Something is very wrong here. How is it possible for such an intelligent woman of high presence and awareness not to see from the beginning that something is wrong with this so much younger and immature man so persistently making love to her without even knowing her? The story is not credible, and it gets worse all the time. It is a cinematic masterpiece, one of both Robert Aldrich's and Joan Crawford's best, and the splendid direction and cinematography conceals the psychological flaws. Worst of all is the end, which gives you the impression of pasting up a psychological failure. Of course, if the story had been more realistic, it would not have made the same brilliant and fascinating film, which indeed at least keeps you on edge until the dreadful final scene, which ruins everything. I am sure Hitchcock would have called this false ending a disaster. Lorne Greene and Vera Miles add to the story and make it really interesting, but they are too soon disposed of. It's definitely worth seeing for the sake of Joan Crawford, her beauty and splendid acting, but everything else is just put there for the enhancement of her performance.

As the opening credits of "Autumn Leaves" are benignly rolling by, the viewer is treated to listening to the golden, mellow voice of Nat "King" Cole as he effortlessly sings this melodrama's title song.And even though there were no autumn leaves anywhere to be found in "Autumn Leaves", this song and its lulling effect played (surprising enough) a somewhat significant part when it came to setting the pace and mood of this film's stormy plot-line.Many years following this picture's 1956 release, Joan Crawford stated, in an interview, that of her later films, "Autumn Leaves" was, indeed, her #1 favourite.I think that that was kind of a funny thing for Crawford to say, since, from my perspective, I clearly found her to be miscast in her role as Millie Wetherby, the longing, lonely, middle-aged typing-dynamo who finally finds her man (who's half her age) only to discover that an unbalanced mind lurks behind those twinkling, baby-blue eyes of his.From my point of view, even though "Autumn Leaves" had all the makings of being a fairly intriguing picture and its subject matter was certainly handled in a mature fashion, I found that a lot of the story (especially the ending) just didn't ring true.Like I said earlier, Joan Crawford just wasn't well-suited for her role as a woman who would allow a man (regardless of how cute he was) to slap her around and brutalize her. And, then, after all was said and done, actually come crawling back for more. (Oh? Yeah!?) Yes. "Autumn Leaves" was a decidedly flawed affair and its dead-serious dramatics contained some unintentionally humorous moments, but, all the same, I think that this 1950's Chick Flick was certainly well-worth a view just to see how mental illness was looked upon in the realm of Hollywood movies nearly 60 years ago.Filmed in b&w, "Autumn Leaves" was directed by Robert Aldrich whose other notable films included - Kiss Me Deadly, Whatever Happened To Baby Jane and The Dirty Dozen.

And if you think that's weird, his mom looks exactly like Michael Jackson did just before he died.But seriously, this sudsy bit of kitsch stars none other than the high priestess of camp herself, Joan C. She gets to perform her trademark overwrought teary thing almost continuously throughout this flick, and the viewer is invited to pretend along with her that Cliff falls head over heels for this freak. The day after they meet he's all "What would I ever do if you left me?" and I'm like "WTF, you just met her dude!" Back in the day, Charles Busch did this act really well in drag. I actually found this film fun to watch though. I laughed along with it but mostly at it. Is that so wrong?

When a Joan Crawford movie pops up on TCM, I'll usually watch it. And there are some great ones...but not this late in her career. Add to it that after all we have learned about the real Crawford, it was impossible for me to buy her as such a totally sympathetic wife, particularly under the circumstances of this story. In fact, she literally made me cringe here. Perhaps it would have been more believable back in 1956, but not in this day and age. In my view, there was virtually nothing credible in her performance here, although you can revel in the scene where she tells of Vera Miles and Lorne Greene.And then there's the way they met -- in a restaurant over chicken salad, in one of the most awkward and asinine scenes I have ever seen in a movie.On the positive side, Cliff Robertson -- no favorite of mine -- is very good here. I guess he was bi-polar in the film, and he was believable in that role. Kudos to Robertson. Lorne Greene and (in a very atypical role) Vera Miles play sleaze-balls here. Given their typical roles it's a little difficult to swallow...but okay, it's acting. And, in fact, the initial mystery in what they are up to is one of the highlights of the film.Also, the scenes of Robertson undergoing electric shock treatments are quite powerful (pun intended), but the downer at the end of the film is that after all Robertson and Crawford have gone through -- spousal abuse and intense psychiatric care -- there is a totally happy ending. Well, gag me with a spoon.It's worth watching for the camp, but not for the overall quality of the movie.