Who is our teacher, if not you and who are you if not the teacher?
First of all, I have to confess my love for educational films. I love “Writers of Freedom”, “Dangerous Thoughts”, “Chorists”, “Keep the Rhythm”, and of course the immortal Soviet classic “Let’s Live Until Monday”. "History Lovers" was a gift to me.
1983. Provincial English school. A group of students who have real chances to enter the best universities in the country. Teachers who are no less students want to see their pupils students of Oxford and Cambridge. Actually, around the preparation of guys for the entrance exams and built the plot.
The training itself deserves special attention. Because perfect knowledge of the subject does not give any guarantees for admission. Special universities need special students - and the characters of the film make every effort to become special.
The main role in the preparation of future students is played by two teachers - an elderly eccentric Hector and a young intern Irvine.
Hector. The most experienced teacher, whose methodology can be called “the transfer of knowledge in the process of relaxed communication”. His lessons go like fun parties, in this form students grab everything on the fly. Hector also likes to hold his pupils by his knees, but he has a wife who seems unaware of his inclinations. And the pupils know perfectly well - but since they respect the teacher immensely for his knowledge and experience, they forgive him his eccentricity and laugh at him among themselves.
Irwin. An enthusiastic teacher who is not much older than his students. He has a different approach - in his opinion, the main thing is not knowledge of the material, but an original view of it. Shocking the audience with excuses for the Holocaust or sympathy for Stalin, you will be remembered - and the cherished place in the best educational institution in the country is yours. And the students like it.
The peculiar confrontation between the two teachers and their struggle for the minds and hearts of students eventually turns into cooperation - as a result, all the boys will go where they planned, and they will have a bright future. But before that, the friendly team needs to experience an unpleasant moment - the school management learns about Hector's passion for students, and the threat of dismissal looms over him. For him, this is tantamount to the collapse of the world - his family is a sham, and the only thing he values in life is the transfer of knowledge. He's not a husband, he's not a father, he's not even gay -- he's a teacher first and foremost -- and the students understand that more than anyone. And in a rather nice way help the old man to avoid dismissal.
In a word, a beautiful movie! Especially pleased - there is no fashion obsession with sexual harassment, but there is also no evasion of the topic.
Separately, I should say b actors. The game is absolutely brilliant - both students and teachers, the viewer immerses himself in the pedagogical process, as if he himself becomes a student and realizes what a huge role even the subject plays - and the personality of the teacher.
The Russian translation of the title does not fully convey the meaning of the film. To understand it fully, you still need to look at it.
The play of Alan Bennett, having collected a good premium crop in London and New York, undoubtedly deserved a film adaptation. And, to the audience to the end imbued with the idea, it absolutely and only correctly invited the main cast, who played in the National Theatre of Great Britain.
Despite the seemingly intricate nature of the action, the film poses very important questions: whether an elite education is necessary to become a good person; how to relate to history and who actually creates it; how religion affects the human worldview; whether sexual harassment can be tolerated for the sake of the higher good. To these and many other questions, graduate students of Sheffield school are trying to find answers with the help of their teachers: a gay literature teacher Hector, a history teacher with progressive views Mrs. Lintott and a visiting teacher Irwin, who must train the children to enter.
Hector (Richard Griffiths ) is a character to whom it is impossible to determine his attitude. He does so much for kids, teaches them to be good people, helps them discover their talents, and sexually harasses them. And the boys, despite everything, respect their teacher, although his behavior embarrasses them and is a duty joke. Young Irvine overshadows him for a while, bringing confusion into their lives and shaking their moral foundations and views on history, but they are happy that Hector manages to keep his job. And Irvine, who turns out not to be who he claimed to be in many ways, supports them in this, which also reveals new facets of his personality. And only at the end we see that it was the combination of methods of Hector and Irvine that allowed the boys to achieve their goals.
The only woman in this film who is given the role is the history teacher Mrs. Lintott (Francis de la Tour). In the midst of the mess of high school, it seems to be the only bastion of traditional education and the values it cultivates. But it only goes on until the boys get a chance to hear her opinion on the role of women in history. And then we see an emboldened, passionate woman who is tired of being just a person, but not being able to realize herself in something mainly because of her gender (another issue that the film touches upon, albeit casually).
Different approaches of teachers collide in the classroom, and students rush from one teacher to another. They don’t know what to prefer: Irwin, who tells them what they want from them, or Hector, who advises them to be honest and start with themselves. Under this press, all students behave differently.
In the youth center Daykin performed by Dominic Cooper. Attractive and intelligent, he knows what he wants in life. The most ambiguous image is the soul of the company, and a manipulative bastard, and a person who seeks justice (albeit not in the most decent way) for Hector. It is impossible to understand Dakin until the very end of the film, when we see who he has become and what he really feels, although he tries to hide. Balances Dakin Scripps (Jamie Parker) - despite the apparent equivalence of the boys, the two can still be called best friends. Scripps is a believer, which is often the object of jokes, but he is the conscience of Dakin, his moral compass, even if he does not always understand him. His opinion, although rarely expressed, is always aimed at the Good in the universal understanding of the word.
Posner - the youngest boy, discovers the unknown. Love for another guy. He is the only one who seems to think that Hector’s approach is exceptionally correct, that humanity is the main virtue, and that his naiveté, even in the matter of homosexuality, makes the viewer smile awkwardly and sympathize with this character no matter what. Against Posner, the filmmakers put Lockwood (Andrew Knott). He is sharp, straightforward, does not consider it necessary to hide his position. We can see from some details (obviously clothes) that he is a rebel and does not want to support someone’s position just because the whole world thinks it is right. In the Holocaust controversy, Lockwood makes judgments that may shock the viewer with his cruelty, but we continue to see him as a boy who will stand up for himself and does not consider it shameful to work part-time delivering milk during the holidays.
The other four: Timms (James Corden) - fat and balagur, Akhtar - Muslim, Raj - not the most far-reaching student of the school and Crowter - actor. Taken together, this eight is a hodgepodge of clichés and stereotypes, but this is what gives us such a remarkable, almost idyllic picture. Guys joke on each other on quite significant occasions, but do not take offense, express such different opinions in the class, but do not take this debate into the corridor and do not pass on to personalities, stand up for each other and for their personal beliefs, despite differences in faith, social status, sexual orientation. I don’t think that happens.
() Sometimes there is a feeling that the “young cast” does not reach the point of view of acting, but only until the moment when they begin to act out scenes within the action – “play in the game” gives an opportunity to really appreciate the huge potential of these then beginning actors.
Through such a diverse set of images, the filmmakers want to convey to us the idea that this is the only way it should be. Only by rejecting the external attributes of the personality and allowing you to be friends with your heart, and not with your brain, you can find yourself and not lose your loved ones. And although the boys in the history class went their separate ways, they will forever remember the lessons they learned in their last semester.
9 out of 10
"History Lovers": "Pass it on, boys!" Pass it on ..."
They throw in Drummer Hodge, to rest
Uncoffined - just as found:
His landmark is a kopje-crest
That breaks the veldt around;
And foreign constellations west
Every night above his mound.
Thomas Hardy, "Drummer Hodge"
Two years of uninterrupted performances on both sides of the Atlantic and easily won major theatre awards of the Old and New World (the Laurence Olivier and Tony Awards, respectively). Two weeks after the last show on Broadway, History Lovers was released in 16:9. Studio Warner Bros. persistently tried to buy Alan Bennett the rights to the film. But the playwright decided that art was more important than the sum with six zeros, and did not let Hollywood “adapt” his work to please the mass audience. As a result of wide distribution in North America, the picture did not receive, but it allowed audiences around the world almost in its original form (casting and directors in full swing from stage to screen) to get acquainted with the play, perhaps one of the best in the history of modern English theater.
The film is set in Sheffield in the early 80s, here in one of the schools, young men from the department of history prepare for their entrance exams (diligently studying or no less diligently playing golf, for the sake of a sports scholarship) in elite and not so. As in any complexly constructed work, and “History Lovers” are exactly that, it is very difficult to bring the final definitions regarding the main storyline.
Young and promising teacher Irvine (Stephen Campbell Moore) is included in the freelance staff of the school to train students before exams. He is academic and virtuoso in the ability to select the right quotes and borrowings from various sources. But to accept Irvine full-time, the school must get rid of the elderly Hector (Richard Griffiths), who leads "free classes" (where students, as part of a repetition of French, act out a scene in a brothel, depicting a soldier and courtesans). It is not a conflict that arises between Irvine and Hector (Bannet reconciles their methods as a result), but a contradiction that requires eight students, each with his own character, feelings, and motives, to illustrate. They are rude, as teenagers are in their vulgarity, but at the same time something about the old fat Hector makes them be condescending and forgive him the cracks given in response to inappropriate comments. The image of Hector, by the way, was created by Bennett on the basis of a real Professor Frank McEachran, born in the first year of the 20th century, and all his life taught in English schools. McEachran was a true humanist and lover of poetry and history, writing a large number of very interesting works in the relevant fields.
Hector knows exactly why he makes his students learn poems and songs, act out scenes and discuss historical events. Only to explain it in the language of methodological aids he does not succeed. It is this moment that Alan Bennett has a sense-forming - a special type not of knowledge, but rather of feelings, of "implicit knowledge." Michael Polani, understood from a socio-cultural perspective. In fact, “history lovers” are located somewhere at the intersection of philosophy (in its entirety with anthropology, axiology, etc.) and cultural studies. “All knowledge is precious whether or not it serves the slightest human use,” Bennett said throughout the film.
Ethics and aesthetics in History Lovers intersected in the personality of the young Posner (Samuel Barnett). "I'm a Jew." I'm small. I'm homosexual and I live in Sheffield. “I’m fucked,” Posner describes himself. But his shortcomings are imaginary, he is truly magnificent in a key scene - in Hector's office, when all the students, having decided that they do not need free classes today, go home. To the teacher comes only Posner, who learned a poem by Thomas Hardy. The dialogue between Posner and Hector is a model of skill that any playwright should strive for - simply and clearly our characters discuss the poem, but obviously this is a conversation about something inexpressible, happening as if outside of time and reality.
Nicholas Hitner, who put “History Lovers” on stage, was skeptical of the idea of the film adaptation. Since this play is essentially anti-cinematic, there is no action in it, as cinema understands it, and the interiors are limited to the classroom (on stage it was a gray wall with newspaper clippings, a piano and a table). Many short-sighted critics have released very superficial and vicious reviews of the film, seeing in the story only the denial of the values of elite education and teenage love. The obvious argument that debunks such theories at the expense of class hostility to Oxbridge is that Alan Bannet himself is an Oxford graduate. And the author tells only about education in the plane of metaphysics, school benches he needs only as an interior.
History lovers are being staged all over the world (from the Oxford Student Club to smaller theaters in the US, not to mention the fact that in European theater classes Posner’s story has become almost a necessary standard), and if you want to see an on-stage version, it will not be difficult to find a suitable performance. But, as with William Shakespeare’s works, this Bennett play is only capable of captivating audiences with the right actors and the magic created by their interaction. Repeat the miracle that was the original “history lovers” has not yet managed to anyone, even an excerpt from the production, played as part of the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the National Theater, in which the actors of the original version partially participated, looked like a gross fake, an imitation of truly unique.
Samuel Barnett appears more on stage than on screen. “History lovers” brought him not only strong feelings due to the need to perform a number of musical compositions (including “L’Accordeoniste” by Edith Piaf), but also the first Tony nomination (the second he received for the best possible “Twelfth Night”). Richard Griffiths will work with Bennett again later, in 2009, when The Habit of Creating Art will appear on the London stage, a fantasy that tells not about anything, but about the meeting of Benjamin Britten and Wisten Auden. For all the actors of “History Lovers”, this film was the culmination, perhaps not in relation to a career understood as show business, but definitely the highest achievement in the field of art.
Dreamy Posner, and happy only that he can engage in the education of feelings, the old teacher Hector is not only good, they are the best. From the point of view of the public majority, they are certainly no heroes - unsuccessful and even pathetic, not achieving recognition and position. But Alan Bannett does not value common sense and public opinion, while acknowledging their importance. “I’m not happy, but I’m not unhappy about it.” So be it. But this strange young man knows the whole world from the book pages, which gives the indescribable feeling that someone is about to take you by the hand.
This film-play allows you to look at the world outside the box, go beyond the concept of “ordinary” love, approach to teaching, behavior in society. Not everyone will like him. I didn't like it. But that doesn't mean I shouldn't watch it.
Gays among students and teachers, the boundless ambition of the headmaster, the arrogance of graduates who are forgiven all or almost all in exchange for their admission. Some episodes are absurd and therefore ridiculous, overly theatrical and seem completely inapplicable to life. But at the same time, they make you think and compare, find an excuse for the heroes. And teachers of the post-Soviet space, when viewing, can learn the method of... no, no, not groping boys, but conducting discussions in the classroom, comparing views that differ from the generally accepted ones. Add to this the ability to inspire your wards to creativity and gain knowledge.
The lack of music behind the scenes cuts the hearing of fans of American cinema, it appears only in the most dynamic segment of the tape - during the interview of the guys. This is the culmination they have been waiting for and preparing for, sitting in the library. But even more sought it, as is often the case, their parents and teachers, thus realizing their long-held dreams of a prestigious university.
6 out of 10
The other day my brother offered to watch this movie. Five minutes later he announced that he was not interested and ducked into the computer, but I looked to the end.
Before us is the history of one graduation class of a small school in England 80-ies. Teenagers grow up, gain intelligence, become aware of themselves and struggle to enter the most prestigious university in the country. Since due to the changes in the higher education system, I know about the Bologna score-rating system firsthand, I can only sympathize with the children. However, the phrase that we have no time to read because we are preparing for exams [/B] is somewhat confusing. These boys are literally obsessed with their marks.
“History lovers” also raises the issue of non-traditional human orientation. In this case, men. And these inclinations for one school are suspiciously many.
Maybe I am not tolerant enough, but I would not tolerate a teacher who indulges his inclinations and gropes boys in school. Even considering the fact that he gave children a thousand times more than the confident young Irvine.
Especially in the film stands out Daykin - the object of desire of half the school, apparently, is bisexual. This character brilliantly embodied on the screen Dominic Cooper. There is something intriguing in his game that makes you follow the events on the screen.
With some of the things said in the film, you can and would like to argue. For example, trying to look positively at Hitler or the concentration camps. Like the old Hector, I think this is blasphemous. Although what boys will not do for the sake of the highest score and the opportunity to be known as non-standard thinking!
The film is very bright and memorable , it makes you think about the things that we usually miss in our everyday life.
Hector, a long-time teacher with a deep sense of life, and a young Irvine, a future journalist for whom school is a staging point on the way to a better life. One seeks to sow the good, the eternal, the second - to help be competitive. It is a pity that most boys, as in life, chose the second way.
It’s a great movie that says a lot.
Well, who writes such idiotic annotations that sometimes have nothing to do with films? So take a quick look - well, another "American pie" comedy. But fortunately, I am not the most trusting person, yet I watched the film, “believing” a serious cast. It was a great surprise to me.
For some time I watched a good youth comedy (not devoid of dramatic elements in the right proportion) without excessive focus on sexual instincts and at the same time excessive sterility and lickiness. Of course, in the story about growing up without the first can not do, but the author does not put special emphasis on this, as if to say “yes, and this is also there, but we will go further.”
Separate plot moments and in spirit as a whole a little reminiscent of the “Society of Young Poets” in a somewhat simplified version and with a focus on somewhat different topics, although in the end everything comes down to the same, namely, to the story of moral maturation. Theatre Nicholas Hitner (before that, in the cinema, noted by the curious “Madness of King George” and several not very remarkable melodramas) unlike Weir, stars from the sky are not enough and does not like to dive into the depths either. Meanwhile, he is a good artisan and works more than well on his territory. Instead of deepening the semantic component, he preferred to describe the characters in detail, so much so that with a fairly large number of them and not such a long duration of the film, they in most cases manage to be remembered well and fall in love with the viewer.
This is largely due to an excellent cast. “The Young Man” in the person of Dominic Cooper, Samuel Barnett, Russell Tovey and many others is given to the fullest and again reminds of the serious English school of acting. “The Old Men” in the person of Richard Griffiths (by the way, a very underrated actor, known to the general public only for his role as Uncle Vernon in Harry Potter), Frances de la Tour and Clive Merrison also successfully hold the brand.
If Weir was headed by a thirst for knowledge (which, however, had to try to instill in the bollocks), then Hitner everything at first glance is somewhat cynical, although closer to the realities of life. Children here just want to enter prestigious educational institutions, applying not so much knowledge, but rather cunning and charm. Naturally, there is criticism of the educational system, for which the craving for knowledge is not important at all, but statistics are much more interesting. But the author wisely decides not to get into these wilds (which in addition are not so terrible, for comparison it is enough to look at what is happening with the educational system in our country), but only to show how you can deal with life’s difficulties. I was also pleased with the lack of a clear moral conclusion and moral teachings, even in the seemingly moral finale.