The History Boys (2006)

I ordered this movie on rental after hearing quite a lot of praise for it.

After about half an hour, I thought, 'It's got to get better soon, surely.' I watched the whole film thinking that it couldn't remain this bad throughout but it did.

At no point was I engaged by the film, and I only left it on until the end because I very rarely turn off a DVD early. The plot was very poor and the acting was nothing special. I'm glad to see since watching it that the ratings have come down slightly, better reflecting the quality of the film.

In my opinion - overrated.

Fmovies: I found this an utterly appalling movie in so many ways.

First of all - the premise of the movie is false - its not about growing up in an English public school in the 1980s because none of the school boys behave anything other than sock puppets of Alan Bennett - The boys dance in their underwear quoting poetry, sing vaudeville songs and practically encourage their beloved fat gay teacher to molest them on a regular basis with some reluctance. Does this strike you as the behavior of normal English school boys or the warped fantasy of a pervert?

Second, I find it absolutely bemusing that so many reviewers choose to ignore the homosexual pedophilia aspect of this film. Why are reviewers not disgusted when the fat sleaze bag of teacher gropes the genitals of the school boys?? Please do not consider this a spoiler since the scene was replayed in the trailers for the film.

Third - I find it puzzling that the main characters who are shocked by his abhorrent behavior are cast as the chief villains.

Fourth - the amount of dialogue devoted to History teaching is about as scant as a fig leaf. Worse, its also absurd as the new teacher instructs the boys to give a cynical and glowing report on the activities of Stalin and Hitler, two of the greatest mass murderers in human history.

Look if Bennett wants to produce his own gay fantasy film where teenage school boys want to have sex with their male schoolteachers - fine - but put it in the adult section together with the other X-rated films - the ones showing porn stars playing the characters of schoolgirls. But trying to claim that this film is an authentic account of school life in the 1980s is absolutely absurd.

A very good film - not setting black against white but looking at flawed people and complex arguments. Also brilliantly funny.

Not quite as good as the play because some balance was lost - I think this was due to pressure of time, A lot of the classroom debate and argument was shortened, the glimpses into the present were omitted so that Irwin's descent into pure spin was not seen and a couple of the boys characters weren't fleshed out enough. This combined to throw the obviously shocking scenes, such as Hector's behaviour, too much into the centre of the film. The classroom performances also jarred as a bit too theatrical, whereas on stage they were believable, apt and very funny.

Worryingly realistic sets – I thought I'd put the smell of school classrooms well behind me - and memorable performances from the entire cast. Jamie Parker, Andrew Knott, Samuel Barnett and Frances de la Tour were the standouts for me, but I still can't decide whether it was their performances or the characters they played.

The History Boys fmovies. With pretensions at loftiness, this film was well-received by the Brits, less so by others, (except for those insecure people who pretend to "get it" in order to feel accepted by the "in" crowd). It has it's moments, but is unrealistic and bombastic in scope. A celebration of borderline gay pedophilia, combined with witty pubescent brainiacs offhandedly spouting obscure literary quotes make this film nearly unwatchable.

Cute in some parts, tediously precocious in others, it's lofty premise is bogged down by a fatal lack of realism, and a story that completely ignores rationality for a weird semi-homo-erotic fantasy-idealism that somehow makes impropriety and perversion ordinary, even acceptable.

And I'm a gay man!

I gave it a rating of 3 for it's beautiful cinematography, its directional excellence and yes, even its cute actors. It has its moments of hilarity, its engaging wit and even a few captivating devices.

But to put the dialog of an educated and seasoned adult into the mouths of these "babes" is laughable. To further portray them in classes that are as randomly unrealistic as these stretches the bounds of credibility. And to further infuse a homosexual pedophilia into the mix as if it were both commonplace and ordinary, "just a bit of fun", as one character defends it, is both offensive and repulsive to me.

If you want to be perceived as smart, chic and trendy, then by all means, sit through this film and rave to your friends about how brilliant, witty and progressive it is. But if you have enough courage to be yourself, then don't bother wasting your time with it.

The History Boys is a very very challenging film for any audience. One of these reasons is that it is driven by extremely eloquent conversations between younger and elder intellectuals, each conversation delving aggressively deep into the corners of conventional logic and subtexts and fleshing them out in what different characters arguably believe are the most truthful ways. Many characters are quite confident and extremely extroverted and the ones who are not so confident are defensively so. Alan Bennett's remarkably clear analysis of the human condition is intimidating.

The other reason is because the story is one beyond social judgment. Perhaps this is purposeful because being written, produced, directed, and acted by English people, class-consciousness is surely existent among them. But that's what I love so much about this film. The audience, in order to understand and enjoy it, must release themselves from the scrutiny of general culture over many, mostly sexual, aspects of life. The film is not about homosexuality, but homosexual goings-on exist prevalently in the story. It's also treated very nonchalantly, and many straight boys are free of any personal sexual burdens that would inhibit them from partaking. The very talked-about homosexual element of the film exists as the most direct example and also the core of the basis of the story, which is the pressure of society's judgmental and devastatingly interfering nature with many things that, if one were truly understanding, would not judge or interfere with. This extends to greater and more complex idealism in the script, such as the philosophy and meaning of education, the satisfactory or unsatisfactory pursuit and outcome of success, the importance of art and poetry, and the point of studying history.

I believe that The History Boys is an extremely important movie, and the fact that it lasted for a single week at a small theater here in Cincinnati is despicable and glaringly, stupidly contradictory to its message.

A certain transcendence beyond ordinary language could, in one sense, said to be the goal of every artist, communicating, inspiring, or perhaps teaching us something within ourselves that goes beyond the immediate form. Music can arouse feelings and aspirations, stories might evoke similar events in our own experience and throw new light on them, and great paintings can reach out to the sublime within us, taking us beyond the mundane for a brief moment of time. There is a creative element in each of us that goes beyond reasoning; the flash of inner genius; the illumination of the soul. The question of how to awaken that in adolescents preparing for Oxford or Cambridge is one that admits of no straightforward answer, though the teachers portrayed in The History Boys approach it from a number of angles, provoking philosophical challenges to the audience about the nature of education. Add to that the theme of awakening sexuality and at least one teacher who confabulates both strands with his personal sexual desires, and you have an entertaining story, even before adding the side-splitting, intelligent humour.

The beauty - and also the shortfall - of The History Boys is that people who are steeped in theatre made it. With the modern genius of playwright Alan Bennett transferring stage to screen we can be grateful that his masterpieces will reach a wider audience. But this is Bennett-lite, and almost makes us long for the original, full-length work. There is a notable absence of cinematic flourish - use of lighting, camera-work, images and subtleties unique to the silver screen that could have lifted the spirit of The History Boys to something that is beyond the physical limitations of the original stage. There is nothing here that could not have been portrayed equally well there - which leads us to conclude that, apart from it being a more accessible medium, the film is nothing more than a shortened and only mildly adjusted copy of the play. All the actors have the same, excellent projection of voice and perfect intonation that carries well for a live performance but that lacks the sense of intimacy which the camera can bring. Facial expressions are slightly overemphasised, as befitting the stage, but lacking the subtlety usually required for good cinema. At times it sounds too much like a recitation or performance, resulting in an audience detachment that comes from not quite being able to believe in the reality of characters before us or the emotions they are going through. Director Nicholas Hytner (Center Stage, The Crucible, The Madness of King George) also has his roots firmly in theatre, yet his choice of subject matter has generally been so outstanding that he has reaped awards in spite of this clunky, stagey style (the one exception being The Object of My Affection - which was less well critically received). The History Boys is obvious BAFTA-bait but, like the Madness of King George, its pluses fortunately outshine its weaknesses, and the story, humour and intellectual substance are so engaging that you can be guaranteed lots of discussion afterwards with your fellow filmgoers.

In 1998, Bennett (who graduated from Exeter College Oxford in Medieval History) refused an honorary doctorate from Oxford in protest at its links with press baron Rupert Murdoch. If anybody has the background to tell an outrageously authentic and rebellious tale of a-list history students with homo-erotic leanings it must surely be Bennett. He skilfully navigates the ground between appealing to a predominantly gay audience and a mainstream