Author: Samuel Marchant
This film is subtle but belongs in effdupmovies !!!
Film “The Innocents” from the 1890s story written by Henry James called “Turn of the screw”.
The film was thought of in the 1950s , and probably written by British child protection specialists for the complex mirroring of characters and incident, and the fact it may been 1800s Victorian child protection.
It was written in 1898! Don’t really agree with interpretations by anyone of underlying meaning or path of the story, BUT, a more historical anthropology of the complete set of story facets looks better.
When someone writes a story they “deem to be fiction” , they draw on what they know as “plausible” from what they have learned that was real too, characters and jobs.
The person writing in 1930 about the story based on psychology only saw as far as the profession of psychology, not the history and problems always reported that would been in 1898 and decades before that Henry James knew.
First, orphans that were relatives of wealthy “get the chance” the children obtained, to be careful for “officially by law by a relative” , in this , their uncle.
And running to true history also, the “sexist roles by law and religion of Victorian society” , the uncle, a bachelor , a man and no connection with children beyond a.k.a. “supply” called in law “benefactor”, responsible for both economic and material well being of “dependants’.
The governess , with the same job suitability credentials by letter of application has reinforced her “complicity to Victorian religious and societal law for the female sexist aspect required to be both acceptable and exceptional”.
My feeling about the ghost story section of the story, may been added to assist representing the peculiar levels of stress and reaction to organisation children have from death of both parents. NOTE it is not mentioned how the children became orphaned in any version !!! , but a dead male and a dead female whom were effectively carers known to them whom’s profile of respect accords the same features in the male and female as mother and father would had is notoriously “suspicious” as to them being a replacement whether in psychology or simply how to arrange them into the story.
While the two estate workers were alive the had a father in some twisted way and the girl, a mother figure replacement in some twisted way (whether if this was taken from a historical documentation in real life there were no miss Jessop and no Quint or however the name was spelled from the fiction).
IF ANYTHING, the story although rearranged to suit a book in 1898 is about the “bizzare behaviour of orphans as reaction” to loss of only parent or parents.
One more feature “closely resembling 1800s era” , and the problems the new governess had, she seems written in as attempting to replace the parents deliberately as the new “parent” (named by law as “guardian”). but probably based on how little success a “governess” rather than specialist would achieve because she attempts to manage and control rather than empathise.
In short, I think the story is about women child stealing or child swiping (a sort of clandestine) by legal opportunity and what it is makes them shallow.
The story ending tends to say her empowered brevity did more damage alike the megalomania of feminism rather than maternal sexist duty.
Quite plainly she shows as a creep.
The final piece of it is interesting , the undertone of some illicit sexual perverse mental contact with deceased figures and the minds of the children being affected! At this point (and in 2026) either paediatric psychology and or paediatric biologists would give a symptom readout on the problem such as stress and precocious puberty activities in such an environment but is just going way too far here. note: apparently, In British countries it’s against the law to directly kiss children on the lips , includes parents because a momentary direct lips to lips kiss is labelled in law as “intense” as the film shows twice!!!!