La mentira infame

A 'classic' film, (whatever that may be), can almost never be re-made in quite the same way again. It's something that we've thought about for quite a while, though - and noted filmmakers (including Gus Van Sant and Sydney Pollack) have tried and failed to re-make films to jazz up their appeal, and make them more accessible to a wider audience. It's something that passed through my mind quite a few times as I watched "The Children's Hour" today. Quite clearly, this is a film that more people deserve to see and know about, and it would certainly be interesting to try and re-make it, but we would definitely lose something in the translation.

The largest reason for this is because it is a film of a definite period - the issues raised in the film are widely discussed these days, whereas in the period the film was set, homosexuality was something to be feared and despised. Similarly, we do not have the various elaborate codes of honour that are so prevalent in the film, and dictate the actions of almost all characters. It's a pity, then, that this film will be alien to lots of people today. The answer, however, is not in a re-make (the film is itself a re-make of a 1936 film by the same director called "These Three", and an adaptation of a play of the same name by Lillian Hellman), but a re-release of this fine example of moviemaking.

Boasting a terrific cast including Audrey Hepburn, Shirley MacLaine and James Garner, "The Children's Hour" is the story of two teachers, Miss Dobie and Miss Wright, who found a school for young girls in an idyllic town in America. Then, out of boredom, spite and plain maliciousness, a child tells a vicious lie that will bring about the downfall of the school, the teachers, and all caught up in the horrible set of affairs. It is quite possible to see the creeping evil and hatred that stems from Mary, the child concerned (played wonderfully by Karen Balkin). Eventually, it reaches out and destroys all it touches.

The photography is great (it was nominated for an Oscar) - there are many scenes which are so wonderfully composed that each frame paints a thousand words: the climax of the movie is a great example. The relationship between MacLaine and Hepburn is delicately and sensitively portrayed, especially for a cast who didn't know what they were doing (according to MacLaine in an interview for "The Celluloid Closet"). James Garner is also good in his role as the doctor about to marry Hepburn, although the movie is clearly not aimed at giving him the best lines. There are also many, many superb supporting roles - and the film's strength comes from a great ensemble performance.

It doesn't really matter what the child accuses the teachers of (indeed we only find out a good hour into the film, although it has been strongly implied), because the film isn't really about homosexuality. As MacLaine points out in "The Celluloid Closet" (a cracking documentary about the history of homosexuality in the movies), it is about "a child's accusation". It is also about the power held by a town to bring about the downfall of two perfectly nice, perfectly ordinary young people. The are lines in the film that one should never forget and it should also make us think about the way our words shape the situations in which we live: ("unnatural" is a great example).

All in all, a lovely film from director William Wyler ("Ben-Hur", "Roman Holiday", "Funny Girl"), and one that deserves to be seen by a wider audience - re-release, please!

This is a great movie. This film was certainly ahead of it's time. It was extremely controversial when it came out in the early 60's and has to do with gay rights. It's based on avery famous play from Lillian Hellman and it's directed by WilliamWyler (The Best Years of Our Lives, Roman Holiday, Ben-Her), and it stars Audrey Hepburn, Shirley MacLaine, James Garner, Miriam Hopkins, Fay Bainter, Karen Balkin, and Veronica Cartwright. The acting is amazing from everyone but Shirley MacLaine steals the show. This coming from a huge admirer of Hepburn. Heart breaking and wonderfully filmed, the "Children's Hour" is a terrific movie. See it!

The themes explored in The Children's Hour are far from dated, so i just can't conspire to other writers who feel this way.

Karen and Martha are best friends who share a home together, they also work at the same all Girls school. Mary Tilford is a spiteful little child, when she is caught out for a lie she is duly scolded. In retaliation she starts casting doubts about the nature of Karen & Martha's relationship, pretty soon the gossip spirals out of control and the ladies are faced with empty classrooms and strained relations at home. A court case is in the air, but just what will be the outcome with a society so quick to frown on something that they deem unnatural?, regardless of it being truth or fiction.

Coming as it did in 1961, The Children's Hour was something of a brave picture, possessing as it does, a plot strand about lesbianism. Yet the film is itself a remake of These Three from 1936, tho also penned by Lillian Hellman {William Wyler directing both pieces}, These Three was built around a heterosexual tryst. The force driving The Children's Hour on is its willingness to explore a then frowned upon topic, whilst simultaneously running a plot arc about the power of a devious tongue, the innocence of youth a cloak shielding bitter intentions. Audrey Hepburn is a wonderful piece of casting, her portrayal of Karen is very restrained, giving the character an aura of worth and gracefulness. James Garner plays Karen's beau, Dr. Joe Cardin, he's a crucial part of the story but Garner never really dominates the screen in the way you feel the character should, however in the face of the films best performance, it's probably understandable that Garner is hardly worth a second glance. That best performance comes from Shirley MacLaine, it's a towering acting job full of wrought emotion and steely determination, it's only during the films last quarter do you realise just how well MacLaine has layered Martha. MacLaine and Hepburn are very different in acting styles, and this makes The Children's Hour a character piece to savour in any decade. 8/10

My favorite review of this film is a short, concise one entitled WOW written in 2000 (read it and you'll read my feelings exactly!). I believe it says a lot that over 40 years later, we still want to comment and view this movie (a movie that is not necessarily a popular classic that people know about). I had never heard of this movie until looking on Netflix and deciding to rent all the Audrey Hepburn movies. While she is fabulous, I thought Shirley M was the shining performance in this movie. James Garner is so genuinely loving and likable (as usual!) The other characters are also fabulous but for length I won't list them all! I highly recommend this film to someone who appreciates dramatic film with good character development. It is definitely not what I expected from something on an Audrey Hepburn list (which makes me love her more)! Some raters feel that this movie has homophobic undertones and is not appropriate for today's society (because we are so open minded now???). As someone who has worked with youth of today in a small town, I believe it is still relatable. I think it would open up a good discussion because I felt hope in the midst of tragedy (I don't want to give away anything but basically a "what could you have done instead" dialog).

I weeped at the end but would watch it again as it is superb. I would give it a 10 but having only seen it once, I feel biased as I'm sure there are minor flaws somewhere! I give it a 9.9/10 instead!

I just watched "The Children's Hour" for the first time this evening. I must say that I was very impressed. Hepburn and MacLaine gave brilliant performances as the two headmistresses of a girl's school. The cinema photography was outstanding and the direction and writing were fantastic.

Turner Classic Movies ran this gorgeous film this evening and the comments that were made after the run brought several thoughts to mind. After viewing the movie, I decided to get on-line and see what others had to say about this film.

The one comment that was made tonight was that it was thought that the film didn't really `appeal' to the heightened sensibility of the audiences of the 60's. However, I felt that the movie was timeless in its observations and portrayals of its two main characters. Grant it, homosexuality was NOT the main focus of this movie but it does play a very important, albeit, small role.

In today's society, homosexuality is more widely accepted than it was at the time this play was written. However, there is one area in society that it is still 'taboo' to be gay and that is in the teaching profession. There are STILL, more than 40 years after this movie was made, teachers that cannot be who they really are for fear of losing their jobs, the respect of their peers and the trust of parents. Grant it this is not in every part of the country, in every town, but it is still as thus in small-town America. I know this for fact, as I am the life-partner of a teacher. I know what it is like for him to have to hide who he really is and the torture that he goes through because of it. Children can say some very vicious things and I have seen what it can do to a person first-hand. This is why I feel that this picture is very 'true to life'; because in so many ways this is still the way things are today.

Indeed, more people should see this movie! Maybe people would think before spreading rumors. This is a prime example of what one comment can do to a person's life and how it can snowball.