Customer Reviews

The History Boys

5 star:		(31)
4 star:		(20)
3 star:		(13)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

I did the "Oxbridge term" at exactly the same time as "The History Boys," the fall of 1983. I chose instead to accept a scholarship to an American university that I won halfway through the Oxbridge term. I've lived in America ever since, but my first 19 years was in England, and I can relate to this movie.
Some explanations are in order, because some cultural things are hard on American audiences. Someone once famously observed that we're two nations divided by a common language.
"The History Boys" is not set at a boarding school; it's a grammar school, and it's a second-tier grammar school. In the pecking order back then, you'd have had your British public (but actually private) schools, then your grammar schools led (as the movie mentions) by the likes of Manchester Grammar. Then you'd have the grammar schools like the one in the movie and it would, for these boys, have been a heck of an opportunity (if you buy into the whole Oxford & Cambridge thing, which obviously I didn't) and a bit of a reach. They'd be at a disadvantage for some of the reasons given in the movie (fewer opportunities than kids at more high-falutin' schools) and for the reason of simple English snobbery and the class system at the time.
Second, the class represented here is not, as one reviewer suggested, a mythical place where students care, teachers care and debate thrives. This is an actual place, very much how good English schools were, especially in the last year of 'A'-Levels and the Oxbridge term. It's very well-portrayed here. When I came to the USA, where I attended a fine public university, I never recovered from my disappointment that there wasn't the same level of debate and class discussion. Frankly -- and I love this country, but this was my experience -- no class I took in six years at a good university here ever challenged me as the 'A'-Level and Oxbridge classes had. I think maybe Britain's a little like Japan in having very high standards at the end of high school (and corresponding student stress) that then fades in university.
A clarification on the lives the boys go on to lead. They would end up, for the most part, in fine houses (see reviews below). That's the whole point. Attending either Oxford or Cambridge (while there are no guarantees) did pretty much set people for life if they approached it aiming for that. I've seen that from afar in the lives of my contemporaries who went there. That's why the stakes are so high in the story and success so desirable.
And a final clarification on the aspect of the movie one reviewer called "morally suspect." Maybe so, but the culture of sexuality in Britain is different from the culture of sexuality here in the States. Britain legalized gay marriage, after all, more than a year ago, with minimal fuss, and even The Times of London now lists same-sex unions without fanfare along with the heterosexual ones. The whole issue of homosexuality is different, including the assumption over there that sexual orientation is not necessarily consistent for life. And same-sex experimentation is famous in largely male or all-male British schools. So that aspect of the movie ought to be judged as much as possible in the context of the movie and probably not in an American context which -- no offense intended -- seems more inclined to censure and prudishness.
All that said, and picture quality aside, this is an outstanding movie and a great portrayal of 1983 in England, down to the cars and the music. The only thing I remember that's completely missing here is furious political debate. Britain was four years into Margaret Thatcher in 1983, and politics and social clashes were very much on people's minds, including students like these, and Alan Bennett completely omits that.
But that's my only criticism. Richard Griffiths, who is a veteran British actor whose face would be instantly recognisable to any Brit seeing the movie, is wonderful, on a "Goodbye Mr. Chips" level and better than "Dead Poets Society." Indeed, "History Boys" beats "Dead Poets" simply because it's not Hollywood-ized, it's a much more real movie.
It's got great bullseye detail, too, like the church service at the beginning where the robed priest ministers to a congregation of three, which is the state of the Church of England, Britain almost completely lacking American-style religion at this point, a very secular place despite the lack of division between church and state.
Dominic Cooper as Dakin, Samuel Barnett as Posner and Russell Tovey as Rudge stood out for me, but all the boys are great, and all of the types felt very much familiar to my memories.
The movie is often funny, the dialog wonderful, the way the boys are and the classroom scenes perfectly pitched. The essential scene is the one where Griffiths tutors Barnett one-on-one, and it's essential because it tells us exactly why Griffiths' character is a great teacher, which has to be established.
The ending doesn't bother me. This is Alan Bennett: This is about ideas. The ending furthers the ideas.
This is the same playwright who brought us "40 Years On," yet a much different play and a much different view of a much changed Britain -- and that's why Bennett has endured, because he's changed with the culture.
This is a great movie if you're not offended by frank discussion (and ambiguity) about late-teen and adult sexuality, if you're a bit of an Anglophile, and if you're willing to sit back for something that's really a long conversation rather than an action movie. All of which is why it'll have limited success this side of the big pond.

(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 and 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 and values education for its own sake. The History teacher, Dorothy Lintott (Frances de la Tour), has taught the facts: "Plainly stated and 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, and the same eight students, joking, bantering with their teachers, and pursuing their favorite subject--sex. The film, however, is very different in tone from the play. In the play the conflict between the teachers and their views of education unites the action and gives depth and 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 and their possible abuse by a teacher. Some characters (especially the headmaster, Clive Merrison) are caricatures, a startling contrast to the more realistically presented students.

In some ways the film is better than the play. The film shows the students within the context of a large school, and 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, and 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, and the drama loses some of its punch. n Mary Whipple

"The History Boys" is based on the popular play by Alan Bennett. Filmed between the British run of the play and its world tour, the film features the same cast and director as the stage production. The story is set among the students and teachers at a boys' grammar (state) school in Yorkshire in 1983. The school's headmaster (Clive Merrison) in intent on seeing that his eight best 6th term students (seniors) get into the prestigious Oxford or Cambridge universities. He brings in a new teacher, Mr. Irwin (Steven Campbell Moore), to coach the boys for their exams. Between Irwin's provocative approach, Mr. Hector's (Richard Griffiths) unorthodox classroom, and Miss Lintott's (Frances de la Tour) traditional instruction, the boys get a few lessons on the real world along with their history.

"The History Boys" covers the personal and academic challenges of 12 people -8 students and 4 instructors- as the young men race to prepare for tests that might determine their future. The movie contains some material that isn't in the play, but it has also removed a lot to make the film shorter and tighter. It's theatrical and talky, with characters that are more representative of types than realistic. But it's very funny at times, and that's the basis on which I recommend "The History Boys". The humor is balanced by a somewhat awkward drama that I expect will have no shortage of detractors. The theme of competing educational styles runs throughout: Irwin teaches to tests, Lintott teaches traditional curricula, and Hector provides an eclectic, inspirational window on life and art. This is another one of those schoolboy tales in the vein of "Dead Poets Society". The depth is found in the teachers more than the students, but the boys' unapologetic humor won me over.

The DVD (20th Century Fox 2007): There are 2 featurettes and an audio commentary. "History Boys Around the World: Tour Diaries" (14 min) follows the cast to Hong Kong, New Zealand, Australia, and US during the play's world tour. "Pass It On: History Boys on Screen" (12 min) compares the stage versus screen, the film's themes, and the actors talk about their characters and preparation for the play. The audio commentary with writer Alan Bennett and director Nicholas Hynter is informative and without lulls. They discuss differences between the play and movie, Bennett's inspirations for the characters and story, the debate over different styles of teaching, themes, characters, and the men comment on their own school experiences. Subtitles for the film are available in English, Spanish, French. Dubbing available in Spanish.

The '06 BBC Films `The History Boys' is a British `Dead Poets Society' with a much sharper, cutting edge than its American predecessor. The dialogue is crisp and insightful, the plot layered and intelligent and the acting superb throughout. The seven young males portraying a high school class of advanced students preparing for their Oxford University interviews constitute a perfect blend of both similar and diverse lifestyles and socio/religious belief systems. Their performances are further enhanced by amazing performances by Richard Griffiths (Hector), Stephen Campbell Moore (Irwin) and Frances de la Tour (Mrs. Lintott) as the three history teachers preparing them for their upcoming college reviews.

As the all important day draws closer the young men are not only challenged in the classroom but within themselves to discover what history is and the part they play in its continuation. They begin to understand that history consists of not only events of the past but is part of the everyday fabric of random events in which they live. It is something to be embraced, lived and passed on.

`The History Boys' is a tremendous film filled with wit, wisdom and a wonderful soundtrack of upbeat tunes you already know and love. Just remember that it's a British production so make sure you're in the mood to listen carefully, those accents can be tough if you're not giving the movie your full attention.

This witty and articulate story about eight young men, all 17 or 18 years old, at a prep school who are preparing to take exams which, if they pass, will lead to scholarships and entry into various Oxford colleges, may seem simply a pleasingly intellectual duel between the forces of dark and light. Far from it. Alan Bennett, who wrote the script based on his stage play, is arguably Britain's best playwright in the last fifty years. His style is bemusement and indirection, which suddenly leads us into seeing the complacencies of English life and institutions. Sounds heavy, but Bennett is such a good writer that seeing and hearing his work is pure pleasure.

The History Boys puts ideas in the ring and lets us see what happens. The contest is about these eight young men, all smart and articulate. In one corner is Irwin, played by Stephan Campbell Moore, a young, clever teacher brought in by the head master to coach these eight students in what it takes to pass the exams. In other words, how to game the system legally. In the other corner is Hector, played by Richard Griffiths, the boy's English/classics teacher. Hector lets the boys make choices. His classroom is a place where he shapes ideas to be formed, talked about and defended. He's unconventional. He occasionally gropes them when he offers one or another a ride on his motorcycle, something that is taken with amusement and a roll of the eyes by the boys. Hector wants these young men to learn...but to learn how to use their minds. In the middle, something of an understanding but sharp-tongued referee, is another teacher, Dorothy Lintott, played by Frances de la Tour.

The contest we are witness to is intelligent and civil, and very much in earnest. Irwin may get more of the best lines, "Truth," he says, "is no more at issue in an [education] examination than thirst at a wine-tasting or fashion at a striptease," but Hector has the wisest. He quotes A. E. Housman: "All human knowledge is precious whether or not it serves the slightest human use." That's also Bennett speaking. We hope someone hears it over the chuckling at Irwin's good-natured realism.

Bennett also deals with sexuality, humanity, ambition and fuzzy thinking about history. As Lintott points out once with asperity, "History is a commentary on the various and continuing incapabilities of men. History is women following behind with the bucket." The clever Irwin, of course, has his own view. "History," he says, "nowadays is not a matter of conviction. It's a performance. It's entertainment." The point of The History Boys, it seems to me, is to show how learning to use one's mind well cannot be taught, only encouraged, and that the last place to have this happen is in a school. Unless, or course, as a student you are very, very lucky to have a teacher like Hector who works to make you think. Bennett wants us to consider this, and he frames the argument with some of the best writing you'll encounter.

All this, of course, applies to American education just as it does to British. It's not by accident that America has developed a multi-million-dollar industry, the whole purpose of which is to teach students how to game the educational system, with the enthusiastic participation of parents and education administrators.

For fans of Alan Bennett, I recommend his Talking Heads, a series of television monologues he wrote for the BBC. Listening to one person tell us about things that happened to her may seem deadly, but in Bennett's hands it becomes engrossing. He gives us ordinary people who find themselves dealing with issues they do not completely comprehend. And one of these days perhaps we'll see a DVD release of his television play, An Englishman Abroad (1983). This gentle flaying of the British establishment and politically correct betrayal features Alan Bates as Guy Burgess. It would make a great pairing on a DVD with Bennett's A Question of Attribution, with James Fox as Sir Antony Blunt.

The acting in The History Boys is exceptional. All the actors from the London stage version recreate their roles. There is no sense of staginess in the performances. The actors playing the young men know what they're doing. Moore and de la Tour are fine actors. And Richard Griffiths gives us a tour de force. He carries off a role that demands subtlety and understanding (the groping becomes an issue). He carries us along, leaving us puzzled at what he is doing as a teacher during the first part of he movie and then demonstrating as we go along what he is after. That's as much Bennett as Griffiths, or course; the two make a powerful combination.

Having somehow missed the play by Alan ("The Madness of King George") Bennett when it was reaping awards in both London and New York, I was unprepared for the richness of the film version of "The History Boys," which manages to say something profound about literature, sex, adolescence, and, of course, history. The story concerns a group of eight over-achieving grammar-school students in Thatcher's England who hope to be admitted to Oxbridge. The scene in which Hector (brilliantly played by Richard Griffiths, of "Withnail and I," who was criminally overlooked at this year's Academy Awards) explicates Thomas Hardy's poem "Drummer Hodge"--about the transiency of youth in a time of war--for young Posner (Samuel Barnett), a gay boy in love with Dakin, the class Romeo, is alone worth the price of admission. At the same time that the scene speaks volumes about the romantic ideals and disappointments of both teacher and pupil, it is a set-piece that may be appreciated without reference to the remainder of the film.

There are many such moments, and performances, in a film whose cast first performed their roles on stage at the National Theatre in London in 2004. Some viewers might have trouble with the fact that some of the "boys" look (and often are) older than the actor (Stephen Campbell Moore) who plays Irwin, their pragmatic university coach, who is, like Prosner, surprised into romance by the charismatic Davin (Dominic Cooper). The latter "boy," though basically heterosexual, is not adverse to experimentation. [That the film tends to take a rather myopic view of homosexuality as pederasty will probably keep it from being seen by mainstream audiences.]

Despite its flaws, however, "The History Boys" manages to say some important things about young boys and their choices in the modern world (the female slant is relegated to a few barbs from Mrs. Lintott, played by the always reliable Frances de la Tour). Rudge, for instance, would rather be playing rugby than attending university, although as a "legacy" (his father was a servant at Oxford) he is a shoo-in for admission. It is Rudge (Russell Tovey) who defines history as "one f---ing thing after another." Ultimately, it is Alan Bennett's own definition of history as "subjunctive" (i.e., a product of wish-fulfillment) that leads him to revisit the days of childhood "innocence." Perhaps, in memory, he is somewhat blinkered to the potential for tragedy that is inherent in child abuse, even when the abuser is as likeable as Griffith's Hector. [Indeed, the boys are so sophisticated (some might say jaded) that they willingly take turns allowing themselves to be groped by Hector when riding tandem on his motorcycle.] But the film itself triumphs over such flaws, especially in its audacity for milking entertainment out of poetry and for not stooping to apologize, or condescend, to its audience.

I saw this twice in the theater. It is better than any movie I've seen in ages. As soon as I saw it the second time I told myself, just buy the DVD.

This film is alive and the acting is first rate. The pace is perfect. I would change nothing except the ending which I found rather bizarre. However, this aside, the movie is about as good as this genre gets.

I will not summarise the plot of the movie, since most reviewers seem to have done a good job of it. I watched the movie with absolutely no preconceptions since I had never seen nor heard of the play. What a revelation it was to watch a movie about teenagers and their rite of passage which did not involve drugs, sex and foul language. What pleasure, indeed, to hear high school students who knew how to quote poetry, and debate history and who were enthused about scoring straight A's in their A-level examinations. They are not afraid of being called nerds, not they. Their exam results pave the way for their admission into two of England's most prestigious universities. For people who felt that the students seemed unreal, may I point out that we, who laboured under the British system of education, were also expected to read poetry and literature, and history? As for the homosexual theme criss-crossing the plot, I have yet to see such an understated yet powerful depiction of homosexuality, which indeed is more openly talked about in a same-sex environment as the English Grammar school. Many of the reviewers here felt that the film condoned homosexuality - I beg to differ. The boys accepted it as a part of their teacher's life - and no, they did not enjoy being groped. In fact, if you follow the dialogues closely, you will realise that the boys know exactly what Hector is up to, and take their own precautions AGAINST being groped. As Dakin so succinctly puts it "All you have to do is to say 'And where is that hand going,Hector?' for him to take his hand back." On another occasion, one of the boys moves his 'Economy in Tudor times' into place. To them it is a game they play, mocking Hector even while they appreciate his craft.
Even Irwin, who it seems has homosexual tendencies, is shown struggling with himself and his attraction for his student. In a telling comment by Posner (about Irwin's attraction) "He looks at Dakin and I look at him looking at Dakin. Our eyes meet over Dakin". It was a film that was superbly crafted and extremely well acted - a couple of the scenes stand out - one where Irwin takes the boys to the war memorial and ends a scathing lecture on history by saying "If you want to forget something, commemorate it." The other one is where Hector tutors Posner alone - it shows why the boys respect Hector. His homosexuality is an open secret. Until it is brought to the headmaster's notice by someone totally unconnected with the school, he prefers to avoid any mention of it. This may seem morally ambiguous, but isn't that what happens most times?
The ending did not bother me; for most people who felt that it smacked too much of good university = good positions, well, why not? Isn't it true? A degree from MIT or Stanford or Harvard or any other great university this side of the Atlantic is nothing to shake a stick at. Doesn't it automatically set up better career opportunities? The boys came from blue-collar backgrounds. Working their way up into Oxford and Cambridge was their way out.
They succeeded. So does the movie.

Anyone who can watch the rolling credits at the end of THE HISTORY BOYS without tearful eyes simply hasn't been paying attention to this intelligent, richly comic, philosophical and tender tale of eight boys ostensibly preparing for exams but also preparing for life. The writing by Alan Bennett closely adapted from his prize winning play that was on the boards of theaters around the globe before being captured for posterity on film is 'rich and strange' and so full of those values of achieving a true education that it serves not only the audience well but presents a gold standard for educators pondering how to transform their pupils into thinking, creative members of society.

Very briefly, THE HISTORY BOYS are eight brilliant but 'crass' young men in Cutler's Grammar School, each coming from backgrounds not considered 'quality' by the British class standards. These boys are rowdy but committed to gaining admission to Oxford - a step toward erasing their class standing and proving their worth. The headmaster (Clive Merrison), himself not too well educated, is bound to get these eight bright boys into the best schools and in that light he hires a new teacher Irwin (Stephen Campbell Moore) to buff the boys into a classy group who will be able to pass their essays and oral examinations. The existing teachers are the testy, frank Mrs. Lintott (a fine Frances de la Tour) and the massively obese Hector (Richard Griffiths in a stunning performance) who teaches 'general studies', a time when he lovingly coaxes the boys to embrace poetry, music, sentimentality, drama, art, and in general everything that allows them to take the moment and live it fully. The boys are torn between Irwin's pragmatic 'teach them how to take exams' approach Hector's teach them how to embrace intelligence and life. Hector is known among the boys for fondling and the knowledge is accepted by the lads until Hector is seen fondling one of the boys on his motorbike and reported. This opens all manner of avenues of introspection, one of the boys confides to Irwin that he is homosexual, another of the lads declares that Irwin is gay and attempts a physical liaison with him, and the permutations move an down the line. But the exams come and the joy of accomplishing goals puts a different twist on matters and the ending is a touching as any on film.

The entire cast is the original group that started the play and in addition to the fine performances by the adults, the boys are extraordinarily fine: Dominic Cooper (Dakin), Jamie Parker (Scripps), Samuel Barnett (Posner), James Corden (Timms), Sacha Dhawan (Akhtar), Samuel Anderson (Crowther), Russell Tovey (Rudge), and Andrew Knott (Lockwood). There is an obvious camaraderie among the actors that obviously grew from their long association with the roles. But the most impressive performance is the polished veteran actor Richard Griffiths who has created a role that will long remain in everyone's heart long after the movie has passed playing. For this viewer this is one of the very finest films of the past year! Highly Recommended. Grady Harp, April 07

The History Boys is inspired and electric and yet at the same time it's absolutely true to life. It also tells a memorable story about 8 British school boys learning, in each case, how to become an individual, how to become a self. The scene where Frances de la Tour either clairvoyantly sees the boys' futures (or is in fact having a clairvoyant dream) is also very powerful, with the mesmerizing Posner talking both satirically and wisely about becoming a teacher and, in the process, following the mantra of the school's most iconoclastic teacher: "Pass it on." When Frances de la Tour then goes to sit next to Lockwood and announces that he was killed by friendly fire when he was 28, it's an incredibly eerie moment since Lockwood doesn't give any evidence of having heard her. Looks, in fact, already dead. The collection of pseudo medals he wears all through the movie's narrative (and which I earlier took to be post-Punk decorations) then makes sense in terms of his "destiny." The other thing that really struck me in this particular scene was the fact that the also mesmerizing Dakin (so clever and original while he was a grammar school boy) had become a tax lawyer. Sad, but again true to life, since the students who are utterly at home and filled with life and exuberant ideas in high school so often seem to make compromises in their adult lives. The actor who plays Scripps (Jamie Parker?) has a mainly reactive role in which he listens to, watches, and comments on the lives of the others---one of the most difficult kinds of roles to play---was subtle and amazing. I've seen this brilliant movie 3 times by now and found it to be absolutely original and extraordinary every time.

www.elisabeth-harvor.com