This movie is about many things teen angst, race relations, and poverty. But what it's *really* about is teased hair, heavy eyeliner and miniskirts. And the title song, of course. Who could ever forget the gushing sentimentality of Lulu warbling about crayons and perfume? It is a charmer of a movie with life breathed into it by a fresh cast of young Brits. Released at a time when the world was captivated by all things British, it was relatively daring at the time it was made. A low-budget film that raked it in at the box office, Poitier, as in *Lilies of the Field*, wisely accepted a low salary in exchange for a share of the profits. But the biggest profit of all is his portrayal of the East End school teacher, Mark Thackery, who quickly learns that his students need a different kind of education than that of a textbook. It has been, unfairly or not, relentlessly compared to *The Blackboard Jungle*, and it is a blood-relation to *Up the Down Staircase* and *Dangerous Minds*. But none of them have the sweetness of Judy Geeson, as Thackery's irrepressible student Pamela Dare. At the end of the movie, when Thackery and Dare dance together, racial, social and philosophical barriers are smashed, and hope springs eternal.
Add a Review
-
The_Movie_Cat17 October 1999Recorded on a budget of just $640,000, To Sir, With Love was drafted, as with Lilies of the Field, to give Sidney a share of the gross profits to account for his diminished fee. Writer-director Clavell also received the same arrangement, a writer who was chosen for his love of the source material. The rights to the source, an identically-named novel by E. R. Braithwaite, had passed from studio to studio, and been offered to numerous stars before finally getting the green light when in the hands of Columbia President Mike Frankovich.
Poitier noted in his autobiography the similarities in terms of racial issues between America and England. Filmed in London, the picture featured a number of minorities, many of whom, he observed, would be unable to find work outside of the confines of the movie. However, for his time spent with the cast, he was delighted with their company. Sidney played Mark Thackeray, one of his most famous characters, an engineer taking a teaching post as a stopgap between jobs. Eventually the relationship he develops with the students causes him to question his loyalty to the profession.
To Sir, With Love is often frowned upon nowadays due to its sentimentality. While not wholly condemned as a film, it is certainly regarded as the poor relation of Poitier's three 1967 works. This is an unfair assessment of a movie that commits the only crime of having its heart on its sleeve. And, though the late sixties would see an increase in the political situation, To Sir, With Love was the only one of the three Poitier vehicles that year that did not rely upon his colour for its subtext. Instead, a few bigoted remarks were inserted, largely from a fellow teacher (Geoffrey Bayldon as Mr. Weston) than the pupils. Compared to his other overshadowing works that year, direction paled, too, the camera-work at times almost static. However, the scope for Poitier as an actor was broader than in the other '67 roles, and certainly broader than in the 1996 TV sequel. Where there the plot would be propelled largely by one pupil, here multiple characters would be guided through numerous situations over an entire term period. Over the course of the lengthy film the viewer can feel as though they have experienced the timescale too. And who would argue that the sheer amount of silly moves Sidney and Judy Geeson perform in the final ball didn't directly influence Travolta and Uma Thurman in Pulp Fiction? -
perfectbond10 January 2003Sidney Poitier is absolutely superb in this film about a novice teacher who prepares a class of uncouth youths for adulthood. There are too many wonderful scenes to catalogue in this commentary but among the highlights are: his reaction to the naughty chatter of the ladies on the bus, his coping with the young lady who has a crush on him, and his complicated relationship with the stiffnecked rebel of the class. There are so many positive messages imparted in this film and they come across without being heavy-handed. Highly recommended, 9/10.
-
thomandybish28 January 2001The school movie against which all other school movies are measured. Sidney Poitier was on a roll in 1966-67(A PATCH OF BLUE, GUESS WHO'S COMING TO DINNER, IN THE HEAT OF THE NIGHT)and TO SIR, WITH LOVE crowned that succession of great films. Poitier's Thackery is meticulous and elegant, something of a revelation to the unwashed juvenile deliquents and teen sluts who populate his class. Yet this unemployed engineer has his work cut out for him, as his motley crew will try just about anything(including burning tampons in the classroom stove!)to run him off. Instead of exploding like the kids wish, Thackery takes a different tack; treating them like adults and talking about things they have questions about. The ploy works, and along the way Thackery learns to deal with indifferent fellow teachers, racism, lovestruck female students, and a hard decision that will determine his future . . . A great inspirational movie, TO SIR, WITH LOVE also boasts British songstress Lulu in her first film role, as well as prominent soundtrack artist(The Mindbenders are the others). The process by which Thackery molds these wild, rebellious teens into mature and thoughtful adults--and the teens' resulting respect for Thackery, quite possibly the first respect they've ever felt for an adult--is touching. Definitely a classic film worth seeing.
-
I am different than many of the reviewers in that I taught high school...though the kids weren't quite like those in "To Sir, With Love". And, while the miraculous change in the kids through the course of the film is hard to believe, there is a certain decency and sweetness about the movie that I could not resist.
The story is about Mr. Thackery (Sidney Poitier) and his seemingly impossible job. While he's a trained engineer, he cannot find work....so he decides to become a teacher...at least until something better comes along. The problem is that he's working with a lot of rough teens--teens who see no future for themselves and who have pretty much given up on amounting to anything. At first, the kids are uncivil...little jerks just biding their time until graduation. However, through the course of the term, his students learn to respect others and themselves...and prove that they might have bright futures.
As I mentioned above, the change in the students is a bit hard to believe if you think about it. But it's still an excellent film....inspiring even. Well worth seeing and filled with some terrific acting, writing and music. And yes, that IS Lulu not only singing the title song but acting as one of Mr. Thackery's students. -
Sidney Poitier's exceptional lead performance anchors this touching film about that special person who changes your life. As the first time teacher to a group of undisciplined British youth, Poitier is in virtually every frame of this picture. It is a role that calls for a high degree of character development, and Poitier meets and expands the challenge by totally inhabiting the character he is playing. I honestly cannot think of any way his performance could be better, and this is a huge compliment for any actor - even one of Mr. Poitier's immense talents.
While not in the same league, the young cast of then-unknowns also perform quite well. Particularly effective of the young cast members is fresh-faced Judy Geeson, who brings unexpected depth to the stereotypical role of the young schoolgirl love-struck over Mr. Poitier (who could blame her). Director/writer/producer James Clavell avoids over-sentimentalization by inject his well-written script with a healthy dose of realism. The film may not be particularly striking, in the visual sense, but Clavell is a perfectly competent film maker, and his love of the material is evident throughout the entire picture. -
Sidney Poitier, doing just fine as usual, is a teacher assigned to a rough gang of kids in an Enblish working-class school. They hate him. Not because he's black, though that fact figures in a few off-hand insults, but because he's a toff. He speaks proper English and dresses in suits and ties and he knows stuff -- like the girls' bouffant hair styles are 2,000 years old. He takes them to museums to prove it. He shows them that there's more to a salad than just a couple of leaves of wilted lettuce, which is an advance over the culinary skills of my ex spouse. I once tried to show her how to boil an egg. The resulting scuffle became a scandal but I thought Fox News went a little too far in labeling it "Hard-Boiled-Egg-Gate".
These ructious British kids are user friendly. Not like Poitier's earlier effort, "Blackboard Jungle," where they threw baseballs at the teacher and beat hell out of him in an alley. Here, their English equivalents are just noisy and irreverent. Potier straightens them out in the course of the film. One of the students, the delectable blond Judy Geeson, develops a crush on him, but the suave, knowing, and sympathetic teacher knows how to solve that problem too. "Turn him to any cause of policy, The Gordian Knot of it he will unloose, Familiar as his garter" The film oozes a savory sentimentality. It's like a fairy tale with a happy ending. The best part is that we know the happy ending is coming, so we can allow ourselves an anxiety jag, as if we weren't quite sure. Watching the kids mature under "Sir's" guidance is like attending a religious ritual, a fixed point in a changing and disappointing universe. And what a climax -- with Poitier and the adoring Judy Geeson dancing 1960's style to the theme song.
The theme song, "To Sir, With Love," by I guess Ron Grainer, was a popular tune on the period hit parade. At the time it was just another pop tune. But listening to it today, the inventiveness of the melody, the intricate rhyming lyrics, the purity and clarity of the vocalist's voice -- she seems to have flawless control over her slow vibrato -- it just rouses our awareness of the decline in vernacular music since then, unless you can't get enough of electronic percussion, anger, and rhymes that don't quite rhyme.
Sure, the film is laden with devices that are designed to engage the viewer's emotions. But at least the emotions are among those that have traditionally been considered positive. If it were remade today, I wonder if the students would turn out to be vampires, invade Poitier's home, wrench off his head, and suck the blood out of his neck cavity with straws. God, we've become desensitized to the point of insensibility. -
Channel Five just showed this film, and I'm so glad. I'm 58 and left school, which was changing as I left it in 1966.. and this film IS how it was at that time. The coloured teacher, well, we had coloured pupils at my school and thought nothing of it. American of course, far more sensitive.. but THIS IS how it was then. We had the young delinquents, looked upon as heroes by the less educated, we had mixed classes and never gave the girls a lot of thought at that age, respect, yes.. and the characters in this film ARE how things were. How many more times am I going to say that. The class rooms, the teaching staff, yes yes and yes again. I'd forgotten a lot of this film, and it captivated me. Its a LOST time.. it was a good, fairly innocent time, pregnancy WAS a no no.. WE didn't do those thing YET.. but girls older than their time came a cropper. WE DID form a relationship with our teachers and one I mer later in my career said the mid 60's WAS the last of the 'family' class feeling. It all changed after that. The system was changing so THIS FILM.. is a lovely reminder of how it was. Judy was ALWAYS gorgeous.. HOW can anyone be that lovely.. it just WORKS. YES WHAT was in this stove.. I didn't get it either. And the end.. WILL HE WONT HE.. hes reminded of the challenges hes already met and conquered.. I cant praise this too highly. 60's London life IS HERE.. Lulu deserved her hit.. and the other young stars DID go forward. WHY didn't all these films of the mid 60's come out?? STILL many not.. WHY NOT.. we NEED the feel good NOW... Smashin Time..Mulberry Bush.. COME ON..
-
raymond-1513 June 2007A graduate engineer Mark Thackeray (Sidney Poitier) can't find a job in his field of expertise so applies for a job as a teacher at an East End school in London. The school administration is virtually non-existent and the students a bunch of noisy and unruly teenagers completely out of control. Desperate for a job Mark accepts the position. His first confrontation with the students augurs a life of misery and disappointment for him. They are a disrespectful and cheeky lot who make snide remarks about the fact that he is black.
While the other teachers have given up all hope, Mark after careful thought decides on a new psychological approach believing that if he treats them like adults they may respond in a similar way. The main interest in this film is observing the slow but positive transformation of each of the students.
Sidney Poitier is at his finest as the teacher who grapples with the multitude of problems that each day brings. The characters in the schoolroom played by a young cast give great support as their cruel attitudes towards their teacher melt into respectful admiration.
There are two scenes in the film which are particularly moving. The first is the arrival of a letter indicating he has at last gained a new job as engineer and the second is the day he receives a present from the East End kids the product of broken homes in London.
This film is highly recommended for those contemplating school teaching as a career. Only a brave person could face a class like that, but if and when the class is tamed and brought to a respectful conclusion, what better reward than that? Highly recommended but tissues may be needed. -
Buskieboy20 November 2005The first time I had watched TSWL, I was probably about 14, but not from the era the film is from. None the less, I found it fascinating, poignant, funny at times, and warm.
The funny thing is that while the clothes, music and styles may change, the feelings we have are common and do not change much over the years. Kids rebel, test and resist authority, and push the rules. We've all done it in some way or another. I smoked cigs, drank beer and had long hair. Others hung-out with the wrong crowd, drank beer or skipped class.
TSWL as is "The Blackboard Jungle" are dated today, but so are "Class of 1984" and "Stand and Deliver", but they all share the same premise, emotions and struggles. If a movie can convey them honestly, as does "To Sir, with Love", then it deserves recognition. I always like to watch TSWL, it does make you feel good in the long run. Even after all your disobedience at school, most of us grew up and realized the importance of what we had learned and were now sad to leave the memories, friends and teachers.
I think we also realize that we are also leaving a young version of us behind and it's sad to let that childlike version go. It's time to start growing up. -
Theo Robertson12 September 2003A new teacher arrives at a tough inner city school populated by teenage hooligans . Hardly a new concept for a movie is it ? , but TO SIR WITH LOVE is slightly different from the same type of film made in the 1980s and 90s , it`s set in swinging sixties London when Britannia really was cool , and the kids are " Cor blimey guvner " cockney kids who are not really bad , they`re just misunderstood and if you treat them as adults they`ll behave like adults . This is a totally naive , predictable film with an extremely progressive streak but that`s what I enjoyed about it as Mark Thackeray shows the kids what being an adult is all about . There`s not a cynical bone in this movie`s body , and it`s good to remember a time when a " really tough " school meant pupils talking in class and slamming doors
-
chrisdl_heath18 September 2002Novice teacher, Mark Thackeray, arrives at a secondary school in a depressed area of London's East End and transforms a class of jeuvenile delinquents into a group of responsible, mature and caring young people, confounding his critics amongst the jaundiced teaching staff.
From the very beginning, members of the class try to bait him into losing his temper so that he'll quit. Their previous teacher committed suicide, we are told. Gradually, he gains their trust and helps them overcome their personal struggles, thus winning their respect and friendship.
Its a slice of sixties social idealism that may appear dated and oversentimental to some, but it loses none of its sincerity or good intentions. The book by E.R. Braithwaite was based on his own real life experiences in the 1950's. Once again, James Clavell displays his winning touch with the screenplay and direction. The role of Thackeray had strong appeal to Sidney Poitiers for its portrayal of African-American characters as responsible role-models, a theme common to many of his films. There is a notable screen debut for Judy Geeson who went onto become one of the most fashionable jeuvenile actresses of the late 1960's. With a schoolgirl crush, she competes with beautiful teacher Suzy Kendall for the attentions of Thackeray.
The films sound-track provides good material for another debutante, Lulu, who sings the main title. It went onto become the top-selling record in the U.S. for 1967, but inexplicably, was never released in the U.K. as a single. The lyrics are provided by the highly talented Don Black who had also written the themes to 'Born Free' and 'The Italian Job' as well as collaborating with John Barry on three of the James Bond Films of that period. The backing group are The Mindbenders who provide the school band sound. They had a U.K. No.2 in the charts at the time with 'A Groovy Kind of Love' and in collaboration with Wayne Fontana, a U.S. No.1 with 'Game of Love' the previous year.
The recently released DVD provides a good quality print of this thoroughly enjoyable film and is well worth viewing. I give it ten out of ten. -
I knew that the Australian-born novelist James Clavell also acted as a film scriptwriter, often adapting his own novels, but until I recently watched "To Sir, with Love" I had not realised that he was also a film director. This film, which marks his directing debut, was not based on one of his books but on an autobiographical novel by E. R. Braithwaite.
"To Sir, with Love" is, along with "Goodbye Mr Chips", probably the best-known British entry in the "inspirational teacher" genre, but the two films are very different. Mr Chips was an elderly retired teacher looking back nostalgically at his long career. Mark Thackeray, the hero of this film, is not a career teacher but an unemployed engineer who only applies for a teaching position because he cannot find a job in engineering. Chips taught in a prestigious public school; Thackeray's job is at a secondary modern in the East End, a deprived working-class area of London.
One thing that caused quite a stir in 1967, but which would not do so today, is the fact that Thackeray is black. (He is originally from what the film calls "British Guiana", although it had become independent as Guyana the previous year). His students are nearly all white, although today virtually all East End schools would have a sizeable number of pupils drawn from the black and other minority ethnic communities. Racial issues, however, play a relatively minor part in the film. One of Thackeray's less enlightened colleagues makes some insensitive remarks, but apart from that the only real hostility he experiences comes, surprisingly, from the only mixed-race pupil in his class, a boy who identifies as white and resents the way his white mother has been treated by his black father. The film is much more about social class than it is about race. Thackeray takes on the school's most troublesome class, working-class youngsters with a well-deserved reputation for disruptive behaviour, and teaches them about self-respect by treating them, for the first time in their lives, as responsible adults rather than irresponsible children. In return, Thackeray earns the class's admiration and realises that he has a vocation as a teacher. The film ends with his rejecting an offer of an engineering job to stay on at the school.
Thackeray's class are all in their final term at school, which in 1967 would have meant that they would have been 14 or 15. (The school leaving age in Britain was 15 until 1972, when it was raised to 16). The actors who play them, however, are all considerably older; Christian Roberts, who plays class ringleader Bert Denham, was 23 when the film was made, and Judy Geeson, who plays his classmate Pamela Dare, was 19. This casting may have been intended to make some of the film's plot lines more acceptable in the eyes of the public. It is strongly implied that Pamela has a romantic crush on the handsome Thackeray, and such a storyline would have been far more controversial had she actually been played by a 15-year-old actress.
Another member of the cast was Lulu, here making her acting debut. She also sang the film's title song, also known as "To Sir With Love", which became a huge hit in the American market, much to the surprise of the British. (In Britain it failed to make the Top Ten). Its transatlantic success may have contributed to Lulu concentrating more on singing than on acting in subsequent years; she became one of the most successful British pop acts of the late sixties and seventies, but only acted in a handful of later films, most of them now forgotten.
The film's main drawback is its pervasive sentimentality and its simplistic assumption that all the problems of education in deprived inner-city areas can be overcome simply by drafting in better (by which it means more permissive) teachers. Yet it is saved from a lower mark by the arresting performance of that fine actor Sidney Poitier in the leading role. The plot may seem unrealistic, but Poitier does enough to make his character entirely believable and to make every adult watching the film wish that there had been a Mark Thackeray on the staff of his or her school. 6/10 -
Lejink1 September 2014There are so any things which date this film, you could lose count. Its outlook towards the generation gap, racism, sexism, music and more really do seem preserved in mid-60's aspic and while it has some vintage charm, it has many more embarrassing aspects of almost look-away gaucheness.
In its favour are the exterior London locations, I suppose the feel-good nature of the plot and a mostly watchable star performance by Sidney Poitier as the "Sir" of the title. Supposedly the new teacher at a school for difficult near-adult pupils you too will be amazed at how he tames his class of young hooligans just by throwing away their text books and talking about life.
Elsewhere clichés abound, from Poitier's encounters with the class rebel, who he eventually teaches a lesson in the boxing ring and the class beauty who eventually forms a crush on him, to the unconventional way he gives out lessons. Occasionally the film tries to grow up with some adult-banter on the bus at Poitier's expense or the strange ritual burning of a sanitary towel in class, but with its largely teenage cast and references to contemporary pop-culture, it seems definitely aimed at the younger movie-goer.
Poitier is good right up until he does his silly one-on-one dance with the adoring Julie Christie lookalike Sally Geeson and you feel more could have been made of his relationship with Suzy Kendall as his white, female colleague who offers him support. The young cast of class pupils occasionally turn to wood but a very young Lulu does quite well in concealing her broad Scottish accent and singing the hit title tune.
The direction tries to be hip too, never more so than with the photo-montage of the class trip to a museum, but the editing isn't always clear and you suspect many of the scenes are watered down for the benefit of the censor.
Still it was nice to jump into my 60's time-machine and watch a reasonably entertaining film from that era -
smakalot25 September 2007I have seen this movies at least 50 times since 1967 I know. It's just one of those movies that you see that you never forget. I have always had great admiration for teachers because I think they have the hardest job in the world. Sidney Poitier is such a great actor that he makes you want to cheer his characters and you believe he is who he is portraying. I still love the theme song and I think it defines the whole movie and makes you want to see it again and again. "How do you thank someone, who has taken you from crayons to perfume." Great flick... And of course the dance scene at the end. I still can't do those moves...
-
lee_eisenberg13 August 2005As one of the movies (along with "In the Heat of the Night" and "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner") that made 1967 Sidney Poitier's annus mirabilis, "To Sir, with Love" shows a man forced to take charge in a less-than-pleasant situation. Poitier plays Mark Thackeray, a Guyanese engineer hired to teach in a high school in a rough London neighborhood. The students not only have little interest in school, but are not quite ready to be taught by a black man. Mark is forced to show the students that he will not tolerate insubordination.
Poitier did great in this role, with good support from the rest of the cast (including Lulu, who sang the theme song). It affirms his status as one of the greatest actors in movie history. And also, I hope that nobody tries to compare this with "Dangerous Minds"; the latter was in my opinion an insult. "To Sir, with Love" was a masterpiece. -
ElMaruecan8210 April 2012I love "To Sir, With Love" and this applies to both James Clavell's film and Lulu's song. You can't imagine the effect this beautiful melody has on me making me wish to go 'back' to 1967, 15 years before I was even born.
1967: If one actor ever exemplifies the groundbreaking aspect of this year, it certainly is Sidney Poitier, by starring in three films that paved the way for a new depiction of African- American people: "Guess Who's Coming for Dinner", Best Picture nominee and "In the Heat of the Night", Best Picture Winner; and if not in the same vein, "To Sir, With Love" conveys the same kind of inspirational message through the struggle of a man facing alone a hostile group and ultimately defeating intolerance and prejudices. I will never say that Sidney Poitier plays the 'same character' as a reproach but as a tribute to his talent and his brilliance for never having fallen in the trap of stereotypes, to play elegant, distinguished and soft-spoken middle-aged men. He might not be the most versatile actor in the world, but like such stars as Humphrey Bogart or James Stewart, he's perfect within his personal range.
So, after playing a doctor and a police officer, two noble professions to say the least, it's almost natural that Poitier embodies the noblest and most idealistic of all the vocations in "To Sir, With Love" as Mark Thackeray, a teacher and engineer-trainee affected in a high school located in the slums of London's East End, facing a classroom of white students whose racism can be forgiven in the name of ignorance and because it's obviously a wall that can be broken with some efforts. It's up to Thackeray to educate them before their entrance in the adult world. As I said, Thackeray reminds so much of the characters Poitier played in 1967 that the film can be regarded as the third of an unofficial trilogy, whose only theme would be the eye- opening experience of a black man, victim of prejudices, and the ultimate triumph of tolerance and human spirit. I'm not a fan of 'big words' but put in their context, these films were not only significant but necessary to educate some viewers, and it's quite fitting that Poitier incarnates here, a teacher.
Before "To Sir, With Love", only two movies impacted the spirits about the value of an exceptional teacher, "Goodbye, Mr. Chips" and "Blackboard Jungle", starring Poitier too as a good-hearted hoodlum, there where other films of course but "To Sir, With Love" can still be regarded as a pioneer on the subject even more interesting because it was made in 1967, a year where the baby-boom generation stood up against the establishment and the system, holding the red, the green or the rainbow flag. But what struck me in "To Sir, With Love" is that the film avoids these clichés and portrays a group of kid who're too practical to be just rebels without a cause. Ultimately, they are not kids learning about discipline, but about life, sex, marriage, employment, being a man and being a woman. Thackeray can appear as old- fashioned but he addresses a youth that can respond to his lessons, especially because he reflects the very attitudes and behavior he 'preaches' to his students.
There's no room for clichés in "To Sir, With Love", it's not the chronicles about rebellion as a sickness that can be cured by education, only the journey of a teacher who'll reconcile a bunch of misfits with society. Of course, Thackeray's struggles will earn him the hostility of some elements, but inculcating trust, understanding and communication is a process that demand patience, and a moral strength to overcome the most difficult obstacles with calm and empathy. The key is respect, politeness, a capability for admitting faults or reacting in extreme situations. Three pivotal moments will punctuate Thackeray's journey, the culminating incident where he'll finally understand what matters the most for these kids is less theory and more practicality, a visit in the museum, and the ultimate confrontation with one of them. From all these situations, Thackeray will turn out to be one hell of a teacher, too perfect to be believable if Sidney Poitier didn't play him.
Despite some obvious subplots, like the cute girl having a crush on him or some clumsy displays of racism by a colleague, the film keeps a certain complexity in Poitier's character, who disorients his own students. "You're like us, and not like us", says one of them, which is probably the greatest compliment a teacher could receive, above the students enough to teach them but not too much, so he also can understand them. And through his experience, even Thackeray learns one thing or two about teaching, and about his very purpose in life. And I wouldn't be surprised to know that "To Sir, With Love" encouraged many vocations. Now, the film is not perfect, some details like the students wearing the same clothes every day betray its low budget, but I was in fact touched by the film's modesty and I guess the film was counting on the emotional pay-off of the ending that redeemed all these little things that didn't work, and I reckon the sight of Poitier almost bursting to tears after hearing one of the most beautiful cinematic farewell songs cut straight to my heart.
Indeed, "To Sir, With Love" is also this beautiful melody that carries all the positive aspects of the film, and I will never believe how this never got nominated to the Oscar for Best Original Song ("Talk like an Animal"? Give me a break), another mystery like Poitier not having an Oscar nomination in 1967 (although it was a strong line-up that year) doesn't matter, "To Sir, With Love" is a beautiful film, carried by a superb performance from one of the last living icons. -
1930s_Time_Machine22 August 2022The author who's autobiography this is based hated this film thinking it horribly sentimental. It is a little sentimental but not of course anything like as sentimental as Goodbye Mr Chips - what comes across is realism, a colour snapshot of the East End in 1967. It's hardly the summer of love of the swinging sixties but that only existed for a handful of people. This is how England was for most people. It might not look as mean and nasty and "realistic" as some people might expect compared with these days but it seems pretty realistic and authentic to me.
Something refreshing about this film is it's treatment of racism - or rather it not really bothering about it. It would have been easy to focus on that issue but that is not what this film (unlike the book) is about. It's a film about a teacher who can make a difference. It doesn't matter what colour he is, what's initially important is that he's ostensibly from a more privileged class than his pupils. In one scene for example he's accused of being posh. It's the kids who think that they're the ones being prejudiced against.
The acting is great and the direction is fresh allowing the characters to develop as their protective layers are peeled away. Perhaps the speed of these miraculous transformations is a little unbelievable but that can be forgiven with just a 90 minute run time.
Overall, it's a positive and uplifting film ....plus it's also got one of the greatest pop songs of the day in it. -
claudio_carvalho6 January 2004Mark Thackeray (Sidney Poitier) is a black unemployed engineer, born in the English Guyanna and with a simple and humble origin, who accepts to work as a teacher in an English school. Very poor and undisciplined teenagers compose his class and he has lots of difficulties to approach them. In the end, their students consider Mark as their best friend and dedicate him one of the most wonderful songs in the cinema history. Mark finds that his real vocation is being a teacher and gives up the new job as engineer he has just gotten.
The first time I watched "To Sir with Love", I was twelve years old, and I went at least three times to the movie theater to see this movie again and again. On video, I probably have watched it at least fifteen times more and I do not get tired of this marvelous story. This wonderful movie is in my top ten films list ever. It is sentimental, touching, maybe silly in the present days, but it is also a reference for other movies about the relationship between teacher and rebel students. Michelle Pfeiffer's 'Dangerous Minds', for example, is an updated copy of this story. The direction and cast have an outstanding performance. My vote is ten.
Title (Brazil): "Ao Mestre com Carinho" ("To the Master, with Endearment")
Note: On 14 August 2012, I saw this film again.
Note: On 16 October 2020, I saw this film again. -
fernandoschiavi12 November 2022The list of feature films that show the challenges faced by teachers and students seems to be endless, but they always address controversial issues in different ways. Some endings are happy, others are not, because after all, reality is often harsh. What matters is that people see that with persistence, discipline and respect, it is possible that school problems can be overcome within Education. Within this list of school plots are "Dead Poets Society", "Freedom Writers", "The Class", "Dangerous Minds", "Leon on Me", "Take the Lead", among others. But one, in particular, opened the fan for the following productions: "To Sir with Love".
Written and directed by James Clavell (best known for writing Shogun), inspired by a 1959 book of the same title, by author Edward Ricardo Braithwaite who recounts his own experience as a teacher. The film is an adaptation that tells the story of Mark Thackeray (Sidney Poitier), a black engineer from Guyana who finds it difficult to get a job in his area and accepts an opportunity at a secondary school in a low-income neighborhood in London. As soon as he arrives at school the other teachers wish him good luck with the class and he doesn't understand why he needs luck so much. The principal warns him that some students are difficult, but that deep down they are good people and act rebellious because of the situations they live in their homes.
Born in the Bahamas, actor Sidney Poitier was sent at the age of 15 (average age of the students in the film...) to live with his brother in the United States, due to the constant problems he was involved in in his homeland. He knew, in his personal life, poverty, lack of a good education, and unemployment. All this seems to have made possible the construction of an unforgettable role in the history of cinema, that of Professor Tackeray. Clothed with an aura of honor and dignity, empathy for the students and deep dedication to teaching, Tackeray became and would remain, for movie viewers, a kind of archetype of the ideal teacher, which everyone would like to have - and who would only come to threatened more than 20 years later by Robin Williams' John Keating.
A remarkable product of its time, the film was banned in South Africa because it was considered "offensive for a black teacher to teach a class of white children". Even if it were not so well executed, this fact alone, combined with the courage to present a black protagonist at the height of the conflicts in the USA for black civil rights (the "long summer" of 1967) would already give the film a definitive place in the history of the film. Movie theater.
The strongly dialectical structure of the feature film, which always opts for a strong marker to highlight this clash between student and teacher, which, in the end, translates into the general interpretation of the film as a kind of "good versus evil" as an element that moves the action of the film fable. Social malpractice is transformed through a very powerful and socially engaged pedagogical act, converting what was bad into something good. The tone is always humanistic and part of the most basic premise of universal education: it is possible for everyone to learn everything.
It is very singular that the figure of undisciplined students does not indicate an individuality, that is, we are not talking about a specific student - the difficult Pamela Dare (Judy Geeson) or the problematic Bert Denham (Christian Roberts) -, we are dealing with the portrait of a collective. I mean, the character is collective and represents, through a microsystem (the undisciplined classroom), a macrosystem (society as a whole). The classroom serves as a laboratory for a successful social experiment, which transforms the collective subject as a whole, making it sociable, and thus the film beckons to a consistent optimism in its reading of human relationships. And of course, all this positive status change has in the hands of a teacher the most essential key.
Still, the film operates as if it were constantly pushing its initial acts towards the conclusion, which would be the moment when these undisciplined students would then gain some discipline and start to see Professor Mark, already deeply disrespected at a certain point in the film, as an expensive example of a human being, of a social subject. From the beginning, the direction points to this place and makes the actions that precede it abrupt and sometimes harsh so that, when changing the status of the plot, we delight in the change generated in the heart not only of the students, but of the film itself, which acquires a different tone from the first part, always bringing, in each shot from now on, an aspect of commotion and rhetorical emotion, so that the bond forged between the Master and the students becomes something close to a very sentimental affection, introducing in each line of the script ideas of respect, humanity, decorum, equality and compassion.
The fact is that, a priori, the twist is not what matters, but the way it is conducted in the mise-en-scène, that is, the way, the strategies, the dialogues and the behaviors that led to this adventure and the film demonstrates this. Step by step, with a firm script, which leaves no point untied. In all acts, even after guaranteed respect and above all after the change of fortune (central motif of the film), the master continues to teach through gestures, decisions and postures in the face of situations that arise.
The film does not only address issues of the school environment, it shows how social aspects interfere in the reality of a teenager. Among the students are people who don't have a family base, who have divorced parents, who take care of their siblings or the house when they get home, who consider themselves the scum of society and think they have no future. Although we have a black person as a teacher in a mostly white class, racism is rarely addressed. With the exception of the moment when a mixed-race student loses his mother and his classmates save money to buy a wreath, but cannot go to his house because they will be frowned upon by society at that time.
Despite having premiered in 1967, its approach remains very current, dealing with recurring themes also from the 21st century. Films that talk about the school environment are always moving, not only because the situations experienced by students and teachers are difficult, but also because they are stories of overcoming, showing that with education it is possible, yes, to change the reality of a child or adolescent who it was "destined" to be a "nothing" for society. Despite its concept being current, this is a work that, despite still being iconic, deserves an adaptation for today, keeping the main ideas, but updating many situations and dialogues, including the opportunity to better explore the lives of students and the teacher outside the classroom, even creating new characters with new dramas. If a new adaptation falls into skilled hands, this new version could easily become a new classic for the human and universal potential of the story.
On a cold note, the aesthetic hasn't aged so well and that low-budget movie impression is notorious. Some choices in the editing harm the emotional immersion, there are segments that are drawn out, but two points remain strong: Sidney Poitier's impeccable performance, full of dignity, intelligently internalizing his feelings, and, of course, that unforgettable ending, in which the students gather to surprise the master with a beautiful song, sung by Lulu, who oozes charisma. It is a sensitive example of how cinema can be a truly transformative tool.
We are facing the results of an excellent seeding - allegorical seeding that represents much more than the classroom, but indicates the possibility of transforming the human race through pedagogical means. Or rather, it demonstrates the possibility of social change, working from smaller categories to express verisimilitude in fiction and leaving everything with an aspect of "possible", of "true". -
suzy q12316 May 2001Rent this movie. Don't read any reviews of it, just go out and rent it.
It's one of the best movies of the last forty years, and Sidney Poitier is just beautiful in it. The movie glows, has a soul even, and actually dares to say something of value. I wish they made more movies like this today! Just a gorgeous movie going experience........ -
michaelRokeefe22 February 2003Sidney Poitier is at the top of his game playing Mark Thackeray who is looking for an engineering job, but takes a position teaching a rough London school where the students have no respect or discipline. Excellent story and meaningful in tune with the times. Also in the cast are:Christian Roberts, Judy Geeson, Suzy Kendall, Geoffrey Bayldon and Lulu, who sang the movie's title song that became an international hit. In 1967, "To Sir, With Love" by Lulu was the number one song in America for five straight weeks.
-
wes-connors15 August 2008Sidney Poitier (as Mark Thackeray) wants to be an engineer, but finds jobs scarce; so, he takes a job teaching a group of unmanageable East End London secondary (high) school students. The inexperienced Mr. Poitier has no control in the classroom. With only a few weeks before graduation, he decides to teach discipline and respect. Poitier's biggest classroom problem is rebellious youth Christian Roberts (as Denham). He also has to deal with pretty blonde Judy Geeson (as Pamela), who develops a "schoolgirl crush" on her handsome black teacher.
Poitier doesn't seem to be doing much academic teaching; but, with only a few weeks to go, he makes some instinctive, wise decisions. As the students' "newest replacement", he must start with extensive classroom management. Mostly, the students like to dance and smoke cigarettes. But, through the young cast's performances, and their scripted background, you believe they are worse than they appear on film. The film is a simplistic representation.
Poitier's dignified characterization is superb. As "Mr. Thackeray", he handles societal racism with quiet reservation. Thackeray does not verbalize any racial "blame" for his 18-month failure to find an engineering job. He grins sweetly when the ladies on the bus hint about his sexual prowess. He does not respond to the cynical teacher's bait. And, he responds with non-sensual sincerity to the film's interested blondes. More than anything, Thackeray values courtesy, which is evidenced by his first "tantrum".
Thatcher is a man of polite manners, who values respect. He demands the students call him "Sir". Poitier's command for respect works not only with the students, but also with the audience. Poitier cuts through the film, and demands the same respect from the audience.
You call him SIR!
So, the "lesson" achieves the unexpected - both Thackeray and Poitier are successful with their audience. The audience responded by making Poitier a "Box Office" superstar. It was the right message, the right time, and the right man.
Director James Clavell and the Lulu-sung title song are also outstanding. Most movie award organizations favored Poitier's two successive 1967 films. But, "To Sir, with Love" did very well with the "Film Daily" critics: "To Sir, with Love" was the year's #4 Film, and #1 song. Poitier was the #3 "Best Actor" (one better than his "In the Heat of the Night" role), Christian Roberts was "Juvenile Actor" #2, and Judy Geeson won as #1 "Juvenile Actress".
********* To Sir, with Love (6/14/67) James Clavell ~ Sidney Poitier, Christian Roberts, Judy Geeson, Lulu -
SnoopyStyle20 January 2015Mark Thackeray (Sidney Poitier) is an unemployed engineer from British Guiana originally and a few years in California. Unable to get an engineering job, he reluctantly takes a teaching job at the North Quay Secondary School in the lower class East End neighborhood of London. His class is compose of some of the worst rejects from other schools.
The cockney accent is quite thick but the movie is mostly understandable. Poitier is doing his stoic acting with some flashes of power. The kids are generally nice looking trying to act tough. None of them has any real edge especially compared to modern movies. It may actually be the idea that these are good kids trying to be bad. It plays more like a less intense sentimental movie. The song is great though. I don't want to say the movie is too soft. Just by having Poitier, the race issue is being dealt with. The main thing is that Poitier is never truly outmatched by the kids. He projects so much presence that the kids don't have anything equal to him. -
richwgriffin-227-17663521 January 2013I give this film 5 out of 10 specifically for the great supporting cast: all of the kids and all of the other teachers and adults, except...SIR. I absolutely can't stand this patriarchal sexist jerk of a teacher! he is so incredibly obnoxious and self-righteous.
It's fun to see Patricia Routledge in a film role (she played Hyacinth Bucket in Keeping Up Appearances and Hetty Wainthrop on television). Lulu is great and sings the great theme song.
I love the sense of place and the sense of time (1967). The music, the look of this movie is great.
But the film's attitude is basically the same as Sir, which mars this film too much for me.
There was an American film that was similar in 1967 called "Up The Down Staircase", where Sandy Dennis (splendidly) plays a first-time high school teacher, but in an American school. That film is so much better because it isn't marred by all that sanctimony - patriarchal and sexist attitudes.
I didn't understand that oven scene either, good grief! (;