenaristS Clements Ripley, Abem Finkel, and John Huston based their sensational screenplay on Pulitzer Prize winning playwright Owen Davis' drama and there isn't a moment that isn't gripping. Mind you, "Jezebel" is not only set in the pre-Civil War South, but it was produced in Hollywood during the Jim Crow era. The protagonist makes a disparaging remark about sullen African-Americans and Wyler presents the slaves as obsequious and ignorant in their happiness. However, though this casts a pall over the narrative, it doesn't detract from his evocative portrait of a woman who refuses to stop loving her man even when he has taken a marriage vow to another woman. Incredibly enough, "Jezebel" gives a fairly accurate depiction of the troubles that plagued the South in those days before the Civil War. Nobody gives a bad performance and George Brent is particularly good as Buck Cantrell, an arrogant, pretentious blow-hard who receives his comeuppance. Oscar-winning "Gone with the Wind" lenser Ernest Haller makes everything look appropriately cinematic and you can tell who occupies the moral high ground. Wyler stages the duel between Buck Cantrell and Ted Dillard in such a way as to generate undeniable suspense. "Jezebel" is simply brilliant.

More