Top Qs
Timeline
Chat
Perspective

The Woman in the Hall

1947 British film From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Woman in the Hall
Remove ads

The Woman in the Hall is a 1947 British drama film directed by Jack Lee and starring Ursula Jeans, Jean Simmons, Cecil Parker.[2] The screenplay was written by Lee, Ian Dalrymple and Gladys Bronwyn Stern, from Stern's 1939 novel of the same title.

Quick facts Directed by, Written by ...

It was the film debut of actress Susan Hampshire.

Remove ads

Plot

Lorna Blake is a widow with two daughters. She augments her slender income by using her children to extort money, visiting the houses of the rich to tell a pathetic story and beg for help.

Lorna makes a rich capture when Sir Halmar Bernard proposes marriage to her. She tells him that she has only one daughter, Molly. When her other daughter, Jay, is arrested for forging a cheque, Lorna refuses to help her.

Remove ads

Cast

Remove ads

Production

It was made by Wessex Film Productions at Pinewood Studios, with sets designed by Peter Proud.

Jack Lee later recalled the experience of working for Wessex "revolted me" because "it reminded me of when I was a child and my mother would send me out on begging expeditions because she never had any money. It was a bloody awful novel and a terrible film."[3]

Reception

Box office

The producer's receipts in the UK were £97,900 and £19,900 overseas.[1]

Critical

The Monthly Film Bulletin wrote: "This is an unusual film made with considerable originality both of story and treatment. Excellent performances from Ursula Jeans, and from Jean Simmons and Jill Raymond as her two daughters, are backed by a strong cast, and although the interior sets are not altogether convincing the film as a whole is refreshing and entertaining."[4]

Kine Weekly wrote: "The film has a sketchy start and an inconclusive big trial scene climax, but the rest is tightly packed with clever and telling vignettes and by-play. Sound and exciting at its core, it is no small tribute to its stars and director that it holds and intrigues in spite of its failure to arrive at clear-cut conclusions. More coherent films have, oddly enough, said less. Technically, it leaves nothing to be desired."[5]

Picture Show wrote: "Brilliantly acted and cleverly directed"[6]

In British Sound Films: The Studio Years 1928–1959 David Quinlan rated the film as "good", writing: "Good script helps refreshingly original story."[7]

Remove ads

References

Loading related searches...

Wikiwand - on

Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.

Remove ads