The Bad Seed (1956) Poster

(1956)

User Reviews

Review this title
253 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
The devil wore dotted swiss.
pocca27 April 2005
Minor 1950's classic that holds up well fifty year later. The film does have its flaws. Occasionally it has the feel of a staged play--at times it seems Mrs. Penmark has to answer the door every five minutes so as to get the other major characters on screen. The Freudian psychobabble and the altered ending add an unnecessary half hour or so to the running time. And the acting can be very overwrought (although the scene in which Mrs. Penmark is screaming in the apartment as Leroy screams outside--both counterpointed by Rhoda's untalented but very loud rendition of "Au Clair de la Lune"--is a moment of high camp horror on par with anything in "Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?") Still the movie works, largely because of Rhoda, the eerily self controlled little murderess who despite her sweet smiles always looks at though her hair is braided a bit too tight. It helps that an actress was cast who was cute enough, but not too pretty--Patty McCormack looks like a miniature gargoyle when she drops the sunny mask and starts roaring. Leroy, the leering simple minded caretaker is almost as unsettling--the scenes in which he sadistically taunts Rhoda almost amount to a very twisted flirtation, as he is clearly more delighted than appalled by her capacity for evil (at least until he learns just how far this capacity goes).

I haven't seen the 1980's remake, but I can't see how it could top the original, if only because evil little girls in jeans and T-shirts just aren't as scary as evil little girls with hair bows and starched frocks.
54 out of 61 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Evil knows no age.
lewiskendell23 November 2011
"Now there's a little ray of sunshine, that one."

An occasionally riveting movie from the 50's about a sunny, charming, sociopathic little girl and her mother's desperate attempts to protect her and hide her nature. The Bad Seed sometimes makes the mistake of focusing too much on the dull adults, but overall, it's a solid movie. Good acting all around, and unlike similar modern movies like Orphan, The Bad Seed gets better as it goes along instead of imploding into an absurd mess. It feels a lot like a play, which is natural due to its evolution from novel to stage-play to film. 

I thought The Bad Seed was a sinister (and relatively timeless) gem of the 50's, and I'm sure it was quite controversial in its time. The ending was changed because of the Hays Code, in fact, and feels a bit like a cop-out as a result, but not to the extent of ruining what came before. Check it out if you're interested.
8 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Does Pure Evil Emanate from the Environment or Does It Originate from Heredity?
romanorum11 March 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Cute little eight-year old Rhoda Penmark (Patty McCormack), with the long blonde pigtails and big blue eyes, seems like any typical child her age. She always wears dresses, is polite, and even curtsies. Rhoda can even roller skate. But anyone that crosses her the wrong way is in danger, danger for his life. Rhoda is not beyond lying, cheating, or murdering. The scratchy-voiced, strained and suspicious mother Christine (Nancy Kelly) suspects that she herself was adopted into the nice Bravo family from a family of criminals. Is it possible that she has passed on her evil genes to Rhoda? After all, the amoral child has no conscience: she can readily read a child's book right after causing a drowning or she can play a musical piece on the piano after causing someone to burn to death.

The Bad Seed may have been a bit talky and theatrical as it was adopted from a Broadway play with many of the original actors. For instance, ten-year old Patty McCormack reprised her role. Nevertheless it can be a bit unnerving for any parent of a young child who wonders how she will turn out. The subject matter is so difficult and the tension so obvious that the film director had the cast take bows after the movie's end. Both Patty McCormack and Eileen Heckart deservedly received Oscar nominations for Best Supporting Actress.

By the way, what does the Nordic-looking Patty McCormack have in common with Cathy Carr, Dodie Stevens, Little Peggy March, Penny Marshall, and Bernadette Peters? The answer is that they are all Italian-Americans. Patty McCormack was born Patricia Ellen Russo in Brooklyn, New York.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Assured portrayals of real characters in an amazingly chilling film!
The_Void5 May 2006
Warning: Spoilers
What we have here is a fantastic classic horror film, which benefits from great performances from all concerned and a plot not typical of serial killer films. The film doesn't adhere to convention and builds its story around an idea that was frightening for the time - and still is to this day. The murderer in this film is as evil as any other; the only difference being that here the killings are committed by a decidedly amoral child. The film presents a good portrait of its star, as it presents its ideas very much from a child's point of view. The young girl doesn't see what she's doing as wrong as she is always given a reason to pass on the blame for wrongdoings, and this always comes across in a plausible way. The plot surrounding the atrocities is even more interesting than the central idea, as we follow the torment inflicted on the girl's mother. The situation that Christine Penmark finds herself in is the stuff of nightmares; just what can you do if you find that your eight year old child has committed murder? The Bad Seed makes excellent use of this dilemma, and the fact that it's incredibly easy to buy into the plot ensures that The Bad Seed prevails as an potently chilling film.

The film is based on a stage play by Maxwell Anderson, and this comes across often as the film takes place in just a few settings and the whole thing is very stagy. This is, however, to its benefit; as the locations make the whole piece more claustrophobic, and the fact that we don't see the murders themselves benefits the film immensely as it allows the audience to spend more time considering the implications; which are what the film is actually about. The main reason why this film works so well is down to a great performance by talented child actor Patricia McCormack. McCormack presents a portrayal that finds exactly the right pitch between the sweet and innocent youngster that she appears; and the dark persona that lies just beneath her exterior. Nancy Kelly similarly gives a defining performance as her tortured mother, and excellently puts across a torrent of emotion. The acting is typically melodramatic, but all the cast somehow manage to keep their acting down to earth. Every scene in the movie is perfectly pitched and nothing is wasted as we are continually taught more about the characters and their situations. The climax to the film is fabulously poetic, despite being implemented on the producer's orders and overall, I really don't see much wrong with this film. Highly recommended!
94 out of 103 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Another '50s movie way ahead of its time!!!
PeachHamBeach16 August 2003
Warning: Spoilers
As the closing statement says, "This motion picture presents a premise that is daringly different."

It may seem to be a self-indulgent thing to say, but in 1956, a film about an angelic looking child named Rhoda Penmark (the remarkable Patty McCormack, whose performance is absolutely brilliant, vicious, and mercurial...she transforms with ease from a sweetie-pie to a bristling monster and back to a sweetie-pie), complete with cutesy dresses, disarming curtsies, and blonde braids, who in fact is a homicidal, amoral murderer, was indeed "daringly different". After the generation of Shirley Temple's angelic dresses and bouncy curles and darling dimples, the idea of a perfectly beautiful little girl being a chillingly cold killer is unnerving to say the least. I love this movie, the controversy surrounding its theme: is a murderous personality inherited???

The book HIDEAWAY by Dean Koontz may have been inspired by this classic B&W film. Koontz describes the malefactor in that book in much the same way little Rhoda is contemplated in this film. Something missing in their genetic codes. "The fundementals of nucleotides, DNA proteins..."

As in HIDEAWAY, where the reader was shocked to discover that Vassago's grandpa was a maniac who slaughtered his family, we discover in THE BAD SEED that there was a grandmother back in Christine's (Nancy Kelly) family who methodically murdered her own brood and then calmly left the country, never to be heard from again.

Just the sight of little Rhoda in that infamous scene with the ex-con/yardman LeRoy is enough to have your hair standing on end: "YOU GIVE ME MY SHOES!!! THEY'RE MINE!!! GIVE THEM TO ME NOW, LEROY!!! RIGHT HERE TO ME!!!" Ooh!!! {{{Shiver}}}!!! That is one nasty little seed, that is!!! And not one any sensible person would dare mess with. Poor LeRoy learns this the hard way.

Not a film for the easily upset or faintish. It's not a horror movie, but laden with truly horrific scenes. The "daringly different" premise is brilliant and far ahead of its time of the sweet, Mrs. Cleaver 1950s.

A+
74 out of 84 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Staginess is not a flaw here
BrandtSponseller8 June 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Christine Penmark (Nancy Kelly) is the daughter of a famous writer, Richard Bravo (Paul Fix). She's married to Kenneth (William Hopper), a military Colonel who seems to spend most of his time away from home, usually on short-term call in some other city. The landlady of their apartment building, Monica Breedlove (Evelyn Varden), is obsessed with psychology, having even been analyzed by Freud. Because of this, she courts friendships with other intellectuals, including a criminology author, Reginald Tasker (Gage Clarke). But by far the most important character is Christine's young daughter, Rhoda (Patricia McCormick).

Rhoda is oddly adult in her behavior. She goes out of her way to excel at everything she does, to be prim and proper, to seem amicable and innocent. However, in the wake of one of Rhoda's classmates falling victim to a drowning accident while on a school picnic, suspicion falls on Rhoda. As more facts come out, Christine realizes with horror that her child just might be a "bad seed".

A tightly focused ensemble piece, heavy on dialogue and taking place primarily in one interior location, The Bad Seed is one of the better but more understated horror films from the 1950s. Because of its ideas, its unusual portrayal of a manipulatively "evil" child (and a weirdly cute young girl at that), and its nihilistic and abruptly mind-blowing ending, The Bad Seed was quite a shocking film in 1956. In my book, it still is. That's not to say that the film is graphic. Much more so than, say, The Haunting (1963), The Bad Seed is the classic example of how something implied and not shown can be just as effective and disturbing as something shown.

Still, not everyone loves it, of course. "Staginess" is often cited with either a direct claim or an implication that that quality is necessarily a flaw. The Bad Seed's "staginess" is easily explicable. It is a film adaptation of a play by Maxwell Anderson, which was itself adapted from William March's last novel, published in 1954. It's easy to see how only minor changes would allow the film to be performed on a stage. However, I don't see The Bad Seed's staginess as a flaw. It's not as if plays are bad merely for the fact that they're plays, right? There seems to be some unspoken or unanalyzed attendant assumption that cinema shouldn't bear strong similarities to other artistic media and/or a belief that cinema should always be "naturalistic". I don't agree with either of those assumptions. Cinema can do many different things. It shouldn't all just be one way or another.

Rather than being a flaw, the staginess of The Bad Seed is an asset. It catalyzed the effective "tell, don't show" attitude towards the film's violence. It allows all attention to be placed on the fantastic ensemble performances, and especially on McCormack, who turns in the best young female performance this side of Dakota Fanning. And it helps make the film feel like the parable that it is.

Under director Mervyn LeRoy's hand, The Bad Seed is an extended meditation on two philosophical ideas--twisted psychologies and the nature versus nurture debate. It's not just Rhoda who has psychologically-rooted problems and dysfunctions, but everyone in the film. Christine is in denial, and shows that she has long been in denial, about her happiness, her life and her daughter. She continually tries to act as if everything is kosher and normal, but as the film progresses, she has periodic cracks in the armor, until the "breakdown" at the end--and even in the midst of that, she tries to act as if everything is okay and mundane. Monica, who keeps trying to psychoanalyze everyone (except the one person she most needs to psychoanalyze), tends to also intellectually browbeat or overpower them. Kenneth is an absentee husband. Leroy Jessup (Henry Jones), the apartment maintenance man, presents himself as just as twisted, deceptive and manipulative as Rhoda, and there is a pedophile subtext with the character. Claudia Fern (Joan Croydon), the head of Rhoda's school, seems on the verge of a nervous breakdown, and also seems to be in denial, as does Christine's father Richard, who also has elements of absenteeism and emotional distancing. Hortense Daigle (Eileen Heckart), the mother of the drowned boy, is an alcoholic, and her tragedy puts her over the edge. In fact, the only character in the entire film who seems well-adjusted is Reginald, and perhaps that's symbolic of his function as a criminologist.

The nature versus nurture material is incorporated in an unusual way. Characters debate this to an extent, but most take the nurture side. However, the film itself makes more of an argument for the nature side, and Christine, despite being in denial, comes to believe the nature side, as does Reginald, the even-keeled character. In fact, William March (the author of the novel) believed more in the nature side, and said as much to colleagues while he was working on the book, including doing research into psychotic killers.

What helps to amp up the disturbing qualities of the film is that Rhoda is manipulating the audience as well as she is manipulating other characters. Only very seldom does LeRoy have her "true nature" come through, and it's a shock to us in the same way that it's a shock to the other characters. The ending of the book was changed to be in line with the "moral code" for Hollywood films at the time, but the resultant, somewhat bizarre ending, is probably more shocking in retrospect than March's original ending would have been. There have been many horror films over the years with endings somewhat similar to March's. There haven't been many that end in quite the same way that The Bad Seed does.

While the film would certainly require a bit of adjustment for many younger modern horror fans, it is well worth watching, especially if you've become acclimated to slower-paced, dramatic, understated horror.
99 out of 116 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Good Film Despite Mixed Feelings
utgard1429 October 2013
While I do enjoy this film and recognize its importance on countless imitators, I did have some quibbles about it. For starters, as others have pointed out, the movie has a distinct stagey quality to it. Obviously it was based off of a play and that might account for it. It even used many of the same actors from the play. Still, one would think a veteran film director like Mervyn LeRoy would do a better job adapting it to a different medium. Another complaint I have is something that is generally seen as one of the film's positives: the performance of Eileen Heckart. She was even nominated for an Oscar for her performance. However, to me she is very over the top and unbelievable. My previous experience with Mrs. Heckart was mostly from her television work, which I always found enjoyable. Here her role is that of a grieving mother driven to drink. She is drunk in all of her scenes I believe. That exaggerated drunken behavior might play well for the stage, but on screen it comes across as a little cartoonish for such serious material.

Still, despite minor problems the movie works and works well. It moves along at a good pace, telling the creepy and sometimes chilling story of this little girl who is "born evil." Time and countless other films about evil kids might lessen the impact of this story just a bit for some, but I find it all holds up quite well. Rhoda Penmark is rotten through and through. You find her annoying at first, then quickly realize there's something unnerving about her. Some might find fault with the concept of genetic evil and reject the film on that basis alone. I don't necessarily adhere to it myself but it doesn't bother me to explore alternative ideas or theories, especially in works of fiction.

One final note: another complaint I've seen is that the movie changes the ending of the play and novel. Without spoiling that for you, I'll just say both endings have merit but I actually think the movie ending works best.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Vividly memorable
the_old_roman27 August 2001
My daughter, Rachel, always found this the most frightening movie she ever saw, and from a psychological perspective, it's easy to see why. Patty McCormack is magnificent as charming but evil first-grader Rhoda Penmark. Nancy Kelly is terrific in some scenes, but almost comically overwrought in others, as Rhoda's gradually terrified mother. Paul Fix deserves special mention in a strong performance as Kelly's father. And, Eileen Heckart is also a standout as the grief-stricken mother of a boy that we suspect Rhoda of killing. But, my personal favorite character is LeRoy, incredibly portrayed by Henry Jones. This is a characters I have never forgotten from the moment I first saw this one in the late 50's.

"That Rhoda is smart, almost as smart as me", he repeats for the camera several times in obsessive fashion. The ending which differed from the play has disturbed a lot of purists, but I think it has a lot of merit. Altogether, I give it 8 out of 10, very memorable and extremely well done.
45 out of 56 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Can't Turn Away
ddagg21 March 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Once again I found myself watching this film on TCM despite the fact I have seen it numerous times. There are many issues (mentioned by other commentators)that make this film hard to take given today's aesthetic. Yes it is "stagy", yes the acting is mannered, yes the main idea of the film is no longer shocking. Despite all of this you simply can't help but watch.

The performances are truly wonderful. Kelly, McCormack, Jones and Heckart are all exceptional and the fact they and others played this on the stage shines through. They work as a well-oiled machine. Nancy Kelly is very over-the-top in parts but this must be viewed in the context of the style of acting at the time. Further, watch her performance multiple times and pay close attention and I think you will find her reactions are not so far-fetched in the context of the story, as she gradually realizes what her daughter is capable of. I used to think McCormack was too arch, but on further viewings it is clear this is a well thought out performance and very effective, one of the best children's performances I have seen.

Beyond the acting, the film places a question that is very relevant today -- what drives children to commit unspeakable acts -- in a very simplistic setting. The frame work forces the viewer to consider the basic question of why and more importantly how would you react if you came to understand your offspring were evil.

Don't be afraid of the things that make this film out-dated and stylized, instead give it a try and you won't be able to resist watching it again and again.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Wow
billcr1221 October 2020
I don't know how I never got around to watching this excellent thriller. Patty McCormack is riveting as Rhoda, a little girl who is a pig-tailed, smiling monster. A classmate drowns in an "accidental" death, while Rhoda comes home to mama to complain that the boy had won a spelling prize which she deserved to win. As the story develops, Rhoda's mom uncovers unsettling events surrounding her darling princess. Think of Billy Mumy in my favorite episode of the Twilight Zone, "It's a Good Life;" same character traits, but a girl this time. I was blown away by the story, the script, and the acting. I cannot recommend this film highly enough. If you have not seen it, do so.
10 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Intriguing thriller
grantss28 November 2021
Rhoda Penmark seems like your average, sweet eight-year-old girl. When her rival at school dies in mysterious circumstances at the school picnic her mother starts to suspect that Rhoda was responsible. However, if she is correct what should she do about it?

An intriguing thriller directed by Mervyn LeRoy (Waterloo Bridge, Little Women, The Wizard of Oz, Mr Roberts, I am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang). Initially not that compelling: things seem to progress in fits and starts. The plot will meander for a while, then something significant happens and makes you think that the film has kicked up a gear only for it to revert to meandering. There's enough interesting stuff happening to keep you watching but there's long stretches where it is quite easy to zone out (and not miss much). These stretches are quite dialogue-filled and dry, making me think I was watching a play rather than a movie.

However, from about the halfway mark the pace does quicken and the last quarter or so is very tense, making for riveting viewing. The ending is great and contains a wonderful, poetic twist.

While the script and direction can be a bit frustrating at times, I can't fault the performances. Ten-year-old Patty McCormack is excellent as Rhoda and Nancy Kelly is great as her mother. However, Eileen Heckart almost steals the show as Mrs Daigle, the dead boy's mother. All three received Oscar nominations.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Evil Is, Evil Does Exist
bkoganbing14 April 2010
One of the most gruesome films ever put on screen is The Bad Seed. But as terrifying as it is, The Bad Seed teaches a lesson that has to be reinforced every so often. That pure evil does indeed exist and there are no root causes in environment for it's being found. You find it here in the amoral child Rhoda Penmark, and you will find it in real life in such disparate individuals as Osama Bin-Laden or Charlie Manson.

We are fortunate indeed to have all the principal cast members from the Maxwell Anderson play that ran 334 performances on Broadway during the 1954-55 season. Nancy Kelly, Patty McCormack, Henry Jones, Eileen Heckart, Evelyn Varden, and Joan Croyden all came over from Broadway to repeat their roles. In the case of Nancy Kelly she won a Tony Award for her performance as the overwrought army wife who comes to the horrible realization she's raising an amoral monster. Henry Jones made his film debut in The Bad Seed.

When the film opens we see what looks like an all American family with father William Hopper leaving his wife Nancy Kelly and daughter Patty McCormack for some army detail that will take him away for a bit. The family lives off post with landlady Evelyn Varden.

McCormack is a strange child who doesn't seem to show real emotion like most of us though she makes a big show of affection when it suits her needs. When a boy from the school she goes to drowns and later a medal that boy won for spelling is found in McCormack's possession, Kelly is frightened out of her mind.

The acting in The Bad Seed goes to levels of excellence rarely attained by a whole cast. It's as if the cast were a functioning machine, each part reinforced by the other. They all feed off each other's excellence.

Nancy Kelly was nominated for Best Actress and Patty McCormack and Eileen Heckart were nominated for Best Supporting Actress. Heckart rules when she's on screen as the distraught mother of the drowned boy who's doing a little drowning herself in gin. Kelly, Heckart, and Joan Croyden who is the school principle all have suspicions about McCormack, but no one can prove a thing.

Henry Jones who played so many delightful rustics on the screen is an evil handyman who suspects McCormack of the foul deed also. But it's different with him because it's a case of takes one to know one. He gets dealt with in an interesting fashion.

The Bad Seed is a timeless classic, it could be updated and play today, tomorrow, the next century, the good and the bad nature of humankind doesn't change. The best summation of this film was actually delivered in another film, The List Of Adrian Messenger by George C. Scott when he comments that, "evil is, evil does exist".
8 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Creepy little girl is creepy
Sfmooreman974 May 2017
There's not much I can say about his other then that horror movies of today don't make you feel as creeped out as this one did for me. The compelling acting of the leading girl as she goes from sweet and innocent to a cold blooded killer was convincing to the core. This psychological drama using almost nothing but its smart script and fantastic cast to tell a story of murder and guilt that'll make you second guess your ideas of having children in the future
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
A filmed play, with the actors projecting to the rafters...
moonspinner5512 September 2004
From novel to stage to screen, "The Bad Seed" somehow became frozen over. No one on-hand during the material's early gestation period apparently figured out a way to open up its action. Consequently, as a movie, "The Bad Seed" is little more than a filmed play, with the actors projecting to the rafters. Several key actors from the Broadway success reprise their roles, including Patty McCormick in the lead as a sociopathic youngster in long pig-tails, but the piece has not been rethought for the screen (and what works on a stage doesn't always deliver in the more intimate medium of cinema). It isn't all McCormick's fault: she delivers a performance of a headstrong, evil child in a perfunctory, overly-rehearsed manner and probably deserved the accolades she received at the time. It is a very demanding role for a youngster. However, there are no shadings in the dialogue for McCormick to pick up on, and she's not fresh in the part. Worse, she's directed to be too terrific--enunciating very clearly and loudly, as if to reach the back rows--all the details of a complex human being ironed out. This couldn't possibly have been intentional, as the rest of the cast members are handled in the very same way. It's so forthright, uneasy, repetitive and awkward, it becomes a static transformation of stage material onto film. ** from ****
28 out of 55 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Eileen Heckart Is Heartbreaking ....
drednm31 October 2004
as the mother of the drowned boy.... a performance that must rank with the best of the 1950s. Heckart repeated her stage role in the 1956 film with Nancy Kelly and Patty McCormack as the mother and daughter. Henry Jones (also in the stage production and excellent), Evelyn Varden, Gage Clarke, Paul Fix, Joan Croyden and Jesse White are good in support. Jones and Varden are especially good. William Hopper is and always was BLAH. But Eileen Heckart is superb as the drunken, crushed woman who knows there is something more to her son's death than she is being told. Her two scenes are riveting as she lurches across the room, begging for information, yet totally in control of the situation. Kelly, McCormack, Jones, and Varden are also good (if stagy) in their roles. Kelly seems hopelessly hammy but grows on you even though she seems to be imitating Gloria Swanson in Sunset Boulevard most of the time. Great film, literate, interesting, riveting..... a must!
59 out of 67 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Moral conundrums
gkearns19 October 2001
Warning: Spoilers
(THERE ARE SPOILERS HERE) What a flock of moral conundrums this little movie throws at us. Rhoda is every bit a little girl. She is not evil. Basically, no one has to fear turning his/her back on the child. Well, almost no one; the point being she was never out looking for a victim. (SPOILER) This is the key point that LeRoy (Henry Jones) misunderstood about her, which proved to be a fatal mistake. He thought he could see right through her because he thought she was just plain bad, like him. She wasn't "bad" in the normal way of things. She loved her dolls and toys. She loved to read fantasies and have her mother read to her at bedtime. She loved to play imaginary hostess with her new tea set. She loved for adults to make over her. (BIG SPOILERS AHEAD) In this story there are three people we know she has killed. The little boy who won the penmanship medal she felt she was more deserving of. Old Mrs. Post in Baltimore, who promised the girl her fish bowl when she died. And, of course, Leroy, who threatened her. She was capable of great lies when pressed for motivations, but was unafraid and even forthcoming if her cover collapsed. To her there were very logical reasons for her acts. (SPOILER) That's what LeRoy missed. Had he realized that when she had reason, she would stop at nothing to achieve her purpose, he would never have turned his back on her after he threatened her security. The conundrum here is that she is only different by degree than many typical everyday people who dodge thoughts of right and wrong when it suits their purposes. (SPOILERS) When her mother realized Rhoda had committed murder, she told the girl to go ahead and burn the incriminating evidence. Her grandfather had let his daughter grow into adulthood without letting her know about her shocking roots. Her teacher, perhaps the only one who really understood what was going on, just asked the mother to move Rhoda out of the school, rather than going to the authorities with her suspicions.

Then there was the bigger conundrum of our own attitudes about children. Rhoda gave out exactly what she thought the adults wanted from her - and she did it very well. She was the unreal, dream, story-book, Shirley Temple-like, non-sexual, pretty little girl people love. When things heated up, she by-passed the subject by turning on the "little girl language" the adults would eagerly eat up. Her selfishness was considered cute and natural. (SPOILER) Even at the end, most of the adults in her life looked on her as that wonderful story-book little girl. We do that a lot in this world, assessing one another by pre-determined stereotypes. Had Rhoda been publicly exposed, there would have been a clamor to analyze her behavior for the warnings we could look for in other children so "this kind of thing can never happen again." Many normal, innocent, sweet, pretty little girls would soon find themselves subjected to cruel psychological behavior mod preventive therapies. Sound familiar?

Patty McCormack was phenomenal as Rhoda. You could see her "reading" adult faces for reactions to her words. You could watch the evolution of decision cross her face at key moments. Hers was never the face of sinister evil. But she portrayed real childhood; and she portrayed determination; and she portrayed hate; and she portrayed jealousy, anger, and rage; and she portrayed happiness and glee. Patty McCormack did not portray Rhoda as any one-dimensional troubled child. There was a depth to her performance that was every bit equal that of any adult, legend or not, in any movie before or since.
15 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
What Rhoda Wants, Rhoda Gets
ligela29 May 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This is a movie that stands the test of time because of the period in which it was filmed, its methods of filming and acting, and the level of knowledge of the subject matter at that time. It is truly a period piece and as such, it is a powerful chiller-thriller.

A hit on Broadway, 'The Bad Seed' was translated into film as though it were a play; hence various commentators speak of its staginess and sometimes overwrought acting as if they were serious objections to the enjoyability of the movie. But does anyone complain that 'Dracula' was stagy and overwrought? No, because the movie is classic in and of itself, and so is 'The Bad Seed'.

Translate your mind back to the early nineteen-fifties and 'The Bad Seed' takes on new levels of meaning and challenge. Christine Penrose, whose military husband is called away from home, is raising her darling daughter Rhoda on her own when things start slowly coming apart. Rhoda is the perfect eight-year-old, a pretty, intelligent and very affectionate child, in crinoline dresses and blonde braids, to whom everyone around gives praise and, often, gifts. She is always grateful and loving in her delight with what she gets.

What is wrong with this picture? Rhoda wants something very badly, something she feels she won and has been unjustly denied, something that disappeared when its owner died a sudden, tragic death. So why does it turn up in Rhoda's possessions?

Christine Penmark has no idea what is going on. Children were not believed to have mature personalities according to the psychology of the day, and the case of Leopold and Loeb was brutal and startling, and apparently a singular aberration, just a few years before the play debuted. There was then no way to explain what Christine begins to perceive: that Rhoda takes what she wants if she can't charm her way to it, and anyone who gets in her way she simply 'removes'.

This wasn't supposed to happen in the 1950's. Today we may be more reliably informed, especially to the statistics that point clearly to the 'nurture rather than nature' explanation, but Christine is alone with her manipulative little murderess with no world-view to encompass what she faces. Her confusion and denial aren't weaknesses of character but the product of the general understanding of the day.

It is not until she has a chance encounter with a criminal psychologist who posits the 'nature, not nurture' theory of criminality, and then digs more deeply into the dark secret of her own childhood that things begin to add up, and Christine Penmark herself unravels in as ghastly a manner as her life has done.

The play is in black and white, and so are the performances and the ethics and morality of its message. Rhoda has only two sides to her: the apparently good, affectionate, perfect angel and the manifestly evil, selfish, deadly crocodile-brained killer. Patty MacCormack is excellent in the dual portrayal, and her performance as a child actress is an achievement seldom rivaled and never bettered.

Nancy Kelly's utter devastation, step by step, is carefully crafted and touched with a dread terror that recognizes, though never states, that Christine knows that she herself is not safe around Rhoda, let alone anyone else. Her response to that knowledge is telling; she is the mother of a murderess, after all.

The performances of Henry Jones as the unsavory handyman the audience ends up wanting Rhoda to put out of our misery and Eileen Heckart as the bereft and alcoholic mother of Rhoda's dead schoolmate are both stand-outs. Again, look to the time of the filming. People had no access to the psychiatric and sociological services both of these two characters needed in spades. People like them were out there in the 50's, more of them than we -- five decades or so later -- want to think, and without help or restraints we expect to come naturally now. Terrifying or pitiable, they were there when the movie was made.

I read the book before I saw the movie, so I expected the original ending and was somewhat disappointed that it was changed. But the add-on tag is yet another level of good v. evil, one the audience might embrace emotionally if not intellectually, and perhaps more reflective of other beliefs of the 1950's, also.

Beware if the Penmarks move in next door. They may not be good neighbors, no matter how much they smile and compliment you. After all, it runs in the family. Oh, and as Christine Penmark had to do, take a long look at your own....
15 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
I find this film fascinating
bndreinert4 May 2007
I watched this film again last night and can't count how many times I've seen it.

What I find fascinating is the that two leads, Nancy Kelly and Patty McCormick don't seem to fit with the talent of the rest of the cast, most of whom are very good character actors.

McCormick plays the role of Rhoda as if she's in the stage play, but on film it comes off as over-acting.

Nancy Kelly is too whiny and seems to swing back and forth between being terrified and oblivious, with no middle range. One minute she thinks her daughter is a murderer and then next she's leaving her alone to go grocery shopping if there's nothing wrong. If she's trying to convey denial due to the love she has for her daughter, it doesn't work.

There are a couple of scenes that don't seem to accomplish anything as they end with someone having to go to dinner or lunch so everyone can just ignore the fact that they believe this child to be terribly disturbed and possibly worse. In this instance maybe we should consider the times in which the film was made.

Something just doesn't flow right for me, yet, I watch this movie almost every time I catch it on television. I can't explain why, but maybe that was the intention of the film maker.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Old favorite
ant bee1 January 1999
I first saw this movie when I was about 10-11. I cried my eyes out....doesn't effect me the same way now, but I truly admire Patty McCormick's acting ability. A true classic and now-a-days the premise of the story is maybe truer than the writer ever would have guessed
17 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
creepy
markmitchell-630426 December 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I have only seen a few horror flicks that are centered around a child being the source for the scares. that is because i am extra ordinarily freaked out by innocent little children doing horrifying abominations agents common moral ground. this film follows a delightful little girl as she goes on a murder spree, and all the bloody fallout. honestly wondering how the concept base for this movie got past the rating people at the time.just so ya know the adults don't know the little girl is a killer for most of the film. its kind of like a murder mystery with a despicable truth, but the audience knows it the whole time. this film really captures the idea of making the viewer feel helpless to the oncoming train.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Bad to the Bone!
jenkins-212 March 2011
I recently caught this on TCM for the umpteenth time and was amazed at how well it holds up after over 50 years. Yes, its dated in its style and acting, but it still packs a punch and is entertaining as hell! I wont bother to mention the plot as everyone else has described it well enough. A 50's mother begins to realize her perfect little daughter isn't what she seems. And on a parallel plane, she also comes to realize her own past is not what it seems. And when these 2 plot arcs finally merge, you have one hell of a climax. Director Mervyn LeRoy made the decision to film this as the staged play it once was. There were few attempts to open it up and few close ups. The film is composed of mostly medium shots. Most of the Broadway cast was also imported for the film and act accordingly (to the upper balcony). Particularly lead Nancy Kelly as the put upon mom. Her hand wringing/chest beating performance is over the top, yet it works wonderfully in this 50s setting. It's too bad the censors made them change the ending. But even the changed ending packs its own wallop. This piece of Eisenhower Americana (turned on its head), hints at the tumultuous 60s decade ahead. There are wonderful bits by Eileen Heckart, hilarious and heartbreaking almost simultaneously as the drunken, grieving Hortense Daigle (who came up with that name? LOL) and Henry Jones as the mentally challenged handyman (who catches on quite quickly to the goings on when the so-called smarter characters are still clueless); Evelyn Varden as the nosy, psychoanalyzing landlady, and of course, Patty McCormack giving one of the most chilling portrayals of childhood mayhem ever put on screen. Alex North's score helps the proceedings immeasurably. As an artifact of the 50s and precursor of many film genres since, this movie is hard to beat! Even the tacked on Let's Meet the Cast (It's Only A Movie!) epilogue cant spoil it. It's a great ride.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
It is a good horror film
blanoue3246 December 2016
Warning: Spoilers
This is one of the creepiest old movies I have ever seen. The girl Played by Patty McCormack is excellent. She is excellent in being very creepy and innocent at the same time. The song that the little girl plays seems innocent at first then gradually becomes more sinister as the movie goes on. The other music in the film is well placed and stirs your nerves the way its supposed to. The acting of the janitor Leroy is just a creepy as the girl. He acts dumb around the others but when he's with the girl he's almost normal. The drowned boys mother plays a good drunk the first time but the second she's outlandish and it makes her seem fake. The mother of the girl is a very good actress and she is believable the entire time. The camera-work is very good. I liked that it never showed anyone dying except for the little girl in the end. The costume design of the girl and her pigtails are always kept perfect. The movie is great but it's a very creepy movie because it deals with child murderers.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Very good
painkilla75 August 2006
I thought this movie was made very well. Despite what another had commented about this movie, I do feel that her facial expressions were very much eerie and the girl did a very good job as "the bad seed". The way she would look and smile whenever she lied made me think about how bad of a person she was and the look in her eyes also would show how she knew that she could manipulate anyone who got in her way. feel that for it's time it was a very good movie. It had to do something right, since it was nominated for an Oscar. So in all despite the comment prior to this one, I do feel that it was a very good movie. I thought that the ending was good too, since it gave people a sense of reality to the people who played the characters(some can't see past a character that a person plays).
16 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A chilling thriller about a psychopathic child and her murderous tendencies
boeseadamj6 December 2016
Warning: Spoilers
A great film about the psychopathic Rhoda. Although some acting leaves something to be desired, the film still holds up well. It is surprising how suspenseful some scenes are 60 years later. I would think that it would not hold up well to a contemporary audience, and although some aspects don't, the film as a whole really does. Perhaps one of the more memorable scenes is when Monica and Christine both incoherently talk to themselves after seeing a man burned alive. The overlapping sound was just unnerving. The ending of this film shows evidence of the production code of the time. The clear good coming out better than evil felt bland. Although I still enjoyed the film, I would love to have seen the unhampered result.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Bad Scene
adamshl21 February 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I must say this film has many supporters, including many film critics. It seems some have gone so far as to call this a near- or cult-classic. Unfortunately I'm not one of them.

The acting seems over-wrought and over-baked, as though the players are still on the Broadway stage. Perhaps they couldn't rid themselves of certain theatrical gestures they used for so many stage performances.

As for my reaction, I found the proceedings pretty implausible and predictable. Most of the revelations and reactions seemed downright hammy. This is not to say everyone's not trying their best. Patty McCorick by the time the film was made was pushing eleven years of age, and the camera catches it.

The lightening climax seemed tacked on and abrupt, followed by unbelievably ridiculous cast bows. Director LeRoy must have stayed home that day.

Still, there are some who give this effort a high rating. To each his own, for they obviously see something here I surely don't.
14 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed