That thing she does with her hand...
...When Patsy Kelly is banging the back of her hand against the table. How did the director allow her to do this? It's just awkward and weird.
share...When Patsy Kelly is banging the back of her hand against the table. How did the director allow her to do this? It's just awkward and weird.
shareYes, it was very distracting and unnatural. Maybe she did it onstage and it wasn't so noticeable, but on the screen it was silly.
shareI disagree and thought it was compelling. I'm glad I was distracted by the character's acting-out, if anything. Today, viewers seem to want things diluted ("understated") which i think is unfortunate. With that type of panic, stress and anxiety, you'd be surprised that your fist doesn't go through the table. Yet, I wonder if this was made today, whether the same viewers would find it distracting and unnatural.
Um, when NANCY Kelly did that I thought it was to punctuate her distress at that mooment, but that had to hurt. The way she slapped her hand against the table before she got up to go to the door was hard.
shareI thought she overacted badly.
shareI agree. She is a terrible actress, and her voice is like fingernails scraping on a blackboard!
shareI am formerly known as HillieBoliday....Member since May 2006
How would you react if you knew your pretty 8 year old daughter was a psychotic killer and a pathological liar!
In the book, Rhoda had already killed a couple of people. I don't think the father was as aware as her mother. Her parents had to keep moving from place to place to try to hide the monster that their daughter had become! They had to keep changing her schools! Every time they moved, it was because they were told Rhoda was not allowed to come back at the end of the school session.
For the time the book, the successful stage production and the movie were presented; if the parents had exposed Rhoda for the murderer she really is, they would've possibly been ostracized from society/friends, there would've been major scandal, public humiliation, a media circus and God only knows what else.
The strain of knowing her child was a monster, trying to keep it from the public, living in some denial, living with the guilt of the multiple murders committed by Rhoda; and her own complicity in not reporting her own child to the authorities.....made Christine a crazed individual herself! Her husband had to travel to earn their living and was always gone; so Christine had to bear this all by herself. Even to this day, some parents, although they don't want to admit it.....are doing double time trying to hide their psychotic children from the public....and then when they commit a heinous act, i.e. Columbine, Sandy Hook, etc., they falsely claim.....'didn't know anything was wrong!'
I think her tension, stressed, nervous filled performance conveyed a normal reaction to that tremendous turmoil in her life....excellent portrayal!
"OOhhhooo....I'M GON' TELL MAMA!"
In the book, Rhoda had already killed a couple of people. I don't think the father was as aware as her mother. Her parents had to keep moving from place to place to try to hide the monster that their daughter had become! They had to keep changing her schools! Every time they moved, it was because they were told Rhoda was not allowed to come back at the end of the school session.
I am formerly known as HillieBoliday....Member since May 2006
Thanks for clearing up my comment. It's been a long time since I read the book; and I was quite fuzzy on the details. They really are important to understanding how complex Rhoda was and the impact she had on her family and her environment.
I can't remember if the book describes Rhoda as the little blond haired blue eyed beauty that she is portrayed in the film. Gotta go dig out my copy📖!
"OOhhhooo....I'M GON' TELL MAMA!"
I think it's clear. Christine knows in the deepest part of her gut that something is wrong here. Very wrong. It's extremely subtle, but it's there allright. This is the mother's natural instinct and Nancy Kelly conveys the instinct with terrifying conviction.
Christine knows in her most worried and panicked heart of hearts that the daughter that she loves so very much is a cold-blooded serial killer. And it did not take Claude Daigel's death to begin to open Christine's eyes to what was happening at a whole other level. At the Fern School picnic at the beginning, Christine asks Miss Fern about Rhoda "Yes, but as a person, how does she fit in with the other children? Is she popular?" This is not an idle line of questioning going on here. She is clearly worried and the effect is pure omen. It's a very subtle feeling at the beginning, but Christine KNOWS... And Nancy Kelly plays her part with a kind of heartbreaking terror and that hand being brought down violently on the piece of furniture is the culmination of her really quite emotionally brilliant performance. The dramatic precision that Nancy Kelly illustrates the exact high key moment of total hysteria with is absolute and final. "Could it be any worse than that... and now she is DRIVING ME MAD!!! I get chills every time I watch her do it. It is absolutely riveting.
Christine knows in the deepest part of her gut that something is wrong here. Very wrong. It's extremely subtle, but it's there allright. This is the mother's natural instinct and Nancy Kelly conveys the instinct with terrifying conviction.
_____________
You know Mr. H, as much as I enjoy The Bad Seed and the performances, I don't go with the notion of a child being born bad, like this sensational film depicts or endorses. Being the cynic I am, I think that is just a cop-out and comes down to a lack of parental responsibility, projection of unrealistic expectations and a lack of "genuine" concern for how one's child can turn out. Christine would have been a narcissist herself.
The extreme sociopathic qualities that Rhoda possessed made for a heightened and interesting character; but to my mind, if Rhoda did turn out the way she did—I realize some people can be opportunists and I put much of this down to role model conditioning and also environment—if I were to feel instinctual about this situation, Christine would have had a large helping hand in how her daughter turned out. Kelly acting out her character and scenario was believable as it was written; but her "decent" character as a mother of a soulless daughter doesn't gel with me.
Exorcist: Christ's power compels you. Cast out, unclean spirit.
Destinata:💩
I don't recall that part of the scene.
shareThe "awkward and weird" part is what I thought made it work so brilliantly.
Her psycho daughter (whom she feels a need to protect) just killed Leroy by setting him on fire, with Christine seeing the man screaming and burning to death. Christine was not in any kind of normal state at that point, so the bizarre hand wringing went along with her semi-deranged state (IMO).
I am formerly known as HillieBoliday....Member since May 2006
You are exactly CORRECT! Brilliant performance for what her character was dealing with!
"OOhhhooo....I'M GON' TELL MAMA!"
[deleted]
Every character has their own brand of psychosis, Christine's 'father' might have been worst of all.
shareThe more I see this movie, the more I realize that Nancy Kelly was a terrible actress. And no, I don't buy that she was "overacting" because she was used to being onstage. Her gestures and the way she moved her arms were very strange and unnatural. The reason why is that there are three levels to acting--voice, facial expression, body--and she never mastered all three at the same time, kind of like someone being unable to walk and chew gum at the same time. Sometimes her gestures don't match her voice, sometimes her voice doesn't match her facial expressions, sometimes her expressions don't match her gestures, etc. At least one of these components are off most of the time.
shareI totally agree that she couldn't act. I found myself wanting to turn the film off repeatedly because her performance in every single one of the scenes was not a natural way to move or to talk. The way she kept grabbing at her father was really icky, too. The only thing I can say where I wasn't thinking she was just so unnatural was reading the book. But, even then, I didn't like her voice...but I could let that slide as I've known some people whose voice sounded like that. Hell, I don't like my voice, but I can't really change it. But they made a conscious effort to cast her in this role, which was not a secondary role or anything and I feel it ruined the entire film for me. I didn't mind the little girl, but I thought her staged dialogue was just too ridiculous, even for a methodical killer child. The only one I thought who did a great job was Henry Jones as the caretaker guy. I honesty don't see why this film has the hype that surrounds it. To me it was less enjoyable than a lot of B sci-fi ones of the same era.
share