Seven Up! (1964 TV Movie) User Reviews

Only two movies in and I'm drawn in completely

[metalgoth · 9/10 · 8 July 2005]

I've read about this series elsewhere and was always curious to see it. Thanks to an internet movie rental chain I've now seen 7 Up and 7 + 7, and the rest of the series is queued up and ready to ship. I can't wait.

Viewers who are not used to the various English accents will likely be struggling to understand what some of the kids are saying in the first movie, 7 Up, but it's a short film, and deserves repeated viewing. My vague memories of previous reviews of this series suggest that this may be the most lighthearted of the series. While it is fascinating for many reasons, it is also vastly enjoyable just for the experience of the 7 year-olds' high spirits and humor.

It's jarring when you get your first look at 7 + 7, which revisits most of the kids 7 years later. Their individuality, only hinted at in the first movie, is obvious in these now-14 year-olds. As a parent I feel that familiar combination of the sadness at the loss of the child and anticipation of the future adult. Here we run through this in a matter of minutes.

As it stands now, the series goes as far as 42 Up, somehow turning these frolicking little kids into my peers in the space of a few hours. (I've always been a sucker for special effects.) This series is unlike anything that came before it, and while a quick scan of titles suggests that it's been imitated since, I'm waiting to see what happens to this particular group.

Good start to long-running series...

[postmanwhoalwaysringstwice · 8/10 · 29 October 2007]

"Seven Up!" is the forty minute documentary from 1964 that stands as a prologue for the most forward thinking documentary series of all-time. The film brings together a group of surprisingly articulate seven-year-olds from a variety of backgrounds in England. Through a number of questions posed to each of the children, the audience gets the opportunity to get to know the world through these children's eyes, and often presumably through the parent's eyes and therefore only quoted through these children. Personalities more than perspectives ring through the strongest in this first film, and the glimpse at the education system circa 1964 is intriguing. Unfortunately, as "characters" that will ultimately be seen for another forty years to come, the thick accents of some of them make for a rough start. All in all this is important cinema regardless.

Is it Just Me, or Does Anyone Else Hear Strains of John Lennon's "Working Class Hero" Faintly in the Background?

[Tony-Kiss-Castillo · 9/10 · 11 January 2023]

First, let us focus on the The Title's content and context:

SEVEN UP, here, does not refer to a Soft Drink.... But rather, to a carefully conceived and executed Documentary where, beginning at SEVEN Years of age, a somewhat large assorted group of British Kids, from disperse social classes and backgrounds will be interviewed and asked the exact same set of questions at SEVEN Year intervals... Pretty much for the remainder of their time on Planet EARTH!

Defined on IMDb as a documentary, this seems, to me at least, closer to a reality TV show, in its focus, execution and style! Certainly, for a project conceived and initiated WELL OVER half a century ago, it was, undoubtedly, Light Years ahead of its time!!!

The basic premise, in a nutshell, was to select a group of kids that represented a cross-section of British society in the early 60's. The children were all to be the same age: 7. All of them would be interviewed and filmed answering the same set of questions and participating in the same activities every seven years. This every seven year "snapshot" would continue until the subjects were well into middle age!

At the beginning, the producers state their primary intention as "thusly allowing the viewer to watch the development of a group of children from varied backgrounds and distinct social "classes", and draw their own conclusions".... Is it just me, or does anyone else hear strains of John Lennon's "Working Class Hero" faintly in the background?

All in all, I must admit this UK doc really brings out the latent voyeur in you...(or, at least, in me, perhaps!) Directed by Michael Apted, what I found to be of most interest, to be brutally honest, were the inherent biases and preconceptions of the Interviewers/ producers/director as evidenced by both their choice of questions and subtle differences in the handling/presentation of the screen dynamic of the interviews themselves... Or, perhaps, the inherent biases and preconceptions are really mine?!?!?

My suggestion: Watch Seven Up/Seven Plus Seven and decide for yourself.

9*.....ENJOY/DISFRUTELA!

The first in a ground-breaking series that is one of a kind.

[TxMike · 17 February 2006]

Michael Apted must be congratulated for having (or perhaps stumbling upon) the vision for this study. Take 14 seven year olds in England, film them in a few interesting situations, and follow those same kids as they grow up. Every seven years. Because all of our lives transpire at roughly the same rates, we cannot actually observe children growing up. But this filmed approach is the next best thing.

This first film is rather short, and in black and white plays about like an amateur home movie. We still get to see and hear these children, their opinions, their likes and dislikes, their ambitions. And, while it is interesting, you can get the same thing at any elementary school playground. What is really interesting, and groundbreaking, is the following these children as they grow up.

For that, one must see the next installments. The best way, for the uninitiated, is the 5-disk DVD set just out, which has all 6 films up through "42 UP" in 1998. ("49 UP" has been made but is not yet available on DVD.) However, simply seeing the most recent film is pretty good, because each film contains snippets of each of the former ones, allowing us to see how each child developed in 7-year increments.

Just a marvelous study of growing up.

Incredibly Moving

[Fleaberhopper · 10/10 · 24 February 2002]

This is a series that should be watched by everybody. It is remarkable to see the kids grow, and deal with life like everyone has to. As far as documentaries go, this series should be awarded a special Academy Award because it is one of the best ever made.

Groundbreaking ongoing one of a kind documentary about life as it happens

[Artimidor · 10/10 · 24 December 2011]

In 1964 Michael Apted filmed a documentary on a couple of seven year olds for a British television studio from various backgrounds. The idea was to see what the generation heading into the next millennium looked like at that early age, what their hopes were, their dreams, their aspirations. It was an interesting snap-shot for sure back in these days, but then again, who knew what would really become of those kids? Well, someone clever got the idea to revisit them at age 14 - and thus made another documentary. Seven years later they did it again, and more and more things began to shape and what at this time could be seen as an experiment became really extraordinarily interesting.

So it went on, a documentary on the lives of people like you and me. Today, a couple of dozen years later, we've got several more installments and have gained insight on what has really become of those children of the sixties. The series as a whole is simply the most outstanding and longest running reality documentary ever filmed, it's all about life as close as it can get, and due to its unique circumstances the feat is impossible to copy. There are twists and turns in the lives that we are allowed to follow, sometimes of course also influenced by the fact that they are shown on screen, in a positive or a negative way. However, in general we get a good portion of real life experience handed out via the Seven Up! series in a way we never would be able to experience otherwise, apart from our own lives. Groundbreaking indeed, must see. Should be compulsory viewing for anyone in the process of growing up...

Additional notes: The Seven Up! series has sparked various imitators all over the world, ranging from similar approaches made in the USSR, Germany, Australia and South Africa, thus honoring the original. All these attempts put together provide a kaleidoscope of developing lives around the planet in different times and places. They have their own merits, but owe much to Apted's pioneering spirit. Even Robert Linklater's "Boyhood" (2014), where a young actor is being followed playing a fictional character over twelve years while he's growing up, apparently was heavily inspired by the "Seven Up!" series. Linklater's hybrid film that tries to merge fiction and documentary however ultimately falls somewhat flat, as it is neither the one nor the other. Better stick with the real thing, and it all started here.

lucky number

[lee_eisenberg · 10/10 · 1 January 2015]

This look at a collection of children in England was intended as a one-time thing, but Michael Apted decided to revisit them every seven years. Previously I had only seen "49 Up". "Seven Up!" introduces the tykes as the UK's future. The boys and girls talk about their aspirations, also focusing on the British class system. Apted's association with the series makes it a surprise that he didn't direct the first installment, acting only as a researcher.

Whatever the case, it's a really good documentary. There have been equivalents made in several different countries; of those, I've only seen ages seven and fourteen from Russia. But Apted's series is the gold standard, and I recommend it.

Fantastic documentary that grabs hold and doesn't let go.

[MovieWiz66 · 10/10 · 27 December 2006]

One of the most fascinating films that I have ever witnessed. It is so interesting to see children of 7 grow up right before your eyes. After watching the 42UP,I feel as if I know most of these people. I found most of the subjects very likable,with the exception of the snooty John. He is one of those type of guys that you just yearn to slap the snug smirk off of his face..lol. If you haven't seen this...make this a must-see on your list of films. Especially on your list of documentaries to watch. A great idea,great film and a great cross-section of British society. I was totally engrossed from the first minute to the last. I hope they keep making these as long as the participants are alive. Very interesting to see how much some change,yet some stay the same. My favorite individual was Neil..the homeless wanderer. Although he is beset by mental problems,he is super intelligent and ya get the feeling that of all the people profiled..he just may be the smartest of all. I can relate to Neil.

Talking without comprehension

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 13 November 2013]

The guiding principal is the quote "Give me a child until he is seven and I will give you the man." The filmmakers hope to follow these kids to see a glimpse of England in the year 2000. They follow a group of kids from varied background, and ask some probing questions.

I think most of the questions are over their head. While it's cute to ask these kids about girlfriends and love, the answers are basically meaningless. There's some interesting takes on fighting, the class system and blacks. We get limited information about their family life. Every once in awhile, they answer a question by giving a glimpse into their real lives. We need better answers by adults rather than answers from 7 year olds.

In the end, this is just setting up the rest of the series. The filmmakers get a lot of quotes that will be replay in the films to come. It's a baseline. At this point, we're just having a bit of fun watching cute kids talking without comprehension.

This is the first of an incredible series. Looking back, there are a lot of questions that the filmmakers didn't ask. If the film is taken as a stand alone, it is just a high class version of Kids say the Darndest the Things. But it is a good setup and we have to start somewhere. For that I'll give it a 7/10. If I have one minor change, they need to put the kids' names on the screen. It would make it easier to watch.

« Show me the boy at seven and I will show you the man »

[ElMaruecan82 · 9/10 · 22 December 2017]

And that's how the astonishingly thought-provoking and five-decade spanning "Up" documentaries series started, a TV odyssey following the lives of a dozen of British boys and girls with one episode every seven years, the most recent one was "56 Up" and it was released in 2012 and always directed by Michael Apted (with the exception of the first episode from 1964). What a concept!

Indeed, it's not much about these boys and girls that it is about time and life, the real protagonists, heroic, neutral or villainous depending on the circumstances or each life's narrative. But don't pay too much attention to my praises, I've only seen the first episode so far, yet I find the concept extraordinary and riveting on an emotional level. And for that, I'm glad I bumped into that "Siskel& Ebert" show that covered the "35 Up" episode of 1991 which made me immediately think, "wait? Such a documentary existed and I never heard about it?" As far as I was concerned, the groundbreaking creation on that subject was Richard Linklater's "Boyhood", you know "12 years in the making" was I fooled? That this series is so unknown is beyond me.

So, I didn't hesitate one second and started my journey with the documentary and now, I've just finished the 1964 episode. I can't say I remembered all the names but I identified the "archetypes"! a lonely child from an isolated village, a little tough one who likes fighting and jumping all around, three kids from the upper class who certainly talk better than many adults today, one girl who practice ballet and is quite disciplined, other girls who are more playful etc. But I wasn't exactly taking notes, I just let the flow of images operate and I'll leave that up for the next chapters to put the right names on the right faces. It's got to be a slow process and we have plenty of time (five decades is quite a lot, isn't it?)

Now, watching the film, I noticed how not so different kids have always behaved, they are from my father's generation (he was 9 in 1964) but listen to them talking, listen to the boys whining about girls constantly screaming, or girls about boys immaturely fighting, listen to them talking about rich people or the lack of education; the vocabulary might change from one generation to another, or place to place, but the core of childhood is there. Childhood is defined in very simple terms, there's no room for complexity, you fight to express disagreement, you play to have fun, you work because you have to, you sleep at specific times, you respect the authority or you don't, but each department of life doesn't leave you with many choices. Yet, there's no doubt that childhood is perhaps the most crucial part of one's life, the one that hits it or breaks it. Some would say youth but teenage behavior is also forged by childhood memories (I expect the next chapter to cover that).

So you better not ruin your childhood, and the maxim about "men at seven" is true. It has been demonstrated by psychologists that after six or seven, you can't change the core personality of your kid, Daniel Goldman's "Emotional Intelligence" dedicates a whole chapter for fear and shyness, explaining that you can cure a child from his insecurities before the age of six. And speaking from my own experience, I can say my personality started at seven, I started reading comic books, playing games, drawing much better than my friends, being aroused by the artistic and intellectual stuff, it was in 1989, the year where I also started wearing glasses. At six, I was painfully shy but I could triumph over it, but at seven, I started to behave like I would usually do. Some parts were accidental; others under one's influence. See, my mother was a teacher in my school so the day I wanted to have fun with boys and pick on girls, my teacher took me and said that she would tell my mother if I did that again. I feared the authority, I couldn't help it. I became a "good boy" (sigh).

But I'm not saying I enjoyed the film because it echoed my own memories, but because it plays like the perfect set-up to a series of discoveries, some you know to be happy and some sad. The film shows kids from rich or poor neighborhoods, public or private school, boys', girls' or mixed schools, cities or farms, different backgrounds, different personalities and different prospects. One wants to be a missionary to civilize Africa, some know they will leave school at the age of 15, some girls wants only two children, a kid doesn't want any. I didn't know how to feel because they were so young, I was like "why are you closing so many doors, life is so full of opportunities" but maybe it is not, maybe it's true that the die are cast from the start and it's only out of a defensive mechanism that we try to set ourselves goals, and the more definite vision a kid has about the future, the happier he or she will be. I don't know how true it is, I just expect the next episodes to come with a load of surprises, to prove me wrong or tell me something I didn't know... and I naturally wish them the best.

(On a side note, the film was made in 1964 at the peak of the Beatle-mania, and I can't resist quoting John Lennon: "Life is what happens when you make plans", these kids talk a lot about life and future, but they'll soon discover that life is a series of random stuff happening for better or worse, they're called circumstances, they're too young to realize it. At seven, I didn't either. At least, the rules are the same for everybody.)

49 Up Interview with Michael Apted

[chucklezone · 7/10 · 9 October 2007]

I was interested to hear an interview with Michael Apted. I learned that the children selected at age 7 were those who were articulate and able to communicate clearly. The heads of various schools were asked to select their brightest and best for the project. As a social commentary, it is very interesting to see how they have developed over the years. Also, the various opinions and levels of participation from those around them, for example wives and husbands. By their very participation and reflection during the filming the participants have been altered. Clearly one participant felt quite misrepresented and wanted to set the record straight. In that sense, the film makers are not passive observers and some bias is inevitable. Despite this, it is a convincing personal commentary on more than 4 decades of British life.

must-see

[mohamadacma · 9/10 · 9 November 2019]

The up series followed the lives of six(or more) children in the 60's at age seven kicking off the series with the premise" give me a child until he is seven and I will give you the man". The doc interviewed the kids of seven and asked them several question about their aspirations, their likes and dislikes, and other life-related topics. The kids were chosen from several social backgrounds in an attempt to reach a comparison of the sort of life they will lead having been brought up in their respective circumstances. Seven is the age, as I seem to understand, with which a child must reach a sort of full picture of what he will pretty much be in the days to come, it emphasizes the importance of the first seven years in making the child whole in respect of ambitions and development. After the first series, the director would revisits the children of seven every seven years to see what changed in their behaviors, aspirations, what they have achieved, and whether they veered from their initial wantings. I felt like a doc kinda wanted to show whether the kids of sseven are actually the man for the rest of their lives. For every seven years of time, some guys kept going on their intended course, some changed their course due to a either a conscious decision of their own, or due to a misfortune or lack of luck that hindered the kinda developmental process that was meant to be. It is interesting seeing how the children changed over the years in terms of the luck they had, the sort of opportunities they pursued, and how important was every bit of nurturing they were exposed to at an earlier age. Like we see how a kid with separated parents was myopic in terms of ambitions and preferred a stable, comfortable job as opposed to taking risks. Also, That kid in the series that had luck turned against him and ended up a beggar with no job until an old age. What I concluded from thei series is how important the parent's love and nurture of their child, and obviously how much education is responsible to the kinda of paths popel pursue at a later age. Overall, I think it is a must-see doc.

Ground Floor of a Bright, Challenging Experiment

[drqshadow-reviews · 6/10 · 21 April 2016]

First in a long line of documentaries, which check-in every seven years with the same group of children to see how their lives have unfolded. Our first meeting is very short, as these things go, which should be expected since the subjects are just seven years old and there isn't a lot of back-story to investigate. There's already a lot of developmental divergence among the youngsters, though, which is intentional on the part of the filmmakers. Of course, the great experiment is noting how much crossover there is between classes over the decades. How much upward mobility is really available for that sweet cattle rancher's child from Scotland, versus the son of a financial analyst who already boasts of his investments in the stock market? Or for the boys, as opposed to the fairer sex? For now, we hear a lot of their parents' opinions filtered through their offspring and some interesting - if not vital - notes about a typical day in their life. Seven is a great age for thinking; beyond the point of simple observation but not yet jaded or corrupted by one's experiences and surroundings. Thus, we get a lot of honest, unashamed opinions on some heavy matters, and some very raw answers that we'd never hear from an adult. It's all just the tip of the iceberg, really. Like the subjects themselves, this is just a sketch of a greater picture yet to come. It does serve as a firm foundation for looking back, for comparing and for contrasting, and that's sure to make for an excellent long game.

Over rated

[frankzappayay · 3/10 · 11 December 2019]

It is a bit interesting, but only really the novelty of seeing people grow up from kids to elderly. The actual content itself is disappointing though. They only get to spend a few minutes on each person, so you don't really get to know them as people. They ask the same few questions in each movie, and they aren't interesting enough questions and not enough depth.

It is also very one dimensional. The series tries to make a point of how bad the British class system is, with the upper class kids forced into their top end jobs but with no appreciation of the simpler things in life. And the working class kids the exact opposite.

Also none of them have interesting lives, or interesting outlooks. Only one of them is interesting which isn't enough, and you also don't get to see enough about any of them. It would have been better to have fewer people and a more in depth look into their lives. One of the more interesting people refused to continue with the show so was only in the first couple of movies.

Overall semi interesting but not good enough. Not deep enough to be useful to a sociologist, not interesting enough to be entertainment. Also it is overall pretty dark and miserable which is a shame because the first episode was so happy, but it quickly takes a dark turn and stays that way until the end.

A great start to a brilliant series

[Ness-8 · 24 May 1999]

I first saw this about five years ago, and I couldn't wait to see the 7+7, 14, 21, 28 and 35, and am eagerly awaiting 42 up. It gets you in, it will make you want to know how these kids will turn out. I'm a lucky one, who didn't have to wait seven years for each of these episodes to come out.

If you have any interest in human behaviour, whether it be in kids or adults; if you wonder if what you thought you would be at seven, or fourteen is actually what you turn out to be; then you should watch this, and the rest of the series.

Unique and amazing series of films

[runamokprods · 10/10 · 26 February 2011]

The 'Up Series' represents one of the most fascinating and unusual uses of film in cinema history - a documentary life-long chronicle of the lives of 14 people starting at 7 years old, revisiting them every seven years through age 49 (so far).

While I could quibble, wishing for a bit more depth here and there (especially with the women, where there's a bit too much emphasis on love and marriage at the expense of all else), it's really an astounding, moving, frightening and uplifting document. There's no way to watch this remarkable series of films without reflecting deeply on one's own life, and how you have changed (and stayed the same) over your own lifetime.

While Michael Aped deserves every bit of credit he's received for this amazing piece of cultural anthropology, it's important to note this first film, 7 Up,was actually directed by Paul Almond, and Apted was a that point a researcher for the project.

A picture of how we evolve

[thebbcamerican · 10/10 · 30 October 2013]

The "spoilers" in this review are a couple of quotes from the series (personally, I find just about any quotes to be spoilers, as that's part of experiencing it fresh) but they will be at the end and duly prefaced.

Roger Ebert put this series on his list of the ten greatest films ever, and although it might not quite make that echelon for me, I wouldn't fault anyone for putting it there.

My favorite lines from the film sum it up very well, and both come from Nick. At first, I was very critical of it not being a "proper" study, which it isn't. But once you get past that hurdle and just allow it to be no more (or less) than just what it is, it has loads to offer beyond the base voyeuristic value in terms of insight and opportunities for soul-searching for the attuned viewer. In essence, the series is less about its practical agenda -- watching how these specific individuals evolve -- and more about us learning how people, or *a* person evolves. In the end, for the viewers lucky enough to be open to it, following these individuals is less about learning about them and more about learning about ourselves.

With that, I'll give the quotes of Nick's I was referring to, which essentially sum up my feelings about the series (QUOTE SPOILER ALERT):

At age 21: "It's just that the limitations of such things as what the audience require and the time don't allow it to be a real study. I mean if we accept this, then okay I think it's probably good entertainment."

At 56, he gets closer to my feelings about its value beyond merely good entertainment: "The idea of looking at a bunch of people over time and how they evolve -- that was a really nifty idea. It isn't a picture, really, of the essence of Nick, or Suzy, it's a picture of everyone. It's how a person, any person, how they change.... It's not an absolute accurate picture of *me*. But it's a picture of somebody. And that's the value of it."

Seven Up! (1964)

[MartinTeller · 6/10 · 10 January 2012]

I've heard about this series for ages, but I've been reluctant to dive in. Partly because of the time investment, but also because I fear the concept as a whole is more interesting than the individual parts. And although I expect the later installments to improve, the first film really doesn't stand well on its own. I'm not that interested in children to begin with, especially not such precocious ones. The subjects were all chosen as the brightest of their respective classrooms, so they're all trying to talk like adults, which gets on my nerves. Particularly the three prissy upper-class boys. The film is too short and has too many players to get very in-depth, but some of the observations about class differences are fairly intriguing, and I'm curious to see how those develop. But as a stand-alone movie, there's not much meat here.

Implicit Ideology

[gentendo · 6/10 · 12 October 2007]

The filmmaker's ideological argument is one that is pervasive throughout the film: "Give me the child until he is 7 and I will give you the man." Set in London England, the director exposes this argument by interviewing an average group of elementary school children. His questions include a variety of topics that allow the viewer to become better acquainted with the thoughts and desires of what these children hope to become. The mere fact that his subject is elementary school children demonstrates his ability to fulfill one of the rules of documentary film-making: giving a voice to the voiceless. These children under normal circumstances would not have a voice in the world at such a young age. They are not celebrities; they are just like any other child—ingenuously funny, naïve, and inquisitive. Most of them aspire to become great things (i.e. astronauts, teachers); however, the director seems to implicitly suggest that given the immaturity of their present beliefs as seven-year-old children, those dreams they wish to fulfill are idealistically unattainable. How? Because given his argument, he suggests that because these particular children are "fully developed" and still immature at the age of seven, he presupposes that the nation of England ought to greatly fear the rising generation and what skills they will lack in the world. The last line of the film implicitly demonstrates this, "We have now seen a look at what the nation of England is in store for and what potential there lies within." Observing how the audience and myself was laughing at the naivety of these children (as I'm sure was intended to show how ignorant they are) I personally felt it was unfair for the director to cast such judgment on them because I don't believe a child is fully developed at the age of seven. One cannot presuppose such a threat to a nation based off what a child's inclinations and aspirations are at such a young age. Why? Because there are many factors that can and do contribute in refining a child's behavior into something better through a space of time and development. The director seemed to suggest that such a space for developing would not be necessary to determine who they would become in the future, namely, bums.

There are several filmic techniques that the director used to support his argument. First, he asked specific questions that he knew would exploit the children through their own responses: "What do you do after you get home from school?" to which most of the children responded, "Watch TV!" The implication here of course suggests that their lack of diligence and acquiescence to passivity and mind-numbing entertainment would cause them to become slaves inside of Plato's cave—something not fit for a future nation to thrive on. Second, he captures on film moments of the children fighting with each other. This is more of an explicit ideology of showing that violence and aggression reign supreme amongst such a young crowd as this. The implicit ideology seems to suggest that if these children are fighting with their hands and feet now, how will they fight in the future?—with guns, knives? Overall, I felt this documentary was promoting activism on behalf of the parents—how to discipline your children better! I felt this was rather ridiculous because they are only children—there's still plenty of time for them to grow and develop into more responsible beings.

This is just a sketch of a greater picture yet to come

[eminkl · 6/10 · 18 April 2020]

First in a long line of documentaries, which check-in every seven years with the same group of children to see how their lives have unfolded. Our first meeting is very short, as these things go, which should be expected since the subjects are just seven years old and there isn't a lot of back-story to investigate. There's already a lot of developmental divergence among the youngsters, though, which is intentional on the part of the filmmakers. Of course, the great experiment is noting how much crossover there is between classes over the decades. How much upward mobility is really available for that sweet cattle rancher's child from Scotland, versus the son of a financial analyst who already boasts of his investments in the stock market? Or for the boys, as opposed to the fairer sex? For now, we hear a lot of their parents' opinions filtered through their offspring and some interesting - if not vital - notes about a typical day in their life. Seven is a great age for thinking; beyond the point of simple observation but not yet jaded or corrupted by one's experiences and surroundings. Thus, we get a lot of honest, unashamed opinions on some heavy matters, and some very raw answers that we'd never hear from an adult. It's all just the tip of the iceberg, really. Like the subjects themselves, this is just a sketch of a greater picture yet to come. It does serve as a firm foundation for looking back, for comparing and for contrasting, and that's sure to make for an excellent long game.

Mesmerising

[CGA_Soupdragon · 13 March 2006]

49 up was screened here i two episodes. Recent meetings with the participants were interwoven with flashbacks from the earlier interviews at ages 7, 14, 21, 28, 35 and 42. So beautifully put together. No sensationalism. No hopping about. Each interview subject was able to unfurl their lives in a steady pace that kept me enthralled throughout.

It's a breathtaking idea that grew out of an interest in finding out what happened to the original group after another 7 years when the children had become 14. The producers have kept in touch and most of the subjects have been more or less willing to be interviewed in the subsequent years.

This series of interviews, especially seen in the light of the fact that I am nearly as old as the people involved in this project, gave me so much. Seeing people live their lives, suffering set-backs, dealing with life's many stumbling blocks, gaining unexpected insights into themselves and their loved ones makes for a very gripping and fulfilling experience.

Absolutely marvelous. A gem.

Beginning to a unique journey

[Horst_In_Translation · 6/10 · 5 June 2015]

Unless you've lived under a rock for the last 1.5 years, you probably have heard about Richard Linklater's "Boyhood", one of the best-received movies from last year. We see a young boy grow into a man and people praised this movie for its uniqueness. Well, it's not that 100% unique. Actually the Up Series did a similar thing. In this 40 minute black-and-white documentary from 1964, several children at the age of seven are interviewed about their dreams, their lives and all kinds of stuff. And every seven years, they came together again and added another chapter. This first one here is actually the shortest. All the later ones easily cross the two-hour-mark. So by now, there are eight editions already and the kids from 50 years ago are approaching 60. Sadly, since the last meeting one of the girls (Lynn) died and also the director Paul Almond, who started this endeavor, is no longer with us. Michael Apted, who directed all the films since the second entry is still alive, however. The boy named Charles (a filmmaker himself) is the only one from the bunch who decided to be not a part of it anymore. I quite enjoyed watching this television documentary. As a film of its own I would give it a 6. It's certainly worth a watch and also tells us about life in England 50 years ago. The whole project I'd rate much better, maybe an 8/10. As interesting it is to watch, it's also a bit of melancholy to see these as there is always some transience in there. Anyway, it's really a great idea and nice to see they kept the concept going for so long. The next entry will probably come out in 2019, when everybody is in their early 60s.

This first one is great but comes with a strong warning...

[soundoflight · 7/10 · 25 September 2020]

While I found this first documentary of the "Seven Up!" series highly compelling, and think it's worth watching, I have to sound a grave warning for anyone who, like me, intended to start here and watch the entire series.

Yes, this first one is great. I enjoyed how it was shot, how it was produced, I enjoyed the children and funny things they said, I liked the artfulness of it and the 1960's style of it. It made me eager for a follow up, and "7 Plus Seven" was also enjoyable, to see the dramatic changes in the teenage years, and then "21 Up" was interesting as well. But each subsequent documentary contains huge portions of the previous ones, and this quickly becomes a giant bore, particularly when you are not watching them seven years apart. Also I found the people became less interesting over time. They are just normal, mundane people, after all, and yet the documentaries about them just got longer and longer, clocking in at 2 hours or more, when the first one is a snappy 39 minutes. It started to seem like really bad reality TV. And all the artfulness of that first one seemed to be totally drained out over time. I had to stop watching and could not continue.

The really magnificent documentary might be the final one, when all these people have passed on and some kind of grand retrospective of their lives can take place that attempts to draw some conclusions about this grand experiment. So give it a shot if you like, but it was too much for me.

Preparatory

[tedg · 9 November 2006]

I get most all of my films by recommendation and this is universally the most recommended to me of those I haven't seen. The series I mean. I suppose it wouldn't make any sense at all to see them out of order so as with everyone, we all start here.

To do that, we have to place ourselves in several other worlds. I'm an American. Though I spent a few years in school in the UK, We came home when I was five and I have few memories. For Americans, England — at least the pre-Thatcher England — was a sort of fairy- tale place where privilege was sprinkled here and there and strongly supported on the backs of the relatively poor remainder because by such tax they helped define what it meant to be British.

There aren't many blanket statements that can be made of the US — and this is less true now — but it is still true that Americans define themselves in large measure against this tradition. The idea of class immobility seems a perversion of nature.

Naturally, that's at the center of how this experiment starts. I'm sure the filmmakers never intended to follow these children as markers (more than representatives) of the collapse of privilege. Not the injustice and wealth, but the willingness which Brits poured into protecting a country (twice!) against barbarians so that their rich could continue pulling the traditions along.

So start here, fellow voyager. This first installment is completely without merit except in how it sets the starting point for a voyage through the transformation of an old two-class system to a "modern" two-class one, seemingly only for the amusement of the rest of the world.

Perhaps it would have been more interesting to have selected all girls.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.