Christina Crawford is 83 today!

And Joan would be 118! that's crazy to to think about..

Joan looks flat out amazing in that photo.

I just noticed that they're both wearing the same outfit.

Joan dressed Christina in "twin" outfits all the time.

Cheers! Now go get Mommie another drink

Especially for being 118!

Joan was so pretty before the booze and cigs ruined her looks and turned her into a gargoyle.

GET ME THE AXE!

Happy Birthday! You're 83!?

Axe, bring me the Christina!

She was not one of her FAAAAANS!

Cindy Crawford is 83? 🤔. Sounds about white

^ Larry King.

How is that vile cunt not dead yet

[quote]How is that vile cunt not dead yet

But I am, Blanche, I am!!!

So old!

I did not sent Christina a birthday present for reasons well known to her.

R4- Someone should have written below that photo-

Adopted children are luckiest because they were chosen.

OP- In that photo Joan is saying

Who wants to go swimming ?!

And she gets to keep one present.

My other kids are all dead because heaven needed more angels.

This one is still alive.

Imagine all the time and energy Joan had to put into having those tacky matching outfits made. The poor seamstress!

Happy birthday, Christina!

I'm sorry; I didn't get you anything for reasons that are known to you.

LOL @ r21

Playing the mother of her children was Joan's worst performance ever.

She gets to keep just one present. All the others will be donated to old lesbians less fortunate than her.

Interesting to me, how crawford was obsessed with her looks and youth based on her regimen, yet smoked and drank equally obsessively so having to know it would ruin her looks and affect her career that she was obsessed with... a merry go round of "addictions" in different ways I guess..

Everybody smoked and drank back then.

R28... true, did they not know it would ruin their looks?

r29 I don't think they were fully aware of how bad it was.

[quote]I just noticed that they're both wearing the same outfit.

Oh, but I wore it much better.

[quote]Playing the mother of her children was Joan's worst performance ever.

Tina and Christopher were just from ungrateful, trash stock - probably the progeny of inbred carnys. Too bad Joan didn't keep the receipts, so she could return them to the Tennessee Children's Home Society.

I forgot about that, r32. Joan bought them from Mary Tyler Moore in Tennessee.

I wonder what was the deal with Christina's second husband, producer David Koontz. She was married to him when she wrote Mommy Dearest. How much encouragement did he give her to write the book and was there any input into the book by him?

“Look, I can tell you for a fact it all happened,” interrupted her husband, David, who was sitting nearby. “When I was going with Christina, everybody in Hollywood knew the stories. Everything. A newsman told me how he and other journalists, maybe half a dozen of them, were gathered at a restaurant for a special layout on Christina and her mother years ago.

“Christina and the other kids were fussing like all kids do, the newsman said, when Christina’s mother lost her temper. She got up — and you know how she punished Christina? She slammed the child’s hand in a door.

“I said to the newsman, ‘Why the bleep didn’t you or anybody else do anything? Why the bleep didn’t you write anything? How the bleep can you sit there and tell me that?’ He answered me that Joan Crawford was so powerful, nobody could do anything about it. No one would dare. He just said he’d never seen anything like it, that he got up from the table, went to the men’s room and threw up.”

That sounds like a bullshit story. No one at that time would have blinked an eye at that kind of behavior, let alone written a story about it.

Spanking or slapping a child wasn't considered abusive then. Slamming a child’s hand in a door would have been seen as a completely fucked up thing to do.

[quote]Slamming a child’s hand in a door would have been seen as a completely fucked up thing to do.

Only if you did it repeatedly.

If (and it's a big if) Joan slammed Tina's hand in a door, I bet Tina never did whatever caused Joan to slam her hand in the door ever again.

R3, narcissist starting the mirroring process

Her secret storms these days are in a doctor's report.

Christina was a cunt and Joan was a tough cunt mom. Was she strict to the point of abusive? probably. Was Christina a spoiled, nasty, ungrateful child? probably. Christina is more of a narcissist than Joan. 90% of what CC says happened NEVER HAPPENED.

Get help, R41

Is writing a shocking tell-all about your movie star mother some sort of pact with the devil longer lease on life? Christina Crawford, BD Hyman - both still alive. And Marlene Dietrich's daughter was already pushing 70 when her book came out - and Marlene died like 30 years ago.

When Mommie Dearest came out, Charlie's Angels was still a hit TV show and Jimmy Carter was President.

Joan was an alcoholic. A bipolar alcoholic can fly off the handle and go nuts over trivial things. if she was a blackout drunk then she probably would think Christina was lying.

Marlene's daughter Maria Riva is almost 100 years old. She's older than the Queen!

[quote] She's older than the Queen!

Oh, she's quite a bit older than I am.

Me too!

[quote]Oh, she's quite a bit older than I am.

But your time is coming, Tommie Dearest

OH the book ole Suri could write? Wonder what or if she'll tell the world about daddy dearest when she hits 18?...

I always thought it interesting that Maria Riva never called her mother, mother, but always referred to her as "dietrich"..

R49 Suri won’t be able to write anything about her dad. She’s barely even met him.

R41 Christina may have been spoiled and narcissistic but Joan made her that way

I think Joan was mean to Christina, but she didn't appear to have trouble with the younger twins. They only said nice things about her. Some parents are trouble. Some children are also troubled.

Some people think that Fate gave Miss Joan Crawford exactly the daughter she really wanted.

Yes, you get the kid you deserve.

I'm sorry, I rarely say this about a kid, but that was one UGLY child.

Off-puttingly so.

R52, that happens. Sometimes an abusive parent picks out one kid to abuse. Sometimes as the parent ages he or she develops some empathy or better coping skills.

My Dad's father was abusive with him and his older sibs, but much nicer to the younger ones. Nothing odd about Joan and how the twins had a better experience than Christina.

I think the story is much more complicated. I said this on here before, the tell-all book I would have written about my father 30 years ago is vastly different than the one I would write now. All of those disagreements and misunderstandings and hurtful words take on a different context when you're older and you've had some time to process the past.

I will never say that Joan Crawford was the perfect parent, but we've never read Christina's first draft and we don't know what pressures were put on her to make the book more scandalous. Hell, it may have been a straight up revenge piece. All I'm saying is that we never got Joan's side of the story.

R58, yes because that's usually how it works with child abuse, definitely hold out on believing the victim until the abuser can tell their side of the story, after all, they might have been provoked...

Christina started writing the book when Joan was still alive, and Joan knew about it. Christina has always maintained that she wrote the book after Joan's death, but that's bullshit.

That being said, I don't doubt Christina's version of events. Joan's rough treatment of Christina and Christopher was corroborated by many people who saw it firsthand.

Joan Crawford was an emotionally unstable alcoholic who never should've been allowed to adopt children.

If you've ever known an alcoholic, you know how moody and volatile they can be.

[quote] All I'm saying is that we never got Joan's side of the story.

Actually, in some ways we did. As Christina has said, her story was not a new one, this was published about 20 years before the book.

She never learned that flirting can be..............................(pause).......................................(longer pause).....................taken the wrong way.

[quote][R58], yes because that's usually how it works with child abuse, definitely hold out on believing the victim until the abuser can tell their side of the story, after all, they might have been provoked...

In my mind, there is a difference between between believing child abuse victims and believing stories told in a celebrity tell-all designed for maximum salability.

Team Christina.

The movie, by this time, has probably been reviewed, analyzed and reanalyzed more times than Citizen Kane.