Customer Reviews
History Boys, take a bow... - By: Eclectic Boy, 08 Jun 2008 
A friend told me about this film & I'm sure I would have enjoyed it less had I not known that it was previously a successful West End play. Written by the well known English poet & writer, Alan Bennet, it feels more like a play than a film - the characters are larger than life & the musical backdrop is a bit of a giveaway.
Set in Britain in the 80s (judging by the music) the plot follows a group of state school boys who have qualified for admission interviews at Oxford & Cambridge Universities. The headmaster feels that despite the boys' obvious intelligence, they lack a certain `flair' against their public school competition. So he recruits a young Oxbridge graduate straight from teacher training school to polish the boys for the entrance exams & interviews.
In stark contrast to their existing teacher & mentor, Hector, (played by Richard Griffiths), this new teacher instructs them in the art of passing exams - paraphrased as: `the truth doesn't matter - as long as your answer is interesting'. This new style of teaching grates with Hector whose own lessons meander through acting out the antics of a Paris Brothel in French (Hilarious if you can follow it - I followed the gist), reading poetry, & acting out modern film. Showing a total disregard for the syllabus or any other conventional teaching method, yet infusing the boys with a passion & interest in creative learning. Very Dead Poets Society.
Themes in the film include, the British class system, homosexuality, love, peadophilia, coming of age angst, literature, & the passing on of wisdom - or as we calll it the Education system. Hector: `Pass it on boys, pass it on'.
The cast of boys & teachers are great & play their characters with alll the passion of the stage. If viewed solely as a film it could be seen as overacted with little action (see other reviews) but Bennett's clever script with constant subtext & sharp wit serve to remind us it's more than a film.
The director, Nicholas Hytner, should also take a bow - taking a successful play & making it into a film (in 30 days) is a great achievement - of vision & leadership & art. Watch the DVD extras for an insight into the journey from play to film & back.
My rating of 4 stars takes account that it's not my preferred genre, but a good piece of art nevertheless.
For more Alan Bennett, read (or watch) `Lady in a Van'.
"History. It's just one [bloody] thing after another." - By: Mary Whipple, 10 Sep 2007 (3.5 stars) Set in the 1980s in a boarding school in the north of England, this newly released film adaptation of Alan Bennett's play (which won six Tony Awards during its 2006 New York run), follows eight young "sixth-formers" who are preparing for the history entrance examinations for Oxford or Cambridge. To help the students prepare for the exams, the headmaster hires a young teacher, Irwin (Stephen Campbell Moore), to improve the students' "presentation" so that they will stand out from the crowd. Irwin's goal is to teach the students to think "outside the box"--not to be dull--when they answer examiners' questions.
His mission conflicts with the goals of the English & History teachers. Hector, the motor-cycle-riding English teacher (Richard Griffiths), has taught the students reams of poetry, along with the French subjunctive (though it is not his subject), having students practice their French by pretending to negotiate at a brothel. He takes the long view & values education for its own sake. The History teacher, Dorothy Lintott (Frances de la Tour), has taught the facts: "Plainly stated & properly organized facts need no presentation, surely," she remarks to the headmaster. The students' efforts to be accepted at Oxford drive the action.
The film features many of the same actors who appeared in the stage play, notably the brilliant Griffiths as Hector, the sensitive Moore as Irwin, the tough-talking, heart-of-gold de la Tour as Dorothy Lintott, & the same eight students, joking, bantering with their teachers, & pursuing their favorite subject--sex. The film, however, is very different in tone from the play. In the play the conflict between the teachers & their views of education unites the action & gives depth & universality to strong themes. In the film, this conflict is much less clear, with the themes largely subordinated to questions about sexual orientation by various students & their possible abuse by a teacher. Some characters (especiallly the headmaster, Clive Merrison) are caricatures, a startling contrast to the more realisticallly presented students.
In some ways the film is better than the play. The film shows the students within the context of a large school, & film close-ups make their emotional conflicts an intimate experience. Hector (Griffiths) is a far more sympathetic character in the film, due in large part to the close-ups, & Irwin has a more fully developed role. Unfortunately (and I'm not sure how universal this problem is), the film I saw (in a major theater chain), was fuzzy, with vertical black lines showing throughout the entire film, making it appear more like an 8 mm home movie than a major studio production. The film tries to take advantage of the broader possibilities of film vs. stage, but as the context broadens, the film becomes less unified, & the drama loses some of its punch. Mary Whipple
