Picspam - Girl on Approval (1961)
30 Nov 2012 01:20 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
thisbluespiritI watched this the other day and felt the need to picspam (though it's in b&w and doesn't even have David Collings). Anyway, it's a film starring Rachel Roberts and James Maxwell and it's one of the British "kitchen sink" oeuvre. (Or New Wave, the booklet calls it.) So, just think, I can painlessly give you a piece of British film and social history and you don't even have to watch the thing.
It also reminded me how much influence stuff like this had on (well many, many things, but also) early Doctor Who (strange, but true, in between the SF stuff and the cheesy B-Movie things. After all, Verity Lambert found William Hartnell in This Sporting Life - Rachel Roberts's next film after this one - and I'd be willing to bet she saw this, too). Girl on Approval was not as bleak as I anticipated/feared (I stressed a lot while watching this - I've seen Saturday Night and Sunday Morning, Room at the Top and A Taste of Honey so I didn't trust them one bit). It's about a couple who foster a difficult teenager, the first time that topic had been covered by British cinema, and even though it was very dated, 1950s-stilted in places and occasionally a bit over-educational, it was very honest in the way it tackled that and Annette Whiteley as the girl (Sheila) reminded me very strongly of some of the young people I've known in some of the places I've worked. (It would be nice to say that the problem was dated as well, but it isn't. It's exactly the same, or even worse fifty years on.)
Plus, while it didn't help me for Copper-related reasons, it was the first time I found James Maxwell playing 'ordinary' and, yes, I was right, he's extremely likeable. (I think, anyway.) Aside from my needless stressing, it was exactly what I was after in that respect.
(Anyway, I found something else with David Collings next; my watching this week has been interesting but it was very much a sudden and unexpected return to my A-Level Media Studies and much too tiring.)
James Maxwell
John & Anne Howland. They don't know what they're letting themselves in for at this point.
Meeting Sheila:
Hearing about her from Miss Gardiner at Social Services, who has persuaded them into taking Sheila (they had intended to foster a younger child, as they had a daughter who died and Anne now can't have any more children). "But only if you're sure," says Miss Gardiner, before arranging to pack Sheila off to them for the weekend and forever if it works out. (I'm sure this is a tad cavalier of Social Services. This seems to be all the preparation they get.)
John Cleese lives next door. He wears an bowler hat. He is middle class and looks down on them because they are lower middle class and don't know their place. (All right, it's not really John Cleese.) What's more, Anne is Welsh and missing home. (It took me a while to realise this; I'm a bit dim, but everyone was being all stilted and 1950s.)
Then James Maxwell read stories to wee!William. I was divided between: awww! and librarian me: aargh, 1950s pictures books, a fate worse than death.
I mean, it was about ducklings. But at least he did a funny voice.
Anyway, they are terribly happy etc. until Sheila comes along... And, actually, no; which was one of the things I liked about it. They have their own issues and the strain of looking after Sheila brings them out. There's quite a bit of them wondering what sort of people they're turning out to be. (They've lost a daughter at some point, Anne is away from home and out of place, lonely and bored, John is working extra hours - he's a maths teacher at the technical college - and worrying about whether Anne resents the move back to London and/or doesn't think he was worth it.)
Sheila keeps getting up and disturbing them the first night. (And I don't know why James Maxwell's pyjamas match the sheets, it seems like something that could get needlessly confusing to me.)
So Anne goes to deal with it, losing her temper badly but then cooking chips.
And works out that Sheila's not used to sleeping alone so goes to sleep with her. (I like the way she waltzes off with the eiderdown with a, "Don't worry, love...")
More cuteness with William. (Rachel Roberts kept walking in front of the camera, so I couldn't cap it, but he was throwing the boy up and catching him. Heh.)
He goes to tell Sheila off, but he's a bit rubbish at it. (He tells her he and Anne aren't green around the gills and she can't play them off against each other, but what she tells him then worries him for the rest of the film. If it was just him, she would eat him alive, I tell you. Also, I thought if you were green about the gills you were feeling sick. Or possibly green with envy.)
The two boys are pretty cute and not too annoying - this is Stephen, the oldest. He doesn't much like Sheila, he wanted another boy and she kicks him sometimes.
Going to the cinema. Me: Noooooo. (It was v stressful watching, like I said.)
Not John's idea of a fun evening out, though, thankfully.
"She's so embarrassing to be seen with!"
And this is William who is too little to be acting - but cute.
Me and Rachel Roberts are in total agreement about this scene.
So he gets told off. (Damn straight; you can't go round being that naive.)
And then they make up. (And he's missing a jacket button; she's being a bad wife, oh no. *rolls eyes* 1950s stuff. And this was written by a woman, btw. *sigh* I suppose they were aiming at educating middle class viewers about the problem and changing attitudes and therefore tackling other issues would be a distraction. Oh well. It does make quite an emphasis on challenging older attitudes - very specifically, the assumption that a child like Sheila should automatically have to be grateful for being taken in and cared for.)
John goes back to Social Services to get some proper background information on Sheila. (As I said, I hope 1950s/60s Social Services weren't really this slapdash). He also suggests that Miss Gardiner (clearly Barbara under another name) taken advantage of their situation for Sheila's sake. (A fair point, I feel.)
"What have we done now?"
More arguing; always a good excuse for arty mirror shots with moody posing.
Then the scissors go missing and Sheila cuts her hair off, right after Anne takes her out to have it done nicely.
"There are worse things she could have done with a pair of scissors, you know."
Me: *nods* Like repeatedly try to stab people with them? (I know, I need a pic or gif of Carole Ann Ford here; I don't have one.)
Then John finally snaps and they have a big argument (ostensibly over Stephen's toy gun - John doesn;t like violent toys - and not anything at all to do with these very strange curtains)
He says he'd like to see how Anne'd get on without him. Anne says she looked after herself perfectly well before she met him and she'll do it again when he's gone. (I believe her).
(He doesn't like that much).
He storms off and Sheila finally shows some concern, even if Anne doesn't notice. (Another thing I liked was the way they often showed Sheila's progress to the viewers but not to the Howlands - especially Anne - who are too much in the situation to see and wonder if they're just making things worse and, after the way they find themselves arguing etc due to the strain, if they're fit to have her).
John comes back, after having apparently had a bucket of water thrown at him. (Thus proving that if you watch enough stuff with a character actor in sooner or later, someone will throw a bucket of water at him.)
Anne wants to know why he didn't ask her if she liked living here weeks ago, instead of worrying about it all that time. And what would she have said? he asks. Anne: "Well, it's all right."
But she doesn't care much where she lives as long as she's with him.
SCARY TEENAGER IN THE HOUSE. Sheila does one last thing and Anne loses her temper and nearly winds up strangling her, so they decide she's got to go back to the home for everybody's sake.
Random cute: William starts crying at all of this, but when John arrives, Stephen's taking care of him already.
However, before they can get rid of Sheila, she runs away. (The girls at school fight with her and tell her that her foster parents only want her for the 30 odd shillings a week she brings in.) I thought it was all going to end bleakly here and everyone was going to regret their failure forever, but after getting the Social Services and police involved...
... John spots Sheila just in time. (Dodgy bloke has been following her.)
Stephen: "You're late!"
And then they decide to let her stay, because she needs Anne. There's a big speech here, but James Maxwell started doing his hand-holding thing again. (Don't ask.) I thought it was going to be a whole film without any of that, but no! And I was wrong, I spotted a couple of briefer, semi-off-camera hand-holding when screencapping, anyway.
John: "Who do you think it is has kept her here all this while?"
Anne: "Well, not me!"
John: "Yes! If you're out of the room for five minutes, she's worrying about where you are. If you go up to the post, she thinks she's lost you. You've got something, I don't know what it is, but it seems to be what Sheila needs. Do you think you can let her go now?"
And so it ends on a hopeful note (with Miss Gardiner driving off with her fingers crossed for Sheila that it'll work out) but no guarantees.
So that was definitely comparatively cheerful for this style of film. I shall have to watch it again sometime and enjoy it properly instead of worrying about the inevitable bleakness.
I don't know why that got so epic, sorry. Anyone still here can have a virtual medal.
Crossposted from Dreamwidth -- Comments there:
It also reminded me how much influence stuff like this had on (well many, many things, but also) early Doctor Who (strange, but true, in between the SF stuff and the cheesy B-Movie things. After all, Verity Lambert found William Hartnell in This Sporting Life - Rachel Roberts's next film after this one - and I'd be willing to bet she saw this, too). Girl on Approval was not as bleak as I anticipated/feared (I stressed a lot while watching this - I've seen Saturday Night and Sunday Morning, Room at the Top and A Taste of Honey so I didn't trust them one bit). It's about a couple who foster a difficult teenager, the first time that topic had been covered by British cinema, and even though it was very dated, 1950s-stilted in places and occasionally a bit over-educational, it was very honest in the way it tackled that and Annette Whiteley as the girl (Sheila) reminded me very strongly of some of the young people I've known in some of the places I've worked. (It would be nice to say that the problem was dated as well, but it isn't. It's exactly the same, or even worse fifty years on.)
Plus, while it didn't help me for Copper-related reasons, it was the first time I found James Maxwell playing 'ordinary' and, yes, I was right, he's extremely likeable. (I think, anyway.) Aside from my needless stressing, it was exactly what I was after in that respect.
(Anyway, I found something else with David Collings next; my watching this week has been interesting but it was very much a sudden and unexpected return to my A-Level Media Studies and much too tiring.)
James Maxwell
John & Anne Howland. They don't know what they're letting themselves in for at this point.
Meeting Sheila:
Hearing about her from Miss Gardiner at Social Services, who has persuaded them into taking Sheila (they had intended to foster a younger child, as they had a daughter who died and Anne now can't have any more children). "But only if you're sure," says Miss Gardiner, before arranging to pack Sheila off to them for the weekend and forever if it works out. (I'm sure this is a tad cavalier of Social Services. This seems to be all the preparation they get.)
John Cleese lives next door. He wears an bowler hat. He is middle class and looks down on them because they are lower middle class and don't know their place. (All right, it's not really John Cleese.) What's more, Anne is Welsh and missing home. (It took me a while to realise this; I'm a bit dim, but everyone was being all stilted and 1950s.)
Then James Maxwell read stories to wee!William. I was divided between: awww! and librarian me: aargh, 1950s pictures books, a fate worse than death.
I mean, it was about ducklings. But at least he did a funny voice.
Anyway, they are terribly happy etc. until Sheila comes along... And, actually, no; which was one of the things I liked about it. They have their own issues and the strain of looking after Sheila brings them out. There's quite a bit of them wondering what sort of people they're turning out to be. (They've lost a daughter at some point, Anne is away from home and out of place, lonely and bored, John is working extra hours - he's a maths teacher at the technical college - and worrying about whether Anne resents the move back to London and/or doesn't think he was worth it.)
Sheila keeps getting up and disturbing them the first night. (And I don't know why James Maxwell's pyjamas match the sheets, it seems like something that could get needlessly confusing to me.)
So Anne goes to deal with it, losing her temper badly but then cooking chips.
And works out that Sheila's not used to sleeping alone so goes to sleep with her. (I like the way she waltzes off with the eiderdown with a, "Don't worry, love...")
More cuteness with William. (Rachel Roberts kept walking in front of the camera, so I couldn't cap it, but he was throwing the boy up and catching him. Heh.)
He goes to tell Sheila off, but he's a bit rubbish at it. (He tells her he and Anne aren't green around the gills and she can't play them off against each other, but what she tells him then worries him for the rest of the film. If it was just him, she would eat him alive, I tell you. Also, I thought if you were green about the gills you were feeling sick. Or possibly green with envy.)
The two boys are pretty cute and not too annoying - this is Stephen, the oldest. He doesn't much like Sheila, he wanted another boy and she kicks him sometimes.
Going to the cinema. Me: Noooooo. (It was v stressful watching, like I said.)
Not John's idea of a fun evening out, though, thankfully.
"She's so embarrassing to be seen with!"
And this is William who is too little to be acting - but cute.
Me and Rachel Roberts are in total agreement about this scene.
So he gets told off. (Damn straight; you can't go round being that naive.)
And then they make up. (And he's missing a jacket button; she's being a bad wife, oh no. *rolls eyes* 1950s stuff. And this was written by a woman, btw. *sigh* I suppose they were aiming at educating middle class viewers about the problem and changing attitudes and therefore tackling other issues would be a distraction. Oh well. It does make quite an emphasis on challenging older attitudes - very specifically, the assumption that a child like Sheila should automatically have to be grateful for being taken in and cared for.)
John goes back to Social Services to get some proper background information on Sheila. (As I said, I hope 1950s/60s Social Services weren't really this slapdash). He also suggests that Miss Gardiner (clearly Barbara under another name) taken advantage of their situation for Sheila's sake. (A fair point, I feel.)
"What have we done now?"
More arguing; always a good excuse for arty mirror shots with moody posing.
Then the scissors go missing and Sheila cuts her hair off, right after Anne takes her out to have it done nicely.
"There are worse things she could have done with a pair of scissors, you know."
Me: *nods* Like repeatedly try to stab people with them? (I know, I need a pic or gif of Carole Ann Ford here; I don't have one.)
Then John finally snaps and they have a big argument (ostensibly over Stephen's toy gun - John doesn;t like violent toys - and not anything at all to do with these very strange curtains)
He says he'd like to see how Anne'd get on without him. Anne says she looked after herself perfectly well before she met him and she'll do it again when he's gone. (I believe her).
(He doesn't like that much).
He storms off and Sheila finally shows some concern, even if Anne doesn't notice. (Another thing I liked was the way they often showed Sheila's progress to the viewers but not to the Howlands - especially Anne - who are too much in the situation to see and wonder if they're just making things worse and, after the way they find themselves arguing etc due to the strain, if they're fit to have her).
John comes back, after having apparently had a bucket of water thrown at him. (Thus proving that if you watch enough stuff with a character actor in sooner or later, someone will throw a bucket of water at him.)
Anne wants to know why he didn't ask her if she liked living here weeks ago, instead of worrying about it all that time. And what would she have said? he asks. Anne: "Well, it's all right."
But she doesn't care much where she lives as long as she's with him.
SCARY TEENAGER IN THE HOUSE. Sheila does one last thing and Anne loses her temper and nearly winds up strangling her, so they decide she's got to go back to the home for everybody's sake.
Random cute: William starts crying at all of this, but when John arrives, Stephen's taking care of him already.
However, before they can get rid of Sheila, she runs away. (The girls at school fight with her and tell her that her foster parents only want her for the 30 odd shillings a week she brings in.) I thought it was all going to end bleakly here and everyone was going to regret their failure forever, but after getting the Social Services and police involved...
... John spots Sheila just in time. (Dodgy bloke has been following her.)
Stephen: "You're late!"
And then they decide to let her stay, because she needs Anne. There's a big speech here, but James Maxwell started doing his hand-holding thing again. (Don't ask.) I thought it was going to be a whole film without any of that, but no! And I was wrong, I spotted a couple of briefer, semi-off-camera hand-holding when screencapping, anyway.
John: "Who do you think it is has kept her here all this while?"
Anne: "Well, not me!"
John: "Yes! If you're out of the room for five minutes, she's worrying about where you are. If you go up to the post, she thinks she's lost you. You've got something, I don't know what it is, but it seems to be what Sheila needs. Do you think you can let her go now?"
And so it ends on a hopeful note (with Miss Gardiner driving off with her fingers crossed for Sheila that it'll work out) but no guarantees.
So that was definitely comparatively cheerful for this style of film. I shall have to watch it again sometime and enjoy it properly instead of worrying about the inevitable bleakness.
I don't know why that got so epic, sorry. Anyone still here can have a virtual medal.
Crossposted from Dreamwidth -- Comments there:
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 30 Nov 2012 02:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 30 Nov 2012 05:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 30 Nov 2012 09:04 pm (UTC)I don't know Rachel Roberts, but she shines out of these caps.
no subject
Date: 30 Nov 2012 11:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 1 Dec 2012 01:30 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 1 Dec 2012 09:41 am (UTC)As to Rachel Roberts, she was particularly famous for this sort of film. I saw her years ago at college in Saturday Night & Sunday Morning and she's pretty much all I remember of that film (although I'm pretty sure that was the one that also made Albert Finney famous) and I think she won a BAFTA for that; she was also in This Sporting Life, which I must see sometime, because that's the one with William Hartnell in as well. (She got Oscar-nominated for that). So you can spot the class-act even from caps, you must have an eye for it! ;-)
She's not as famous now as she might otherwise have been because it took her a while to get a lead role (she was Welsh, and her style of acting was seen as too passionate for 1950s british cinema) and once she had, she was very choosy about her scripts (so you can be reasonably sure a film with her in is going to be worth seeing) but she also suffered badly from depression and v sadly killed herself in 1980 (aged 53).
(Sorry, I had to study this stuff once, a very long time ago - I think more of it is hanging around in my head then I realised.)
no subject
Date: 1 Dec 2012 10:25 pm (UTC)Did you study film?
no subject
Date: 2 Dec 2012 10:07 am (UTC)I didn't, not really! I just did Media Studies A-Level, but we did the 1950s in some detail, and that seems to be one of the bits I remember the most. Also when I was 11 an English teacher randomly made us do A Taste of Honey at school. (I'm not sure why a teacher would think that was a good play to make 11/12 yr olds study, but I got quite taken with the film version - because it was all black and white and fog and canal paths and children's songs as incidental music.)
no subject
Date: 30 Nov 2012 11:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 1 Dec 2012 09:43 am (UTC)