Cast: Natalie Dormer, Clancy Brown, Jimmi Simpson, Brandon Michael Hall, Tony Robinette

Written By: Julia Fisher Farbman

Director: Directed By: Ami Cannan Mann

Release Year: 2025

There Is No Known Audio description For This Title

What is it?: In 1969, a female doctor (Dormer) joins the ranks of medical professionals at a children’s hospital, hoping to help as many kids as she can. She ends up revolutionizing how cancer in kids is diagnosed, treated, and all against the discouraging opinions of many of her male peers. she also has a big hand in establishing the first Ronald McDonald house, seeing how hard it is for parents to stay close to their children.

What Works: Yes, you miss things due to the lack of audio description, but Audrey’s Children is still an interesting biopic. It might be more satisfying to listen to a book on the topic, but my heart was warmed to hear the actual Audrey at the end, so elated that people would come and see her film, and hope that it brings some comfort to families with children dealing with cancer, or who have dealt with it.

It isn’t an Oscar bait film, and it plays a little safe, like a 90’s Hallmark Sunday night Movie Of The Week, but it still is enough for Dormer to get a delightful performance in. It is a very broadly accessible title, in that it never pushes into any potentially offensive material, choosing to really lean on history and the underlying message of hope to sell itself to an audience. Clancy Brown is a reliable character actor, and he reliably turns in a solid supporting performance as Audrey’s boss.

What Doesn’t Work: Well, the lack of audio description means there’s just a lot you never pick up, like in scenes where there isn’t dialogue. There’s not too much of that, but still I found myself wanting more context. Also, I appreciate the film taking a sanitized approach, but there’s something about how they go about it that makes it feel more made for television than I think they intended. I think that has a lot to do with why this film has fallen under the radar, because it almost feels like a film of no consequence.

Why you Might Like it: If you’re worried about profanity, sex, or violence, this film doesn’t have that.n It is also a true story about someone we rarely get to learn anything from their story. I realize it is a tall order to recommend without audio description, but it also is not an impossible bridge.

Why You Might Not Like it: Like nearly every version of Going In blind, I know my target demo needs audio description. Sometimes, I can see the reason an audience would choose to dive in without it, because of the subject matter, or an adaptation of a famous work, or something. here, the film is honestly just Ok, and while I lean on the positive side, it’s not enough to expect blind or low vision audiences to follow me on this one. The cast isn’t big, and I don’t know how many blind Natalie Dormer fans are clamoring for this. You might not like it, simply because it is inaccessible.

final thoughts: I was very on the fence here. I’ve certainly seen far more unintelligible films without audio description, but I’ve also sat through far easier films to follow. At the end of the day, what caused me to step onto the greener side was the true story, and the decision to amplify a voice that deserved to be heard. Audrey’s Children isn’t a great film, but it is a fine, if not slightly homogenize biopic of a woman who deserved to have her story told.

Fresh: Final grade: 6/10