--- title: "The Hours" year: 2002 kind: "film" canonical: "https://film.one/film/the-hours" fi1m_score: 72 critics_score: 75 critics_reviews: 15 published: "2026-09-20T07:08:54.172437+00:00" updated: "2026-09-20T07:09:16.098764+00:00" region: "US" licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # The Hours (2002) Directed by Stephen Daldry · 1h 54m · MPA PG-13 · Drama **Fi1m score: 72** · Critics 75 from 15 reviews *In a sentence:* Three women, three kitchens, and a Philip Glass arpeggio that follows them all home > Three women, three single days and one novel running through all of them. Stephen Daldry’s adaptation is handsomely made and acted with real care, Julianne Moore especially, but David Hare’s script keeps saying the point aloud and Philip Glass’s piano never lets it breathe. ## Synopsis Three women, three days. In Richmond in 1923, Virginia Woolf (Nicole Kidman) wakes with the first line of *Mrs Dalloway* in her head and a husband, Leonard (Stephen Dillane), who counts what she eats and keeps the doctors at bay. In Los Angeles in 1951, Laura Brown (Julianne Moore) is reading that novel in bed, and has a birthday cake to bake for her husband Dan (John C. Reilly) while their son Richie (Jack Rovello) watches from a kitchen stool. In New York in 2001, Clarissa Vaughan (Meryl Streep) goes out early to buy the flowers herself, for a party in honour of Richard (Ed Harris), a poet who is ill and does not want a party. Stephen Daldry cuts between the three as each morning goes wrong. ## Review Michael Cunningham’s novel gives three women a single day each and lets Virginia Woolf’s *Mrs Dalloway* run through all of them: Woolf writing it in Richmond in 1923, a Los Angeles housewife reading it in 1951, a New York editor in 2001 nicknamed after its heroine. David Hare’s screenplay keeps that shape, and Stephen Daldry cuts between the three days so that the women wake together, wash together and look into mirrors together. It is a serious, well-acted film about depression, and it is worth your evening. It is a film that keeps telling you what it means, and by the end we wanted it to stop. Seamus McGarvey gives each period its own light. Richmond is brown wood and grey window, Los Angeles is lemon yellow and turquoise, New York is the flat blue of a winter morning. Maria Djurkovic’s three houses tell you what each woman has been allowed: a study with the curtains half drawn, a new kitchen, a flat stacked with books. Ann Roth puts Laura Brown in a housedress she cannot quite breathe in and Clarissa in trousers and a big coat. Peter Boyle cuts on matched actions, three faces turning from a mirror, three vases set down, and the first few times the trick is exciting. By the tenth it is a tic. Kidman plays Woolf with her face lengthened and her voice dropped low. She barely moves. It is a good, careful piece of work that never lets us forget how careful it is. Streep, as Clarissa, is the opposite, all errands and lists, buying flowers and arranging a party for a man who would rather be left alone; she is best when the busyness runs out and she has to sit down. Ed Harris, as Richard, in a dim flat in a dressing gown, supplies the film’s only real anger. Stephen Dillane’s Leonard Woolf is the quietest good performance in it, a man counting his wife’s meals and pretending not to. It is Julianne Moore who got at us. Laura Brown has a new house, a kind husband (John C. Reilly), a second child on the way and a cake to bake, and Moore plays her as a woman doing a convincing impression of someone who is fine. The scene in the kitchen with her son Richie (Jack Rovello), in which the cake goes wrong and the boy watches his mother’s face rather than the cake, moved us more than anything else in it. Rovello does almost nothing. He looks, the way small children look at a parent who is somewhere else, and we had not expected to be undone by sponge. The trouble is Hare. He is a fine dramatist who does not trust the pictures. Every so often a character stops and says what the film means, about facing a life, about choosing, and the lines sound like a summary of the novel read aloud. Philip Glass’s score does the same job in music: one rolling piano figure over and over, rising whenever anyone looks out of a window, flattening three quite different women into a single mood. Richard Strauss is also credited, for a song on a record in Richard’s flat, and those seconds are more affecting than the whole of Glass. The New York strand is the weakest. Woolf’s day and Laura’s day are held in check; Clarissa’s tips into speeches and slammed doors, and a late scene in Richard’s flat is staged for effect in a way the rest of the film would not allow. There is a late flourish that we will not describe, except to say it ties a bow on a story that did not need one. It is braver than most literary adaptations: it is about three women who are not sure they want to go on living, and it says so plainly within a 12A. Watch it at home and turn the volume down when the piano starts; the faces carry it, and at 114 minutes it does not overstay. The reviews were warmer than we are; the difference is the score and the script. The women are as good as anyone said. *Fi1m score 72, published 20 September 2026.* ## What the critics say Most critics admire The Hours, and the praise gathers in the same places. The three lead performances are singled out almost everywhere, with Nicole Kidman’s inward, brooding Virginia Woolf the one most often named as the film’s finest work. Beyond the acting, reviewers credit Stephen Daldry and David Hare with turning a difficult, layered novel into a drama that moves people through precise editing and quiet parallels rather than flashbacks or voice-over, and several remark that the tears it draws feel earned rather than engineered. The reservations are modest and scattered. Some find it slow and a little precious; Variety thinks it plays as a collection of fine scenes rather than a whole, and Empire feels the modern strand slides into melodrama. The Guardian is cooler than most on Kidman and on a flourish in the ending. The spread is narrow, with one outright dissenter: Slant dismisses the film as a faux-feminist manifesto with spoon-fed dialogue. ### Reviews we read (15) - **Los Angeles Times**, Kenneth Turan (90/100, inferred): The film has turned out to be a splendid work that uses all the resources of cinema to deliver cumulative emotional power that takes viewers by surprise. It singles out the fearlessness of its emotionality, strong performances by Kidman, Streep and Moore, and the way it embraces strong feelings while maintaining intelligence and restraint. [Read](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2002-dec-27-et-turan27-story.html) - **The New York Times**, Stephen Holden (NYT Critic’s Pick): The deeply moving film is an amazingly faithful adaptation of the novel, with Nicole Kidman delivering a performance of astounding bravery as Virginia Woolf that evokes the torment of mental illness as never shown before. It praises the layered, delicate reflection that blends three women's stories across time. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/27/movies/27HOUR.html) - **Screen Daily** (85/100, inferred): Hare and Daldry have turned the novel into an elegant, intense and perhaps profound drama that will be a major awards player and must-see prestige picture. It succeeds as a rare tear-jerker driven by emotional impact rather than manipulation, with strong performances from the lead actresses. [Read](https://www.screendaily.com/the-hours/4011577.article) - **Sight and Sound**, Sheila Johnston (80/100, inferred): The film is a sophisticated treat with a complex layering of three women's stories. It praises the outstanding performances, especially Nicole Kidman's, and notes its mainstream arthouse ambitions based on a postmodern novel. [Read](http://old.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/feature/24) - **The Times**, Barbara Ellen (80/100, inferred): The critic praises the film's excellent acting across the board, clever production design, and empathetic handling of its themes of despair and resilience, calling it a welcome highbrow literary drama about women's interior lives despite some slowness and preciousness. [Read](https://www.thetimes.com/travel/destinations/europe-travel/italy/the-hours-death-in-venice-xz7rgd0xld8) - **Variety**, Todd McCarthy (80/100, inferred): Considerable intelligence and strategic finesse have been brought to bear on this handsomely mounted adaptation, with fine performances and expert work from the director and cast. It singles out Kidman's brooding, inward portrait of Woolf as especially rewarding, while noting the film feels like a collection of scenes rather than a full synthesis. [Read](https://variety.com/2002/film/awards/the-hours-3-1200544436/) - **The Guardian** (75/100, inferred): The critic describes the film as a daring triptych intercutting the stories of three women across eras, praising the strong, controlled performances especially from Meryl Streep and Julianne Moore while noting reservations about Nicole Kidman's portrayal and a narrative flourish in the ending. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2003/feb/14/artsfeatures) - **Time Out**, TCh (75/100, inferred): Daldry's adaptation cuts between single days in the lives of three women across the 20th century, suggesting Woolf's insights remain pertinent. It calls out more complex female characters than usual in Hollywood and deems it a boldly realised, affecting work despite minor quibbles with the score and screenplay. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/the-hours) - **Empire**, William Thomas (70/100, inferred): The critic praises the film's direction, writing, and especially the lead performances, highlighting Nicole Kidman's transformative portrayal of Virginia Woolf as particularly special. However, they note that the story ultimately descends into clichéd bohemian melodrama in its modern strand, undermining the thoughtful setup of the three interwoven narratives. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/hours-review/) - **RogerEbert.com**, Roger Ebert (70/100, inferred): The film meditates on three women's lives linked by Virginia Woolf's novel Mrs. Dalloway, showing how personal freedom expanded over decades but responsibilities and guilts remained. It praises the performances, especially Nicole Kidman's portrayal of Woolf, and the emotional vortex created by the interconnected stories. [Read](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-hours-2002) - **The Hollywood Reporter**, Kirk Honeycutt (70/100, inferred): The critic finds the film a fascinating and ultimately successful cross-cutting stunt among three eras of women's lives marked by repression and depression. The direction by Daldry and performances by the lead actresses are highlighted as strengths in this muted variant of cross-era storytelling. [Read](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/hours-review-2002-movie-1070395/) - **Slant Magazine**, Ed Gonzalez (10/100, inferred): The critic dismisses the film as a preposterous faux-feminist manifesto that reduces its women to sudsy abstractions of repression across generations. The screenplay's spoon-fed dialogue and graphic matches come in for particular complaint amid the melodrama. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/the-hours/) - **Collider**, Liam Gaughan (90/100, inferred): The critic views The Hours as a masterful, deeply moving contemplation on the passage of time and women's inner lives, far more than mere Oscar bait. The anthology structure and strong performances, particularly Kidman's, are singled out for praise. [Read](https://collider.com/the-hours-nicole-kidman/) - **Eye for Film**, Angus Wolfe Murray (90/100, inferred): The critic states it would be difficult to overestimate the quality of this film, praising the subtle emotional connections woven between the three women's lives across decades through precise editing and insinuation rather than flashbacks or voice-over. Daldry coaxes extraordinary performances from the stellar cast, with particular note of the lead actresses' portrayals of inner turmoil and the supporting roles' impact. [Read](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/the-hours-film-review-by-angus-wolfe-murray) - **Paste**, Lacy Baugher Milas (90/100, inferred): The critic calls The Hours fantastic and a delicate, emotionally harrowing story about depression, longing, and the exhaustion of pretending to be fine. The direction's handling of parallels across timelines and the film's affirmation of life amid bleakness are highlighted. [Read](https://www.pastemagazine.com/movies/nicole-kidman/the-hours-nicole-kidman-virginia-woolf) ## Details - **Director:** Stephen Daldry - **Director:** Stephen Daldry - **Screenplay:** David Hare - **Novel:** Michael Cunningham - **Cinematography:** Seamus McGarvey - **Editor:** Peter Boyle - **Music:** Philip Glass, Richard Strauss - **Production design:** Maria Djurkovic - **Costume design:** Ann Roth - **Producer:** Robert Fox, Scott Rudin, Ian MacNeil - **Cast:** Nicole Kidman as Virginia Woolf; Julianne Moore as Laura Brown; Meryl Streep as Clarissa Vaughan; Stephen Dillane as Leonard Woolf; Jack Rovello as Richie; Ed Harris as Richard Brown; Miranda Richardson as Vanessa Bell; John C. Reilly as Dan Brown - **Runtime:** 1h 54m - **Certificate (MPA):** PG-13 - **Release (the US):** 27 December 2002 - **Genres:** Drama - **Also in:** [Best Picture winners](https://film.one/collections/oscar-best-picture.md) (Nominee, 2002); [BAFTA Best Film winners](https://film.one/collections/bafta-best-film.md) (Nominee, 2002); [Golden Globe Best Drama winners](https://film.one/collections/golden-globe-drama.md) (Winner, 2002) - **Budget:** $25 million - **Box office:** $109 million - **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkPWXUxIiXs ## Where to watch in the US - Amazon Prime Video: rent $3.99, hd - Amazon Prime Video: buy $12.99, hd *Checked 2026-09-20.* Also available in: AT, AU, BG, BR, CA, CH, CL, CZ, DE, DK, ES, FI, FR, GB, HR, HU, IE, IT, JP, LT, MX, NO, NZ, PT, RO, RS, SE, TR, US. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country. ## Awards - Academy Awards 2003: Best Costume Design (nominated); Best Director (nominated); Best Film Editing (nominated); Best Original Score (nominated); Best Picture (nominated); Best Supporting Actor (nominated); Best Supporting Actress (nominated); Best Writing, Adapted Screenplay (nominated); Best Actress (won) - Amanda Award for Best Foreign Feature Film 2003: Amanda Award for Best Foreign Feature Film (won) - Silver nugget for the best foreign film 2003: Silver nugget for the best foreign film (won) ## If you liked this - *Mrs Dalloway* (1997): The novel itself, filmed straight, with Vanessa Redgrave buying her own flowers. - *Far From Heaven* (2002), Fi1m 87: Julianne Moore in another 1950s kitchen, in colours even brighter and sadder. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/far-from-heaven.md) - *Cléo from 5 to 7* (1962): One woman, one Paris afternoon, waiting for news; ninety minutes, no wasted ones. - *Jeanne Dielman, 23 quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles* (1975): Three days of housework in real time, and the moment the routine slips. - *Orlando* (1992), Fi1m 81: Sally Potter’s Woolf adaptation is playful where Daldry is solemn; Tilda Swinton across centuries. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/orlando.md) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/the-hours