Queen Bee

1955 "She's so excitingly good . . . when she's so wonderfully bad!"
6.7| 1h35m| NR| en
Details

A devilish Southern woman, married to a man who despises her, manages to manipulate those around her under the guise of being kind. But, when her sister-in-law is engaged to be married to the woman's former lover and her husband starts up an affair with her cousin, visting from New York, things start to go awry and she sets a plan to destroy it all.

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Reviews

MoPoshy Absolutely brilliant
Zandra The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.
Geraldine The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.
Cheryl A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.
bkoganbing I think I'm not going too far out on a limb when I say that Joan Crawford probably did Queen Bee as a favor to screenwriter Ranald MacDougall who wrote the film that was her greatest success and brought Joan the Academy Award for Best Actress. I'm referring of course to Mildred Pierce. Queen Bee was going to be MacDougall's directing debut as well and I'm sure Crawford did this one for a friend.As a director MacDougall just gave Crawford her head and she just chewed the scenery right down to the foundations. It was that kind of part and her overacting also covered up a really bad melodramatic story.Crawford's cousin Lucy Marlow comes to live with Crawford and her alcoholic husband Barry Sullivan and their two children. It becomes rather apparent soon enough that Crawford sadistically manipulates events and people around her almost as a hobby. She's miserable and she can't stand anyone around who is truly happy. She even engages sadistic nanny Katherine Anderson for her kids. The film such as it is belongs to Joan Crawford who dominates the film totally. Her friend MacDougall to say the least didn't write a screenplay that was anything close to Mildred Pierce. Hence Crawford had to take up the slack.Joan's performance carries the film a couple of notches up from where it should be. Definitely a must for her fans.
PudgyPandaMan This is Joan at her nastiest. Don't come here looking for lighthearted fare because there is none. I know that "nastiness" is one of Joan's specialties. If you are to believe "Mommie Dearest" it must be because she had a lot of that in her to begin with.Some people love to watch people at their nastiest, but I find them a little hard to tolerate after 20-30 minutes.I did like the cinematography and elaborate sets. The costumes were gorgeous on all the woman, but of course Joan is showcased in the finest. The southern mansion is a sight to behold as well.I didn't care much for Barry Sullivan as Crawford's husband. He seemed very wooden and mechanical in his dialogue.There isn't any pleasantness to be had in the whole entire movie. Just a lot of nastiness, deceit, infidelity and lying. So don't watch this if you want lighthearted entertainment or a deep, convincing plot.
marcslope And you're not, Joan, in this Gothic 1955 soap. Joan's a Northerner who married into Southern aristocracy and rules the Tara-like mansion with threats, sarcasm, deceit, and in one memorable take, a quite real-looking slap at a prettier young actress. That's Lucy Marlow, who actually has what's probably the lead role in terms of length. But the focus is Joan, Joan, Joan, and while her evil-bitch persona is always entertaining--at this point in her career, she'd determined it was the way her fans wanted to see her, and she wasn't shy about pouring on the acid--it's not a very energetic or convincing movie. The children, for one thing. Aside from the fact that they're at least 20 years too young to be Joan's children (and Tim Hovey is an unusually annoying '50s kid actor), their relationship with the parental units isn't spelled out at all. What's their father (Barry Sullivan)'s attitude toward them, and vice versa? And is the ending meant to be, like, happy? And how are we supposed to feel about Jud (John Ireland)--hero or heel? It's like writer-director Ranald MacDougall just wanted to paste together a medley of evil-Joan moments and didn't really care whether the continuity made any sense. There are some memorable images, though, and a bevy of ugly '50s fashions, and the usual fawning over how lovely La Crawford is even though she isn't. That ought to keep you amused through the lulls.
fimimix I really think that Ms. Crawford ("Eva Phillips") kept a bunch of writers on-salary to write these movies particularly for her. Randall MacDougall certainly was one of those ! Can't you see her deciding which lines to "keep" and which ones to "ditch" ?? "Avery Phillips" (Barry Sullivan) was truly good in his alcoholic role - didn't you know the end of the movie would involve a car-accident when he picked up "Eva's" keys from his desk? I really didn't understand why the niece committed suicide - it was plain to me that "Eva" had hitched-up with every male in The South. John Ireland ("Judson Prentiss") was good in his role, as were Betsy Palmer and all the rest.The star of the show, of course, is the wardrobe Ms. Crawford wears. I recall the TV-appeal they had her to do for poor people all around the world, some time ago. Everyone in the world could have, at that time, been fed if they just hocked the necklace she was wearing. True Crawford ! "Poor people, but keep you hands off my necklace !"Yeah, the drag-queens really got some fodder for their acts, especially the fabulous Charles Pearce, who did an act about a bitch-fight between Bette Davis and Crawford, just by turning his wig around......but by using his own material. For those of you who didn't have the privilege of seeing Pearce perform, you missed some great talent....almost as famous as the ladies he mimicked.You weren't aware that the lighting for this movie were designed to highlight Crawford's eyes - thick brows, or not ?I think this film was a story of Crawford's real life - her own daughter couldn't sit through it. I loved "Queen Bee", because it made me laugh at such meanness, although I've known a lot of those people, too. You gotta admit one thing: NO ONE does "queen of mean" like Crawford did. Today's actresses don't have it in them to be mean AND glamorous - younger people may not realize that movies, in those days, ALWAYS had lines in them to say "how beautiful" the leading lady was.I'm not a hard-core fan of hers, but I truly enjoyed Crawford in "Queen Bee". Bravo to all!