MovieChat Forums > The Killing of Sister George (1968) Discussion > Well-Acted, But Hardly a Lesbian 'Boys i...

Well-Acted, But Hardly a Lesbian 'Boys in the Band'


The same year that Mart Crowley's landmark play about Gay men in New York, THE BOYS IN THE BAND, opened off-Broadway, Robert Aldrich, one of Hollywood's brightest and most versatile voices, gave us the distaff version with his adaptation of Frank Marcus's play THE KILLING OF SISTER GEORGE. Two years later, William Friedkin would bring Crowley's work to the screen, with much better results than Aldrich achieves here, but I think it is only fair to point out that, flaws and all, Marcus and Aldrich got there first.

And they brought a cast of heavy-hitters with them: Beryl Reid, a force of nature as June Buckridge ("Sister George," a nurse on a popular soap opera), Susannah York as her somewhat infantile lover "Childie," and the third point in the triangle, a serpentine BBC executive by the name of Mercy Croft, played to a fare-thee-well by Coral Browne, who has a dual agenda: telling June that she's been sacked and stealing Childie from her into the bargain.

The acting by all three of these women is, in a word, sensational. Reid in particular dominates the proceedings: June Buckridge is an unpleasant, loud, obnoxious woman who is abusive to her lover. York, however, it must be said, is no slouch in the role of the submissive Childie; in fact, there is one scene with a cigar butt where Childie turns the tables on "George" with devilish glee. And Browne as Mrs Croft is a perfect foil for the both of them: a serpent in a Chanel suit; oozing style from every pore while scheming to get her way.

The only problem is that the basic situation really isn't enough to hang a two-hour-and-eighteen-minute movie on. With THE BOYS IN THE BAND, setting the proceedings at a birthday party allowed the drama to unfold almost in real time, with room for a cast of nine actors crammed into a fancy Village apartment; the claustrophobic nature of the set actually works in the film's favor.

Unfortunately, GEORGE is a bare-bones story of an aging actress about to lose a job that she has grown to take for granted, much as she takes for granted her lover, a woman who retreats into her dolls when under stress and whom George abuses mercilessly. Childie, as I mentioned, sometimes gets her own back, and once or twice we see some real affection between the two women, but halfway through this thing I found them both quite unbearable and I had a hard time swallowing the notion that either of them would stand for the other's nonsense for so many years. The addition of Mrs Croft to the proceedings does add a little something extra, but though Browne works hard, the part is underwritten
and we really don't understand what motivates her. Is she really attracted to Childie, or is she just a bitch out to get George, and taking her lover just an added bit of venom? In the end we are forced to draw our own conclusions. And June, as difficult as she has been, is most certainly the one left with the short end of the stick as the curtain falls.

The sex scene, which garnered a lot of press in its day, and which in fact is a pivotal moment, is frankly the movie's low point. Much was made at the time of Susannah York's reluctance to play the scene; I do not know if there was any truth to that, but Browne's icy-cold approach to the "seduction," her fixation on one of York's breasts as if it were a rare specimen of beetle under a microscope, and York's orgasm, which sounds more like a blood-curdling scream of pain than ecstasy, all add up to what must be the most unpleasant seduction scene in film history.

At the end of the day, this is a film worth seeing for the performances (Reid's in particular), but it's a rather unpleasant business, and goes on way too long; frankly, by the time the thing finally ended, I was ready to take a hatchet to all three of them.

Never mess with a middle-aged, Bipolar queen with AIDS and an attitude problem!
><

reply

Your observations about The Killing of Sister George are well put, and as to the movie, I agree with you. I remember the play as being a little easier to take. It moves a lot more quickly than the movie largely because the movie shows most of the incidents that are only described in the play. The play is set entirely in George and Childie's flat and has only four characters.

Aldrich's adaptation strikes me as old-fashioned and borderline lurid. Lesbianism is not merely neurotic (cf. The Boys in the Band) but grotesque and predatory. The musical score reenforces that feeling as do the odd, diagonal compositions. (It reminded me of Whatever Happened to Baby Jane.) In this respect, it is not an advance beyond earlier film depictions.

Apart from their generally unpleasant, perhaps even distasteful, depictions of gay life, Sister George and The Boys in the Band have fairly little in common. The boys really don't suffer the kinds of losses that George does. In fact, all but Harold leave with a greater insight into themselves than they came with (and Harold had it figured out from the start).

I think a more appropriate comparison would be 1973's Butley. Here we have an acerbic English professor who loses both his significantly younger lover and his estranged wife on the same day. And if that were not enough, a rival teacher has found a publisher for her book while he has barely started his. Once again, it is a single-set play and movie, but Harold Pinter's adaptation has none of the melodrama that both Aldrich and Friedkin took pains to heighten in theirs.

Oh, and while I'm middle-aged, I'm only a monopolar depressive who is HIV- and reasonably affable as introverts go. ;)

reply

I'll have to add BUTLEY to my list if for no other reason than to see the great Alan Bates in his prime; the man was not only a brilliant actor, but gorgeous to boot!

As to SISTER GEORGE and BOYS IN THE BAND, I never had the privilege of seeing either of them onstage, but I appeared in a stage production of BOYS; I can say that William Friedkin brought the play to the screen pretty much intact, and since it was an ensemble piece with nine major characters rather than just three, it moves along at a ferocious clip and if some of the moments are unpleasant, there is more than enough sharp and witty comedy to balance the proceedings. In fact it's one of my very favorite stage-to-screen adaptations. SISTER GEORGE, for all its good points, and it has some, is an unpleasant business that drags on too long, and while Beryl Reid is a force of nature as June Buckridge, she blows everyone else off the screen and evokes little sympathy, which makes the film that much harder to take.


Never mess with a middle-aged, Bipolar queen with AIDS and an attitude problem!
><

reply