Blu-ray Review The Children's Hour Blu-ray Review (1 Viewer)

The Children's Hour Blu-ray Review

Lillian Hellman’s The Children’s Hour was rather a cause célèbre when it premiered on Broadway in 1934 and ran for a year and a half. So notorious was it, in fact, that the first movie version in 1936 was renamed These Three with the play’s central dilemma changed to a different kind of love triangle than the one in the play. William Wyler directed this first film version, and he was also behind the camera for the second movie adaptation in 1961 with the original title reinstated and the original thematic material in place. Despite its more faithful adherence to the original play, the second film version doesn’t move as well, doesn’t seem pitched quite right, and is rather stagey. In a more modern era, it seems a bit more naïve about human emotions and realizations, too.

Studio: MGM

Distributed By: Kino Lorber

Video Resolution and Encode: 1080P/AVC

Aspect Ratio: 1.66:1

Audio: English 2.0 DTS-HDMA

Subtitles: English SDH

Rating: Not Rated

Run Time: 1 Hr. 47 Min.

Package Includes: Blu-ray

keep case

Disc Type: BD25 (single layer)

Region: A

Release Date: 08/05/2014

MSRP: $29.95

The Production Rating: 3.5/5

Struggling to make a go of their private girls’ academy, teachers Karen Wright (Audrey Hepburn) and Martha Dobie (Shirley MacLaine) are the victims of a scandalous lie told by one of their most recalcitrant students Mary Tilford (Karen Balkin). She tells her grandmother (Fay Bainter) that the two women are lovers and have been seen kissing, not even behind closed doors. The horrified elderly lady calls the families of the enrolled girls, and they’re immediately pulled out of school, effectively closing the institution. Despite the best efforts of Karen’s fiancé Dr. Joe Cardin (James Garner), the women lose a libel suit they bring against Mrs. Tilford, mainly because Martha’s meddlesome aunt (Miriam Hopkins) who had jokingly remarked on Martha’s lack of interest in men is too embarrassed by her gaffe to come back to testify on their behalf. With their lives in shambles, Karen, Martha, and Joe must decide what their next step will be.Though the original play by Lillian Hellman was much admired in its day, the drama doesn’t hold up to close modern scrutiny especially with its feeble psychological underpinnings, and characters who, despite much education, seem completely helpless in the maelstrom of negative public opinion which surrounds them, all based on the stories of two prepubescent girls. Shirley MacLaine has said that director William Wyler was terrified of the material (he had directed the earlier film though the lesbianism had been completely removed from the story), and he seems to have gone out of his way to avoid directly dealing with the issue here except in the vaguest of terms. Of course, the last vestiges of the infamous Production Code were still in force at the time likely making direct handling of most of the sensitive issues regarding homosexuality practically impossible. Wyler wastes no time showing us what a monster little Mary can be (we never see what punishment, if any, is ever doled out to her once her lies are revealed either), and he makes effective use of close-ups for most of the major characters showing us their anguish and heartbreak and hopelessness.Shirley MacLaine gives a raw performance that’s the showpiece of the film and the most memorable take away from the viewing experience even if it’s hard to believe a woman of her age and education wouldn’t have given her sexual orientation a great deal of thought before the entire question is raised by others (the fault isn’t MacLaine’s; it’s the cobwebs showing in the Hellman adaptation along with screenwriter John Michael Hayes). Miriam Hopkins does her addled auntie act well enough to make you want to strangle her, and Wyler couldn’t have found a more fitting child for the insidious role of Mary. Karen Balkin’s eternal pout and hate-filled eyes (which can be masked by the snarling smile of a cobra) still send chills down one’s spine whenever she occupies the frame. Audrey Hepburn is a little more subdued than the material would seem to warrant, and James Garner is effective in a role that could have used a great deal more fleshing out. Fay Bainter earned an Oscar nomination as the grandmother who acts on her granddaughter’s lies, and the part does offer her moments of great outrage and great remorse. As a budding kleptomaniac at the mercy of Mary’s blackmail, Veronica Cartwright proves equally able to summon tears on cue just as she’d be able to do in The Birds a couple of years later.

Video Rating: 3.5/5 3D Rating: NA

The film has been framed at 1.66:1 and is presented in 1080p using the AVC codec. While sharpness is always pleasing and sometimes even more than that, contrast occasionally seems a bit lacking especially in the early going (the film looks better the longer it plays). The grayscale offers nicely achieved black levels and crisp whites. There are dust specks that crop up on a fairly regular basis, one major scratch in evidence, and splice cuts that make the picture jump on several occasions. The film has been divided into 8 chapters.

Audio Rating: 3.5/5

The DTS-HD Master Audio 2.0 mono mix is very typical for its era. The dialogue-heavy film has been well recorded, and the speech mixes quite well with Alex North’s stirring and yet sometimes unsettling score and the occasional sound effect. Fidelity seems rather subdued in this mix, but to its credit, there are no age-related artifacts to spoil the listening experience.

Special Features Rating: 1/5

Theatrical Trailer (1:53, HD)

Overall Rating: 3.5/5

The Children’s Hour may tell a somewhat dated story, but most of the performances are laudatory, the direction by William Wyler is solid if unexceptional, and the Blu-ray presentation certainly above average in audio and video.

Reviewed By: Matt Hough

Support HTF when you buy this title:

I always thought it was a great touch, having Miriam Hopkins as Martha's aunt, after she had previously played Martha in the 1936 screen adaptation, "These Three".

I love the wonderful score by Alex North.

Even though it's not really as strong as it could have been, and a bit overheated in moments, I do enjoy this film. It still remains a sad statement on how people acted toward homosexuality back then and how lives were certainly ruined.

This film was known as The Loudest Whisper in Australia & probably in UK. Can't recall any legal release in Home Video for These Three. Those splice jumps are a bit worrying.

There were also splices on the DVD (which was non-anamorphic if I recall correctly).

JohnMor said:

Even though it's not really as strong as it could have been, and a bit overheated in moments, I do enjoy this film. It still remains a sad statement on how people acted toward homosexuality back then and how lives were certainly ruined.

Click to expand...

And still goes on....

I have read that Lillian Hellman's primary theme for this play was the power of a whispered lie rather than the controversial issue which was the basis for the lie.She based her story on an actual case which occurred in Scotland in 1810. Jane Cumming, a pupil, accused two school mistresses of having an affair in public. Her grandmother spread the story and within days the school was deserted. The teachers sued and -unlike the characters in Hellman's play- won the case, however the devastation made of the women's lives made it a somewhat hollow victory.
The original play ran for nearly two years on Broadway (Nov. '34- May '36) and starred Anne Revere (an Oscar-winner for NATIONAL VELVET ten years later and victimized in the McCarthy era). It was banned in Boston, Chicago and London but played in Paris as LES INNOCENTS. (The ban in London was lifted and the play opened there in 1936 with Ursula Jeans and Leo Genn) New York critics protested when it was deemed ineligible to be awarded the Pulitzer prize due to its content and formed the Drama Critics' Circle in response to this prejudicial oversight.
Wyler's first film adaptation (released on VHS in Australia, the UK and the US and out on dvd in Spain) starring Miriam Hopkins, Merle Oberon and Bonita Granville (amongst the first five performers to be nominated in the Best Supporting Actress category at the 1937 Oscars) is an excellent film. Modifying the lie to an act of heterosexual fornication taking place in the boarding school and witnessed by the malicious child was still a shocking concept to be depicted on film in 1936 and Hellman's main theme still 'packed a punch'. (Although an added happy ending in which Karen is reunited with her fiancee diluted the mood of the tragedy).
A 1952 Broadway revival (with 'McCarthy era' overtones) starred Patricia Neal and Kim Hunter and had a respectable 5 month run and possibly gave Wyler the idea to remake the film with the original lie intact.
As a big Wyler fan, I have always found this movie to be well directed,well acted, well shot and well scored by the great Alex North. I began school in 1965 and I believe that a rumor such as the one spread by the character (superbly) portrayed by Fay Bainter would have closed a small private school here in Melbourne back then,especially if a libel/slander case had been publicly lost by the accused. The flaw in the (under-rated) remake which stands out to me was the decision to cut the court-case scenes which cast-members thought were quite powerful.The 1936 film has a courtroom sequence but Wyler obviously chose to adhere to the stage play and just have this element of the plot talked about, thus making the movie closer to being a "photographed play". A pity, as even a short courtroom scene would have taken us out of the two main sets (the school building and Mrs Tilford's house) and added some more dramatic tension to the last third of the film.
One change made at the end was effective. In the play, Mrs Tilford arrives at the house to beg forgiveness AFTER Martha has committed suicide and Karen begins to remonstrate angrily with her but softens and offers her a measure of forgiveness before the curtain falls. I have always felt it was more powerful to move her visit to BEFORE the suicide but directly after Martha's big confession sequence as Wyler seems to use this to "tip (Martha) over the edge", ie. if she'd waited a little longer she may never have had to make her confession at all (and risk losing Karen's friendship). This also gives us Martha's mocking response to Mrs Tilford's request for forgiveness. The final sequence-with Audrey Hepburn "walking alone" in heroic defiance of the town's treatment of her and Martha-is also a nice improvement on both the ending of the play and the 1936 movie.It does not guarantee a reunion with the James Garner character, but leaves it "open" (and possible).
The actress who portrays Mary (Karen Balkin) is good but not as venomous as Bonita Granville was in the role and is out-acted by Veronica Cartwright, whose hysterical scene is something to behold. Miss Balkin only made appearances in two TV shows in the '60's (inc THE LUCY SHOW) and her last role to date was in OUR TIME in 1974 with Pamela Sue Martin. The late James Garner showed what a versatile actor he was as this movie gave him an opportunity to do a more dramatic role than he was normally cast in. An actress (who I will not mention by name) recently went on record stating that "Audrey Hepburn was not really an actress". This performance (and most others Miss Hepburn gave, including Eliza in MY FAIR LADY) makes that statement ludicrous in the extreme.(In fact, I believe she is a better actress than the award-winning one who criticized her so unfairly).
Fans of Alex North may be intrigued to know that his original Main Title theme was to be a "twisted" version of a nursery-rhyme melody. It is on 'collerctors' recordings' of the score and on the recent official Kritzerland release on CD.

Warners (or whoever currently has the rights to "These Three") really needs to get that film back into print. I've only ever seen Bonita Granville in "Now Voyager" and her pert "Nancy Drew" period; but I can imagine how fabulously villainous she'd be as Mary Tilford.

lionel59 said:

An actress (who I will not mention by name) recently went on record stating that "Audrey Hepburn was not really an actress". This performance (and most others Miss Hepburn gave, including Eliza in MY FAIR LADY) makes that statement ludicrous in the extreme.(In fact, I believe she is a better actress than the award-winning one who criticized her so unfairly).

Click to expand...

As much as I have enjoyed some of the performances by this actress, she is nothing extraordinary. If I had a choice between watching her and watch Audrey, it would always be Audrey. And (although this has nothing to do with acting) the ghastly outfit she wore while giving those statements to the press proves she has not a whit of Audrey's style. And class for that matter.

But I'm sure her new version of My Fair Lady, "with fewer songs," will be quite the improvement!

A quick Google search will readily reveal the actress who made this nasty statement. Needless to say my admiration of said actress has diminished considerably.

Some actors should just keep their mouths shut (*cough*gwyneth paltrow*cough*) lest they put their foot in it. If Ms. Thompson is referring strictly to Hepburn in My Fair Lady then there is an argument to be made for her side. But if she is talking about Hepburn in general, she's so off the track to be on another planet. Hepburn's performances in The Nun's Story, Two For The Road, Wait Until Dark and Breakfast At Tiffany's are first rate and prove her to be an exemplary actress. As for her singing, while Judy Garland and Ella Fitzgerald have nothing to fear, Hepburn's plaintive vocal on How Long Has This Been Going On? in Funny Face is still my all time favorite version of the Gershwin song.