I watched this because of the featured cast, and they don't disappoint -- but the film itself left me puzzled, unfulfilled and yes, disappointed. It strikes me in retrospect as a set of lovingly-detailed characters in search of a plot.
I've no objection (in principle) to languorous cinema, but I have an unaccountable bourgeois prejudice in favour of stories that actually have a resolution. "The Whales of August" sets up its cast, its location, its history... and, having made us care about the people, then just stops, with a seemingly arbitrary abruptness that felt like a slap to the face. Half a dozen plot strands are left dangling unresolved in an instant's disbelief -- can that really be it? Bette Davis, oddly enough, is more beautiful in old age than she ever was in her heyday, although her speech, affected by a stroke, is sometimes hard to understand. If I hadn't known that this script was a play before ever it was a film, watching her sit stubborn and hostile in her chair as Libby, the 'difficult' sister, I'd probably have assumed that the part had been written specifically for her as a typecast "Bette Davis role". She raps out the acid one-liners with as much aplomb as ever, and convincingly plays blind.
Lillian Gish, on the other hand, has lost her youthful looks entirely... but the camera (or the cameraman) still loves her. It's strange, but as others have said, there are moments when she glows; her silent film technique still shows through. When she is talking, she is a sweet tottery old lady with an occasional streak of assertion -- but when, from time to time, she stops talking to face the camera and just *look*, something suddenly comes into place that wasn't there before. She acts best when she doesn't even speak; and her submissive, normally quiet character definitely steals the film.
Vincent Price is courtly and still unmistakable as the White Russian who claims to have been a nobleman of the Tsar's court, although his story, too (and perhaps his identity?) is left unfinished. Which of the women, if any, is he courting? And where will he find to live? Ann Sothern comes across as much younger than the others, which is disconcerting. She was the only one of the quartet I hadn't seen before, so can't compare against previous work. Her Tisha is an easily-recognisable cheerful voluble type.
Overall I found the film interesting as a set of performances in extreme old age, and as a vehicle for stars I'd once known. But I found the structure intensely frustrating: a lot of backstory is revealed, but none of it ever leads anywhere. The whales of the opening scenes never do come back. Present-day problems are left unsolved -- like the repairs to the water-pipes. If there's something there, I'm missing it.
"The Whales of August" is worth seeing for the actors, but for a meditation on age I prefer a more conventionally structured film such as "Last Orders".
I've no objection (in principle) to languorous cinema, but I have an unaccountable bourgeois prejudice in favour of stories that actually have a resolution. "The Whales of August" sets up its cast, its location, its history... and, having made us care about the people, then just stops, with a seemingly arbitrary abruptness that felt like a slap to the face. Half a dozen plot strands are left dangling unresolved in an instant's disbelief -- can that really be it? Bette Davis, oddly enough, is more beautiful in old age than she ever was in her heyday, although her speech, affected by a stroke, is sometimes hard to understand. If I hadn't known that this script was a play before ever it was a film, watching her sit stubborn and hostile in her chair as Libby, the 'difficult' sister, I'd probably have assumed that the part had been written specifically for her as a typecast "Bette Davis role". She raps out the acid one-liners with as much aplomb as ever, and convincingly plays blind.
Lillian Gish, on the other hand, has lost her youthful looks entirely... but the camera (or the cameraman) still loves her. It's strange, but as others have said, there are moments when she glows; her silent film technique still shows through. When she is talking, she is a sweet tottery old lady with an occasional streak of assertion -- but when, from time to time, she stops talking to face the camera and just *look*, something suddenly comes into place that wasn't there before. She acts best when she doesn't even speak; and her submissive, normally quiet character definitely steals the film.
Vincent Price is courtly and still unmistakable as the White Russian who claims to have been a nobleman of the Tsar's court, although his story, too (and perhaps his identity?) is left unfinished. Which of the women, if any, is he courting? And where will he find to live? Ann Sothern comes across as much younger than the others, which is disconcerting. She was the only one of the quartet I hadn't seen before, so can't compare against previous work. Her Tisha is an easily-recognisable cheerful voluble type.
Overall I found the film interesting as a set of performances in extreme old age, and as a vehicle for stars I'd once known. But I found the structure intensely frustrating: a lot of backstory is revealed, but none of it ever leads anywhere. The whales of the opening scenes never do come back. Present-day problems are left unsolved -- like the repairs to the water-pipes. If there's something there, I'm missing it.
"The Whales of August" is worth seeing for the actors, but for a meditation on age I prefer a more conventionally structured film such as "Last Orders".