The Children's Hour (1961)

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by WaverBoy

I don’t think the film is any less sympathetic to Shirley’s character than VICTIM is to its gay characters, and yet Criterion had no problem releasing it.

Obviously, I'd be thrilled if they announced it, I think there's a lot to like in the film. Hepburn is superb, as always, in a far less showy role than MacLaine. It's interesting to see Hepburn really dig into a dark, painful role like this that's not in any way part of a piece of entertainment. She's so known for light, frothy romcoms, but she really had depth, no doubt from the many harrowing personal ordeals she went through over the course of her life.

Veronica Cartwright is amazing too. She gives one of the best child performances I've ever seen, because she plays the character the way I prefer child characters to be played, as a complex person, not a sentimentalized kid.

I'm less of a fan of the little girl who plays Mary, her performance isn't very nuanced, but maybe that's just because her character is such a monster.

[traths]

Are there rumors that Criterion is releasing this?

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by traths

Are there rumors that Criterion is releasing this?

Nope, haha, none at all, we just got onto a tangent.

But watch other sites start picking up the word that there are rumblings, lol.

[traths]

Originally Posted by James Luckard

Nope, haha, none at all, we just got onto a tangent.

But watch other sites start picking up the word that there are rumblings, lol.

Like Dawn of the Discs and Geek Gab?

[Gacivory]

Originally Posted by traths

Like Dawn of the Discs and Geek Gab?

They’ve been known to get info from here. So that’s a vicious circle.

[jeangreyforever]

Horrid movie. The original, These Three, was far superior in both script and in performances. I wish they would release that on Blu-Ray.

[Gacivory]

Why not release both? The one with the intentes lesbian plot, as much as they could do at that time and the one that erased it completely to appease the annoying Hayes Code.

[jeangreyforever]

The Children's Hour is already on Blu-Ray unlike These Three. Most of Miriam Hopkins' movies aren't available on Blu-Ray unfortunately.

And it's ironic that even with the neutered plotline that erases the lesbian relationship, These Three still feels more powerful than anything in the regressive Children's Hour. Not to mention, Lillian Hellman herself, the original playwright, wrote the script for These Three which is probably why the final product works even while censored. The Children's Hour has no such excuse.

[WaverBoy]

Originally Posted by jeangreyforever

Horrid movie. The original, These Three, was far superior in both script and in performances. I wish they would release that on Blu-Ray.

Nope, excellent movie, quitchyer threadcrappin’, there’s a good fellow. That said, I would love to see THESE THREE as well.

[Aunt Peg]

Originally Posted by James Luckard

Obviously, I'd be thrilled if they announced it, I think there's a lot to like in the film. Hepburn is superb, as always, in a far less showy role than MacLaine. It's interesting to see Hepburn really dig into a dark, painful role like this that's not in any way part of a piece of entertainment. She's so known for light, frothy romcoms, but she really had depth, no doubt from the many harrowing personal ordeals she went through over the course of her life.

Veronica Cartwright is amazing too. She gives one of the best child performances I've ever seen, because she plays the character the way I prefer child characters to be played, as a complex person, not a sentimentalized kid.

I'm less of a fan of the little girl who plays Mary, her performance isn't very nuanced, but maybe that's just because her character is such a monster.

Shirley Maclaine's performance in The Children's Hour is my personal favourite of hers. It is so gut wrenching and brave. I've always felt the criticisms of the film to be rather unfair given when the film was made and the limitations that it would have had imposed on it.

Some of that does comes down to the gay character killing themselves and therefore showing homosexuals as leading unhappy, unfulfilling virtually worthless lives. But the sad reality is that some gay people are still killing themselves 60 years after The Children's Hour was filmed for a variety of disturbing reasons. I have always felt this film painful to watch every time I view it because it sadly reflects what some people do still go through.

[drush9999]

Watched it very recently, and can't see why there would be any major controversy today. It accurately portrays attitudes of the time while being sympathetic to Shirley MacLaine's character and showing up the parents of the kids as being complete a-holes. I think it works better through modern eyes TBH.

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by Aunt Peg

Shirley Maclaine's performance in The Children's Hour is my personal favourite of hers. It is so gut wrenching and brave. I've always felt the criticisms of the film to be rather unfair given when the film was made and the limitations that it would have had imposed on it.

Some of that does comes down to the gay character killing themselves and therefore showing homosexuals as leading unhappy, unfulfilling virtually worthless lives. But the sad reality is that some gay people are still killing themselves 60 years after The Children's Hour was filmed for a variety of disturbing reasons. I have always felt this film painful to watch every time I view it because it sadly reflects what some people do still go through.

It's a tough one. The film was hugely daring for when it was made, and they all deserved to be commended in their time for taking a big chance in making that film at that moment.

That said, as MacLaine mentions in the 1995 interview, they were making it with 1961 eyes, not modern eyes, so it's a film that requires a lot of context. And the basic message of it is so hopeless for the MacLaine character that I really do believe it's impossible to entirely separate this one film from the pop culture context of similar films over so many decades that utilize the "Bury Your Gays" trope, which has been written about extensively in recent years:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv...hy-100-877176/

It's probably the single most famous and iconic example of the trope, because the ending is so relentlessly bleak.

In the abstract, yes, the film works on its own terms, and is harrowing and moving. Some of what's so moving about it is that the characters and even the filmmakers exist, trapped in amber, in a 1961 world in which there is no possible outcome for MacLaine's character but to hang herself and relieve herself and everyone else of the pain of her existence.

However, the larger social phenomenon of "Bury Your Gays" is deeply troubling, and with suicides of LGBTQ+ people, especially youth, still a major issue, I genuinely feel this is still a potentially dangerous film to put out into the world, without the proper context.

It's the age-old question about the danger of representing something in art, and whether that illuminates it, simply reinforces it, or does a bit of both, and what the value of one is when weighed against the danger of the other.

There's no easy answer, but when the film is seen as part of a decades-long tradition of having all LGBTQ+ characters kill themselves, get murdered, die of AIDS, or at best exist as one-note comic side characters, it becomes troubling.

I just rewatched Independence Day last night, and boy is the Harvey Fierstein character dated. I was reminded of how people laughed up a storm at him when I saw it in theaters in 1996.

I also rewatched Braveheart last week, and was grimly reminded how every single one of the 4 times I saw it in theaters, the entire theater laughed riotously at every appearance of the gay prince and his lover, and ROARED with laughter when the king threw the lover out a window.

Times have changed, mercifully, but The Children's Hour needs to be seen in a continuum. I'm genuinely curious to see how they'll do it as a miniseries today, with its famous/infamous ending.

I saw an article where MacLaine was interviewed when the 2015 film Carol came out, and I think the two films would make a valuable double feature:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/mo...ecalls-799165/

Carol is especially powerful because the story was written at the time, not from a safe modern remove, and even then, in the midst of unimaginable oppression, its LGBTQ+ writer managed to imagine an ending where the protagonists don't have to kill themselves, or live lonely, empty lives, but can find their own detente with the world around them and be happy. It's a bold and radical ending.

There's a great deal of value in putting a story like that out into the world, much like the "It Gets Better" public service video campaign. I just worry that continuing to give oxygen to The Children's Hour, without proper context, could be profoundly dangerous.

[witheygull]

Originally Posted by James Luckard

I just worry that continuing to give oxygen to The Children's Hour, without proper context, could be profoundly dangerous.

I think you're spot on with how this movie plays into a damaging trope, but I think you may be overestimating the potential harm from this specific title. Even if this got a new release and marketing push from someone like Criterion, it's still going to be such a niche title that I doubt it would reach a very wide audience today. And those folks who somehow stumbled onto this without knowing what it was beforehand are probably the kind of movie fans who can place content like this appropriately in the context of when it was released.

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by witheygull

I think you're spot on with how this movie plays into a damaging trope, but I think you may be overestimating the potential harm from this specific title. Even if this got a new release and marketing push from someone like Criterion, it's still going to be such a niche title that I doubt it would reach a very wide audience today. And those folks who somehow stumbled onto this without knowing what it was beforehand are probably the kind of movie fans who can place content like this appropriately in the context of when it was released.

I do agree, if anyone could handle it properly, it would be them.

On the other hand, I do tend to think the film's place within that trope may be part of why Criterion has never touched it, and might never. That was how all this started, I was asked to explain why I thought it was unlikely that Criterion would pick it up.

I also think they're unlikely to pick it up just because the film doesn't really have the continued strong critical reputation they tend to prefer, the film has kind of been forgotten by the general film buff audience, maybe for the best.

In a weird way, I would almost place this story and this particular film adaptation alongside The Birth of a Nation and Triumph of the Will, as movies that are historically important and worthy of study, but profoundly troubling in the modern world and potentially dangerous. Obviously it wasn't made with hateful intentions like the other two, it was made with the very best of intentions, but sometimes that's what the road to hell is paved with, as they say, and the film certainly played a notable part in establishing and perpetuating a noxious and destructive narrative trope that remained the dominant storytelling method for decades.

[dukiejosh54]

I missed getting this movie on blu-ray before it went out of print but I found a copy on ebay at auction for a good price. I was able to catch the last half of the movie on TCM awhile back. I really liked what I seen, looking forward to finally watching the entire movie.

[WaverBoy]

Originally Posted by James Luckard

I do agree, if anyone could handle it properly, it would be them.

On the other hand, I do tend to think the film's place within that trope may be part of why Criterion has never touched it, and might never. That was how all this started, I was asked to explain why I thought it was unlikely that Criterion would pick it up.

I also think they're unlikely to pick it up just because the film doesn't really have the continued strong critical reputation they tend to prefer, the film has kind of been forgotten by the general film buff audience, maybe for the best.

In a weird way, I would almost place this story and this particular film adaptation alongside The Birth of a Nation and Triumph of the Will, as movies that are historically important and worthy of study, but profoundly troubling in the modern world and potentially dangerous. Obviously it wasn't made with hateful intentions like the other two, it was made with the very best of intentions, but sometimes that's what the road to hell is paved with, as they say, and the film certainly played a notable part in establishing and perpetuating a noxious and destructive narrative trope that remained the dominant storytelling method for decades.

I wouldn’t place it anywhere NEAR those two films. I mean, come on. Seriously. Regardless, as I said before, the film isn’t any less sympathetic toward its gay character than VICTIM is to its gay characters (that is to say, it’s pretty darn sympathetic), and Criterion has already released that one. I see zero logic in positing that Criterion would be afraid to release the film for the reasons you’re stating. Does not compute.

[WaverBoy]

Originally Posted by Aunt Peg

Shirley Maclaine's performance in The Children's Hour is my personal favourite of hers. It is so gut wrenching and brave. I've always felt the criticisms of the film to be rather unfair given when the film was made and the limitations that it would have had imposed on it.

Some of that does comes down to the gay character killing themselves and therefore showing homosexuals as leading unhappy, unfulfilling virtually worthless lives. But the sad reality is that some gay people are still killing themselves 60 years after The Children's Hour was filmed for a variety of disturbing reasons. I have always felt this film painful to watch every time I view it because it sadly reflects what some people do still go through.

Absolutely. Spot on. The film presents what happened as a tragedy, which it was, brought on by idiot asswhole homophobic bigots, which it was. I think it holds up incredibly well. This sort of thing still happens all too often, depending on the part of the world you live in. Hell, even in some parts of this country. The film is still incredibly timely. I think Shirley is being far too harsh on it with her retrospective comments.

[WaverBoy]

Originally Posted by drush9999

Watched it very recently, and can't see why there would be any major controversy today. It accurately portrays attitudes of the time while being sympathetic to Shirley MacLaine's character and showing up the parents of the kids as being complete a-holes. I think it works better through modern eyes TBH.

Again, spot on. Thank you.

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by WaverBoy

I wouldn’t place it anywhere NEAR those two films. I mean, come on. Seriously. Regardless, as I said before, the film isn’t any less sympathetic toward its gay character than VICTIM is to its gay characters (that is to say, it’s pretty darn sympathetic), and Criterion has already released that one. I see zero logic in positing that Criterion would be afraid to release the film for the reasons you’re stating. Does not compute.

As I've said before, we'll have to agree to disagree. However, Criterion had access to the MGM catalog for years and years, and never chose to release this, so that has to say something.

I'm not saying it's as dangerous as those films, I'm simply saying that, like those films, it is still something where its danger needs to be weighed against its value as a work of art.

Do I think one viewing of The Children's Hour alone will actively cause someone to go out and kill themselves? No, of course not. But do I think that, as part of a massive artistic and social trend painting a hopeless portrait of queer life, it probably added to the sense of alienation a lot of people felt, in 1961 and for decades to come, and may have been one of countless elements that eventually contributed to lots of suicides and lots of people being unhappy? Definitely.

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by WaverBoy

Absolutely. Spot on. The film presents what happened as a tragedy, which it was, brought on by idiot asswhole homophobic bigots, which it was. I think it holds up incredibly well. This sort of thing still happens all too often, depending on the part of the world you live in. Hell, even in some parts of this country. The film is still incredibly timely. I think Shirley is being far too harsh on it with her retrospective comments.

I don't think that's the case though. At its core, the film still seems to be saying there's something wrong with Shirley's character, something defective. The reaction of the community is cruel,yes, but when Shirley's character says that she's an awful person to Audrey's character, her character and the film don't really rebut it strongly. The Audrey character doesn't know how to process it, and the film presents Shirley's suicide at the end as a tragedy, but one that feels almost inevitable, it doesn't seem like she had much of an alternative. And the moderately hopeful ending the Audrey character is given, going off for marriage with a handsome male doctor, seems to reinforce that.

Again, it was the best they could do in 1961, especially based on a play that was already 30 years old, and groundbreaking int its time. But it's a highly dated message today, in a world where we can have films like Carol or Call Me By Your Name, where the queer characters aren't "punished" by the fates for their "otherness."

I'm truly curious to see how they adapt it for that miniseries they announced a year or two ago. I can't imagine it can be done as anything but a period piece, but I'm curious to see how they deal with the inherently bleak outlook of the piece.