I think "THESE THREE" is better than the second version of William Wyler "THE CHILDREN OUR". It´s true that de second version is more fidel to the original but THESE THREE have an romantic climax that dont exist in the second. In conclusion. the fisrt version is more realistic, more humanistic and less melodramatic... is better
share'These Three' was indeed very well done. I was skeptical at first, wondering how on earth they could pull off such a censored version, but the acting was spot on and made for an incredible picture, even if the story at times made me smirk. Merle Oberon and Joel McCrea were very good; however Shirley MacLaine was my favorite Marth.
...and in conclusion, I would like to say that James Dean and Leo Gorcey are very hot.
I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiments so far expressed. These Three is far superior in almost every way to the later, theoretically more faithful remake. The one way in which TT yields the palm to TCH is in the afore-mentioned performance of Miss MacLaine, who could probably draw tears from a stone. But overall, the level of acting is much better in the first one. And who could resist dear old Margaret Hamilton as the sarcastic housekeeper who sees through Mary from the beginning, and gets to deliver the much-deserved slap! When I saw this at the theatre, the audience cheered and applauded at this point! I also love Walter Brennan as the curmudgeonly taxi driver, who, when Mrs. Mortar demands he open the door for her, retorts 'Why? Got a bad arm?'. But Bonita Granville is definitely the star of the show as evil Mary Tilford. She effortlessly portrays one of the wickedest villains in film history, and in my opinion should have been awarded a special juvenile Oscar for her work.
shareI love both films. I actually think Both Films are sad because in These Three I get the impression that Martha is stuck with her Awful Aunt. I liked Miriam better in The Children's Hour because she didn't get a chance to over act. I have loved These Three since I was a litte girl and over all it has the most effective performances by both the leading and supporting casts.
"Dig the grave both wide and deep,
For I am sick, and fain would sleep!"
[deleted]
deapan_dive and blainefielding:
I agree with both of you that the superior film is TT; for the various reasons you point to. It is about the "lie" and the children driving that lie.
I also think that Ms. Hopkins performance is the better one, understated and real, not too hysterical (Ms. Maclaine) and over the top acting.
I like both versions, but I have to say I too prefer "These Three". It is the children's machinations that drive the story and I think those in the 1936 version far outshine the more wooden ones in the 1961 movie.
I think Bonita Granville's performance as the malevolent Mary was superb. Ditto for Marcia Mae Jones. And the other supporting child actors were excellent too.
Blaine in Seattle
I feel this is one of the rare cases where BOTH films compliment each other.
In the first we are offended by the censoredship.(As any true blooded American should be.) And the remake educates us to the TRUE moral of the story.
Disgust of the details should never allow us to ignore its source.
It is for this reason I keep BOTH copies in a double-sided DVD case in my collection. Incase any of my friends inquire about it to me.
I think Hellman stated something to this effect after the remake.
Good for you that you have "These Three" on DVD. I'd like to watch it again but can't find a copy of it in Netflix, Amazon.com....
share[deleted]
[deleted]
DamienWasHere, it may come as a suprise to you, but NOBODY lives happily ever after.
All true stories end in death and nobody ever had a HAPPY ending.
People that look for gold at the end of a rainbow are apt to die trying!
As for being politicaly correct, Id settle for just plain old good mannors. No need to singularize them.
[deleted]
''This response is almost as dopey as your original post especially because you don't understand what the hell I am saying.''
FilmCollector made a great and true post, you just come across as a ''dopey'' homophobe trying to justify yourself by implying that 'The Children's Hour' is more offensive to lesbian. Give me a break!
And Americans should be ashamed of the level of censorship at the time 'These Three' was made, because not everyone at the time agreed that lesbian storylines should be censored (hence the plot) and not every country censored as heavily.
And it is not PC to be anti-homophobia.
If you are sick of the ''I love Jesus 100% signature'', copy and paste this into your profile!
So you're NOT offended by censorship?
In that case, let me make you're day by telling you to shut the f--- up!
[deleted]
[deleted]
DamienWasHere:
Damien,
Frankly you haven't really been anywhere. The story is NOT about how lesbians are or are not treated or lesbianism at all for that matter. Lesbianism is incidental to the story. The story is about the LIE, and how these lives were all affected by it.
I just read some of your other posts on this thread, and I would seek professional help if I were you, and I thank "whomever" that I am not. You are a very hostile, angry, and bitter person. Somehow you feel the world has done you a great disservice. The disservice is being administered by the one closest to you, yourself. Take care of your anger, you will be infinitely happier, and so will we.
[deleted]
Dear Damien,
I have no argument with you, and frankly you write beautifully and you are always on point. I am writing merely to let you know that your ire toward me while aptly directed was do to my stupidity for not realizing that I meant to respond to "film-collector." While I have no idea as to whom or where you came up with "Blanche" I will take it as a rebuke of me, and a well deserved one for incorrectly addressing my post.
[deleted]
I agree both films are very good of course the second movie probably wouldn’t have been done if the first one wasn’t censored as such. I believe it was 1934 when they went crazy with censorship which is too bad. I agree that Miriam was better in the second movie then the first but it was Bonita that really did a bang up job in the first. I’ve always liked Joel McCrea especially as he got older and Merle Oberon did a good job as well. If I were to pick the better of the two movies it would be the second one ONLY for the fact that it told the true story as it should be told, I prefer real life situations over contrived phony outcomes, not to say that fiction can’t be fun too, but this movie was to have a purpose which wasn't addressed well in the first movie.
Film-Collector, don’t be put out by “DamienWasWhere?” there are a#oles all over the place and it is obvious “IT” is only here to stir the pot and get people worked up. As you can see everyone else seems to be on your side so the best thing to do is just ignore “IT”.
[deleted]
[deleted]
''Only a queen would get offended by my valid opinions.''
I am not a queen, yet I am offended. I get offended by ignorant, overly hostile bigots. And you sound like a moronic Christian; if you aren't one, stop acting like one.
If you are sick of the ''I love Jesus 100% signature'', copy and paste this into your profile!
I saw this for the first time last night on TCM. I enjoyed it a lot. I can't say it was better than the first because it was changed to make it a heterosexual love triangle. I saw the Childen's hour when I was a I kid and a lot of it went over my head. I did see it again as an adult and it made me think a lot. It was a very sad movie. At least with this movie there was some vindication for Martha and Karen and Joe had a happy ending. That was nice.
I will say this, I loved Joel McCrea. The girl that played Mary was brilliant. She had me scared of her, lol. She had evil down to a science. She would have given Patty McCormack a run for her money as Rhoda in the bad seed.
You're certainly right about THAT, Ilariol~~~while Mary Tilford didn't murder anyone in "These Three", she murdered the reputations and livelihoods of three decent, hard-working people. I like this version much better than the original "Children's Hour", mainly b/c I was so upset to realize that the lie actually DID take a life---that of Martha. Guess I'm a happy-ending type of person.
I felt that Alma Kruger did a wonderful job as doting Grandmother Tilford, believing that horrible excuse for a child, even after all the holes in Mary's story and the obvious distress of Rosalie, whom anyone could see was admitting under extreme duress. I felt sympathy for Mrs. Tilford; as an overly-doting grandmother myself, it's been hard for me to admit that my grandchildren could possibly do ANYTHING wrong! Did the original play ever say where Mary's parents where or why she was being raised by her grandma? Just wondering...........
It's difficult for me to compare both movies and decide which is better because to me, although they were based on the same source, they are two different stories. The main theme of how a lie can affect lives in such a damaging way came through nicely in both films, and I think both adaptations are wonderful.
As many others in this post have stated, I thought Shirley Maclaine was superb in TCH. Audrey Hepburn, rather oddly, to me, acted a bit woodenly. I love Hepburn's movies, but I wouldn't say this was one of her best. James Garner steals my heart away, but I particularly liked Karen Balkin as Mary Tilford. She reminded me a lot of Veruca Salt from Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, and I agree that she was indeed a great villain. Veronica Cartwright's depiction of Rosalie made me so sad. I really felt for her. Overall, as a film, I think I'd prefer TCH, but just because of the portrayals and dialogue, not so much because of the story.
I just taped "These Three" a few days ago, and was impressed with the performances of the actors, especially Joel McCrae's convincing doctor. Of course, Merle Oberon and Miriam Hopkins deserve credit for their roles as the teachers of the girls school brought down by the infamous "lies" of Mary, played by 13-year old Bonita Granville (Oscar nominee). I had seen this film years ago, as well as its remake, "The Children's Hour," although I didn't remember how well of a film the latter was. I'm seeing posts that state that "The Children's Hour" reverted back to the homosexual theme of Lillian Hellman's play, and that Audrey Hepburn's and Shirley Maclaine's performances didn't hold up well. I need to see that to make my own comparisions to "These Three." That's why I like original films more than remakes...the impressions lasts longer.
shareThough this film is pretty great I strongly disagree. All the extraordinary emotions that jumps at you in the remake are softened or even removed. The Children's Hour is better in every single way. In direction, writing and acting. It's a near perfect masterpiece which really affected me.
Somebody here has been drinking and I'm sad to say it ain't me - Allan Francis Doyleshare
[deleted]
I saw These Three for the first time today. It is so much better than The Childrens Hour. I am glad Bonita Granville received an oscar nomination. She was terrific. Hellman and William Wyler did a great job of respectively writing a new version of her play and his directing.
shareThey're both equally good. The dialogue is almost exactly the same in each and all the acting is great.
share