This film and its predecessors are the most fascinating documentaries released cinematically, not because of their breathtaking cinematography, whiz-bang special effects or even revelation of secret or unknown information. What it does offer is a look straight into the personal lives of a group of people with nothing much in common except this series of extraordinary films which every 7 years throw their experiences open to the world. For the most part they are ordinary lives but they are engrossing as only reality can be. There is no gloss applied, no smoothing over of rough edges. Apted has become a friend to many of his 'subjects' and the warmth of their relationship with him comes into the film. In this program, even the effect of the film series on the people in it is examined, so in some ways it is a film about itself. Like a classic serial cliffhanger, at the end one is impatient to see the next instalment, but it will be seven years in production...
21 Reviews
A Fascinating and Important Film
ProfessorFate24 November 2004
This film series takes the adage "Give me a child until age 7, and I'll give you the man" and blows it out of the water. I've been a fan of the "Up Series" since my first viewing of "28 Up". Watching these precocious 7-year-olds grow into adulthood right before my eyes has sparked some much needed self-examination of my own life. That may be the greatest value of the "Up Series", causing the viewer to project themselves into the film and see how their own lives have changed and developed. The movie ticket is certainly cheaper than a trip to the psychologist.
Some highlights of this edition:
-Tony, the would-be jockey and racetrack numbers runner who became a London cabbie. Despite his infidelities, Tony is still married to his forgiving wife and seems to take great pride in his children. Tony has now become more reflective about his life, taking a thoughtful stroll through the closed down racetrack where he once rode, and getting misty-eyed when discussing his late mother and father. Always frank and pragmatic, he says of his comfortable suburban home, "I'm a cabbie. This is probably as far as I'm gonna get."
-Bruce, the good-natured, relationship challenged school teacher who was teaching in Bangladesh, is back teaching in London and has finally found Mrs. Right. Among the interesting tidbits of information you learn from Apted's DVD commentary is that he broke his rule of only filming the subjects every 7 years so he could be present to film Bruce's wedding.
-Nick, the physicist who moved to the US, returns home to his father's farm.
We meet his brothers and are treated to some beautiful shots of the English contryside. In his commentary Apted discusses his regrets regarding the way he edited Nick's wife in previous episodes. She now refuses to do interviews for the films and also refuses to let their son participate.
-Andrew, the only one of what Apted refers to as the "Three Wise Men", the upper class boys, who participated in 42 Up. Successful well-adjusted, happily married, we see Andrew and his family on a vacation to New York City (with several pre-9/11 shots of the WTC). Thanks to the DVD commentary, we learn that John doesn't particularly like Apted and only agreed to be interviewed for "35 Up" if his interview was conducted by Apted's assistant director. The other upper class boy, Charles, is ironically a documentary director for the BBC and has consistently refused to participate since "21 Up".
-Neil, the bright, animated 7-year-old who ended up dropping out of college and living in a trailer. Neil has always been the most compelling character in the "Up Series". His obvious intelligence exists in sharp contrast with mental problems and bouts with depression. Every fan of the films would probably admit to worrying whether or not Neil would survive to the next episode. Happily, Neil is now involved in local politics. Despite his eccentric appearance and lack of a paying job (he makes no money from his job with the Liberal Democrats), Neil is no longer the rambling hermit of "28 Up". His turn around can partly be attributed to some assistance from fellow "Up" subject Bruce. Neil even participated in Bruce's wedding.
Let's hope Apted comes up with a DVD compilation that includes footage from all the films. Instead of the brief 15 minute updates we get for each subject in "42 Up", it would be nice to see a half-hour or so on each, as well as footage of those who no longer participate (like Peter). Apted's DVD commentary is boring at times, but includes some fascinating behind-the-scenes information which devoted fans will enjoy. In conclusion, the "Up Series" stands as one of the most important and engrossing documentaries ever committed to celluloid.
Some highlights of this edition:
-Tony, the would-be jockey and racetrack numbers runner who became a London cabbie. Despite his infidelities, Tony is still married to his forgiving wife and seems to take great pride in his children. Tony has now become more reflective about his life, taking a thoughtful stroll through the closed down racetrack where he once rode, and getting misty-eyed when discussing his late mother and father. Always frank and pragmatic, he says of his comfortable suburban home, "I'm a cabbie. This is probably as far as I'm gonna get."
-Bruce, the good-natured, relationship challenged school teacher who was teaching in Bangladesh, is back teaching in London and has finally found Mrs. Right. Among the interesting tidbits of information you learn from Apted's DVD commentary is that he broke his rule of only filming the subjects every 7 years so he could be present to film Bruce's wedding.
-Nick, the physicist who moved to the US, returns home to his father's farm.
We meet his brothers and are treated to some beautiful shots of the English contryside. In his commentary Apted discusses his regrets regarding the way he edited Nick's wife in previous episodes. She now refuses to do interviews for the films and also refuses to let their son participate.
-Andrew, the only one of what Apted refers to as the "Three Wise Men", the upper class boys, who participated in 42 Up. Successful well-adjusted, happily married, we see Andrew and his family on a vacation to New York City (with several pre-9/11 shots of the WTC). Thanks to the DVD commentary, we learn that John doesn't particularly like Apted and only agreed to be interviewed for "35 Up" if his interview was conducted by Apted's assistant director. The other upper class boy, Charles, is ironically a documentary director for the BBC and has consistently refused to participate since "21 Up".
-Neil, the bright, animated 7-year-old who ended up dropping out of college and living in a trailer. Neil has always been the most compelling character in the "Up Series". His obvious intelligence exists in sharp contrast with mental problems and bouts with depression. Every fan of the films would probably admit to worrying whether or not Neil would survive to the next episode. Happily, Neil is now involved in local politics. Despite his eccentric appearance and lack of a paying job (he makes no money from his job with the Liberal Democrats), Neil is no longer the rambling hermit of "28 Up". His turn around can partly be attributed to some assistance from fellow "Up" subject Bruce. Neil even participated in Bruce's wedding.
Let's hope Apted comes up with a DVD compilation that includes footage from all the films. Instead of the brief 15 minute updates we get for each subject in "42 Up", it would be nice to see a half-hour or so on each, as well as footage of those who no longer participate (like Peter). Apted's DVD commentary is boring at times, but includes some fascinating behind-the-scenes information which devoted fans will enjoy. In conclusion, the "Up Series" stands as one of the most important and engrossing documentaries ever committed to celluloid.
Brilliant series
Jisk25 October 2001
I can't say enough about this series. I just watched 28 up, 35 up and 42 up all in about a week's time, so there are a lot of things to talk about within the entire series, rather than just in this one particular film. But I'll do my best to focus on 42, since that is the film I am commenting on.
As a film on its' own, 42 up is probably the most interesting of the series as far as watching the people change physically over the years goes. Each subject filmed at the six different stages appears (except for those that had dropped out of the program) and you get to see how they have transformed over the years. 42 is also great because you also get to see how film techniques (& stock) have evolved over the years along with the people. In the present time, the film looks beautiful and rich in color while each successive film appears murkier and murkier over time until you get the original black and white of 1964. The problem with 42 Up, if you were going to watch just this one film, is that because there are so many flashbacks of people at various stages, this leaves little room for getting to know them better (during a 2 hour time frame). I have talked to people who say, "I am just going to watch 42 up because they give you all the background stuff anyway.." I say NO!.....
For a richer experience, and this is what I did so you can take it for what it's worth, watch 28, 35, and 42 up at least so you can get to know these people fully at each stage. There are crucial things that happen to these people in 35 for instance which does not show up in 42.(Neil!!John!!) I cannot even view each film as seperate, because they all seem sewn together somehow. Taken as a whole, they are amazing to watch..and the suspense in wondering what happened to each over the next seven years is truly there if you start early in the series. So watch some of the others before you watch 42 to get the full effect.
On to the characters..who are real people. Their stories are so beautiful to watch unfold over time it is truly amazing they were captured at each stage as they grew up. And you can even get the feeling by the end how large their lives really are and that they extend way beyond the borders of the film which the filmmakers obviously knew and luckily never once tried to pretend that they could completely capture the essence of a person on film. You just get tiny snippets of who these people are yet by the end you can't stop thinking about them, they become a part of you. I cannot think of any movie or series of movies where the characters were so richly drawn as these were, especially over the course of time. A beautiful, wonderful series that everybody should own.
Questions (if anyone can answer them for me) 1) Whatever happened to John???? why don't they even mention him (like they do some of the others who dropped out) in 35 & 42? He disappears after 28! What happened to him??? 2) Are there any other projects going on like this in America or on a global scale? I think it would be a brilliant idea to do this similarly Globally to investigate and compare cultures all over the world! 3)Will there be a 49 Up or was that the end of the series?
As a film on its' own, 42 up is probably the most interesting of the series as far as watching the people change physically over the years goes. Each subject filmed at the six different stages appears (except for those that had dropped out of the program) and you get to see how they have transformed over the years. 42 is also great because you also get to see how film techniques (& stock) have evolved over the years along with the people. In the present time, the film looks beautiful and rich in color while each successive film appears murkier and murkier over time until you get the original black and white of 1964. The problem with 42 Up, if you were going to watch just this one film, is that because there are so many flashbacks of people at various stages, this leaves little room for getting to know them better (during a 2 hour time frame). I have talked to people who say, "I am just going to watch 42 up because they give you all the background stuff anyway.." I say NO!.....
For a richer experience, and this is what I did so you can take it for what it's worth, watch 28, 35, and 42 up at least so you can get to know these people fully at each stage. There are crucial things that happen to these people in 35 for instance which does not show up in 42.(Neil!!John!!) I cannot even view each film as seperate, because they all seem sewn together somehow. Taken as a whole, they are amazing to watch..and the suspense in wondering what happened to each over the next seven years is truly there if you start early in the series. So watch some of the others before you watch 42 to get the full effect.
On to the characters..who are real people. Their stories are so beautiful to watch unfold over time it is truly amazing they were captured at each stage as they grew up. And you can even get the feeling by the end how large their lives really are and that they extend way beyond the borders of the film which the filmmakers obviously knew and luckily never once tried to pretend that they could completely capture the essence of a person on film. You just get tiny snippets of who these people are yet by the end you can't stop thinking about them, they become a part of you. I cannot think of any movie or series of movies where the characters were so richly drawn as these were, especially over the course of time. A beautiful, wonderful series that everybody should own.
Questions (if anyone can answer them for me) 1) Whatever happened to John???? why don't they even mention him (like they do some of the others who dropped out) in 35 & 42? He disappears after 28! What happened to him??? 2) Are there any other projects going on like this in America or on a global scale? I think it would be a brilliant idea to do this similarly Globally to investigate and compare cultures all over the world! 3)Will there be a 49 Up or was that the end of the series?
One of the finest documentary series ever made!
mooseburton21 March 2002
I cannot say enough good things about this series. Each one seems to interest me more as I follow the lives of the kids I first saw in '7UP'. '42UP' continues to show us how they have evolved as people and how the British class system still has control over their lives. As an American I find it somewhat hard to understand that the class you are born into largely determines your educational choices and therefore part of the outcome of your life. I strongly suggest seeing as many of the series as you can, (7UP, 14UP, 21UP, 28UP, 35UP) before your see 42UP. But as a stand alone documentary it is still excellent.
A fascninating and enormously perceptive series
GregRG5 January 2000
In the most sociologically fascinating and perceptive documentary series ever produced, Michael Apted has made this enormously thought provoking series a labour of love. He has taken eleven seven year olds in 1964, and has filmed them every seven years since then. The results have been breathtaking. In seeing footage from when these now grown adults were little, we see how the boy becomes a man and the girl becomes a woman. We see as each attempt to reach their hopes and dreams. There are successes and failures (including one heartbreaking one), but we get more than that. We get an overwhelming sense of the connection and delicate fabric of human life.
Continues to be Compelling
SnoopyStyle13 November 2013
The original idea was to see these kids of England in the year 2000. Director Michael Apted returns to see these kids, and I wonder what he sees of his charges. I think the social studies aspect is now mostly gone. They're not simply a rich child, or a poor child. These are individual characters each deserving of our attention.
We are now finding these people have surprising drama. The biggest stories are Tony had an affair, Simon returns to the series, and Bruce helps out Neil. Simon missed 35 Up and got divorced. He's remarried now and happier and more willing to do the series. On the other hand, John was never happy with the series and skip this one. Charles continues to skip the series and Peter is gone now also. The kids of the kids are growing up now, and the world keeps moving on.
We are now finding these people have surprising drama. The biggest stories are Tony had an affair, Simon returns to the series, and Bruce helps out Neil. Simon missed 35 Up and got divorced. He's remarried now and happier and more willing to do the series. On the other hand, John was never happy with the series and skip this one. Charles continues to skip the series and Peter is gone now also. The kids of the kids are growing up now, and the world keeps moving on.
Fortitude Up!
ElMaruecan8222 December 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I must confess that "42 Up" felt a bit redundant but it has nothing to do with the documentary itself, but rather the fact that I'm binge-watching the series, a concept that is totally estranged to the context when it was made, but that affects the "enjoyment" a little bit.
Michael Apted's epic documentary series spanned more than three decades by the times the sixth episode was made, for the targeted audience, each episode was as fresh as if it was the first, carrying just a few bits of déjà vu. The introductory montages were necessary for a time where there was no video, let alone Youtube, to remember where we left each person. This is why I'm taking a little break after the '42' episode, I need to "miss" them for at least one or two weeks before concluding the series.
But boy, I'm always glad when the show starts and as usual with good old Tony. Tony was the little guy who dreamed to become a jockey and had fulfilled his dream for a few months before becoming a bookie runner than a cab driver, he took his under-achieved goal with all stride, took acting classes, had a few roles, nothing to brag about, but nothing to be ashamed of either. Tony isn't a dreamer but a doer. And I'm amazed of the consistency of his high spirit.
However, I was startled and moved by the physical changes, he gained a few pounds and definitely had that forty-something look, in a way, he made me ready to observe similar changes in the others. Nicholas lost hair, Paul a little less and his goatee featured a white little crop at the bottom, Bruce became a bit chubbier, Jackie and Susan looked their age and Lynn a bit older, probably her health didn't help... I'm sorry to venture into such superficial observations, but let's not pretend that this is an aspect we wouldn't care about. Haven't you noticed that after looking at old pictures, you look at yourself in the mirror?
The interest toward physical changes might confine to a form of voyeurism but it's one of natural inclination, we care about it as we care about any sign of a declining health, and just like many of them have lost their parents in the previous episodes, some are getting ill, like Jackie whose disease seems to be a tad worse than Lynn's. It is obvious that as the series advances, some will get sicker and eventually die, I didn't put much thought into that until this episode. Thankfully, 42 is still relatively young and the episode allows us to focus on happier fates like Bruce who has finally met love, Simon who divorced and found love again, but let's get to the most anticipated of all: Neil, almost the greatest miracle of the series.
Neil has always been the toughest nut to crack. For all I knew, when I 'left' him at 35, Neil could be as well alive or dead at 42, happy or miserable, but I was pleasantly surprised to learn that a friendship grew between him and Bruce, which allowed him to become politically active. Politics seemed to be tailor-made for Neil, as he was the kid who dreamed to be a bus driver, showing people what to look at. Ever since the show started, Neil has always been the one who shows us a different direction, not the marriage and the family, not success or money, something he didn't know exactly, but that we could figure out after hearing his insights about life, love, God and death, with Bruce's influence, he also started to get more involved in religion.
That bit doesn't contradict Neil's personality since he admitted a few episodes earlier that believing in God was necessary to survive in this world. The documentary pays off with the part dedicated to Neil, because he's always the interrogation mark, and he still is, I could see him becoming a writer, a teacher or even a drifter again, he's the soul of the "Up" series as unpredictable as life itself. But there's something else that gives an edge to this chapter when at the end, it gets back to the other protagonists, asking them two different questions. How they feel about social classes in Britain? And about their fame? As if Apted was aware of their mortality (he was 57 at the time), he seizes the opportunity to have a retrospective look at the documentary and make the subjects for once commentators of their own journey.
The social class bit is important because the 'characters' don't change much, we see the evolution of Britain and the population, the rise of immigration, technology, and it's interesting to hear these upper and working class people analyze happiness through their own background. What we gather is that social classes are less and less insurmountable barriers but they used to be quite tangible factors before, although not being obstacles to happiness. Now that everyone has access to the rest of the world, you can be aware of what you're missing and try to overcome your condition, the days of resignation are over. As for fame, these men and women became like British pupils instantly recognized, especially every seven years and incarnating a generation, a human snapshot of Britain in constant evolution.
If the show was made today, it would have featured more middle-class people, more women, certainly more ethnic or sexual minorities, like some marketing panel but you don't feel anything lacking in the series as we've been following them since they were 7 and they are literally part of our families. And from their respective journey, we have the opportunity to observe the evolution of British landscape, if not clear reflections, they're providential windows to their country, to the world, to life, to our own existences.
Michael Apted's epic documentary series spanned more than three decades by the times the sixth episode was made, for the targeted audience, each episode was as fresh as if it was the first, carrying just a few bits of déjà vu. The introductory montages were necessary for a time where there was no video, let alone Youtube, to remember where we left each person. This is why I'm taking a little break after the '42' episode, I need to "miss" them for at least one or two weeks before concluding the series.
But boy, I'm always glad when the show starts and as usual with good old Tony. Tony was the little guy who dreamed to become a jockey and had fulfilled his dream for a few months before becoming a bookie runner than a cab driver, he took his under-achieved goal with all stride, took acting classes, had a few roles, nothing to brag about, but nothing to be ashamed of either. Tony isn't a dreamer but a doer. And I'm amazed of the consistency of his high spirit.
However, I was startled and moved by the physical changes, he gained a few pounds and definitely had that forty-something look, in a way, he made me ready to observe similar changes in the others. Nicholas lost hair, Paul a little less and his goatee featured a white little crop at the bottom, Bruce became a bit chubbier, Jackie and Susan looked their age and Lynn a bit older, probably her health didn't help... I'm sorry to venture into such superficial observations, but let's not pretend that this is an aspect we wouldn't care about. Haven't you noticed that after looking at old pictures, you look at yourself in the mirror?
The interest toward physical changes might confine to a form of voyeurism but it's one of natural inclination, we care about it as we care about any sign of a declining health, and just like many of them have lost their parents in the previous episodes, some are getting ill, like Jackie whose disease seems to be a tad worse than Lynn's. It is obvious that as the series advances, some will get sicker and eventually die, I didn't put much thought into that until this episode. Thankfully, 42 is still relatively young and the episode allows us to focus on happier fates like Bruce who has finally met love, Simon who divorced and found love again, but let's get to the most anticipated of all: Neil, almost the greatest miracle of the series.
Neil has always been the toughest nut to crack. For all I knew, when I 'left' him at 35, Neil could be as well alive or dead at 42, happy or miserable, but I was pleasantly surprised to learn that a friendship grew between him and Bruce, which allowed him to become politically active. Politics seemed to be tailor-made for Neil, as he was the kid who dreamed to be a bus driver, showing people what to look at. Ever since the show started, Neil has always been the one who shows us a different direction, not the marriage and the family, not success or money, something he didn't know exactly, but that we could figure out after hearing his insights about life, love, God and death, with Bruce's influence, he also started to get more involved in religion.
That bit doesn't contradict Neil's personality since he admitted a few episodes earlier that believing in God was necessary to survive in this world. The documentary pays off with the part dedicated to Neil, because he's always the interrogation mark, and he still is, I could see him becoming a writer, a teacher or even a drifter again, he's the soul of the "Up" series as unpredictable as life itself. But there's something else that gives an edge to this chapter when at the end, it gets back to the other protagonists, asking them two different questions. How they feel about social classes in Britain? And about their fame? As if Apted was aware of their mortality (he was 57 at the time), he seizes the opportunity to have a retrospective look at the documentary and make the subjects for once commentators of their own journey.
The social class bit is important because the 'characters' don't change much, we see the evolution of Britain and the population, the rise of immigration, technology, and it's interesting to hear these upper and working class people analyze happiness through their own background. What we gather is that social classes are less and less insurmountable barriers but they used to be quite tangible factors before, although not being obstacles to happiness. Now that everyone has access to the rest of the world, you can be aware of what you're missing and try to overcome your condition, the days of resignation are over. As for fame, these men and women became like British pupils instantly recognized, especially every seven years and incarnating a generation, a human snapshot of Britain in constant evolution.
If the show was made today, it would have featured more middle-class people, more women, certainly more ethnic or sexual minorities, like some marketing panel but you don't feel anything lacking in the series as we've been following them since they were 7 and they are literally part of our families. And from their respective journey, we have the opportunity to observe the evolution of British landscape, if not clear reflections, they're providential windows to their country, to the world, to life, to our own existences.
The Up Series
mulevariations26 February 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I just finished "42 Up" on 2/26/05 and have a few things to say about the film and the series.
First, it's the only longitudinal study of human development we have, and for that reason, no matter how boring or trivial some people may find this series, I find it to be extremely valuable. Especially when considering how people develop by age, socioeconomic status, education, ethnicity, culture and gender. I am unaware of any other study that has covered as much ground as the Up series has. 14 children, all British, taken at age 7 and revisited every 7 years from 1964 to 1998 certainly makes for an interesting study. If there is no "49 Up", Michael Apted can at least rest on what this study already has accomplished.
Second, it's amusing to me that at various stages the participants have no clue as to the importance of this study. Some of them decline to be a part of the project and others seems to really understand the value of participating in this study. If my wife and I had a 7 year old we would jump at the chance for him/her to be in this type of project. I fail to understand why some of the participants (Charles, John & Peter) continue to belittle, devalue and not take part in this study. Nick, Symon, Suzy and Andrew all participate, but with an air of sourness about what the study has done to their lives. As I stated, it's truly amazing how some of the participants have no concept of the psychological/sociological value of this study the participate in, they merely seem to be thinking only about themselves and how it affects their lives.
Third, there are a few annoying pieces to this series. One is that Michael Apted fails to explain why Peter is not part of the program anymore after "28 Up". You have no idea why he isn't in "35 and 42 Up". Michael doesn't even add a 30 second explanation!!! At least Mr. Apted explains what's going on with John and Charles, and why they are not part of the program. He failed in "35 Up" to mention why Symon was not interviewed! Yet, Symon re-appears for "42 Up" and all is explained. Another thing about this series is that it greatly improves around 21 and 28 Up as Michael finally organizes the stories so you can keep track of each person, and the technology advances as well as all the participants begin to have something to say about the world they live in. Still, Michael Apted could stand to not engage in flashbacks as much as he does and spend more time on the present. If you watch each show in order like we did, you do not need the flashbacks because you already know what has happened. These films should be viewed in order. Just watching "42 Up" is a mistake and a disservice. You need to watch how these people grow in order to see the whole picture.
My recommendation is, that if you are in the field of psychology, counseling, social work, teaching, etc. You should watch this series as mandatory to your education. If Mr. Apted continued with "49 Up" this year and then continues the series in the future, this project will be even more fruitful and valuable of just looking at how personalities are shaped and determine future choices and consequences.
First, it's the only longitudinal study of human development we have, and for that reason, no matter how boring or trivial some people may find this series, I find it to be extremely valuable. Especially when considering how people develop by age, socioeconomic status, education, ethnicity, culture and gender. I am unaware of any other study that has covered as much ground as the Up series has. 14 children, all British, taken at age 7 and revisited every 7 years from 1964 to 1998 certainly makes for an interesting study. If there is no "49 Up", Michael Apted can at least rest on what this study already has accomplished.
Second, it's amusing to me that at various stages the participants have no clue as to the importance of this study. Some of them decline to be a part of the project and others seems to really understand the value of participating in this study. If my wife and I had a 7 year old we would jump at the chance for him/her to be in this type of project. I fail to understand why some of the participants (Charles, John & Peter) continue to belittle, devalue and not take part in this study. Nick, Symon, Suzy and Andrew all participate, but with an air of sourness about what the study has done to their lives. As I stated, it's truly amazing how some of the participants have no concept of the psychological/sociological value of this study the participate in, they merely seem to be thinking only about themselves and how it affects their lives.
Third, there are a few annoying pieces to this series. One is that Michael Apted fails to explain why Peter is not part of the program anymore after "28 Up". You have no idea why he isn't in "35 and 42 Up". Michael doesn't even add a 30 second explanation!!! At least Mr. Apted explains what's going on with John and Charles, and why they are not part of the program. He failed in "35 Up" to mention why Symon was not interviewed! Yet, Symon re-appears for "42 Up" and all is explained. Another thing about this series is that it greatly improves around 21 and 28 Up as Michael finally organizes the stories so you can keep track of each person, and the technology advances as well as all the participants begin to have something to say about the world they live in. Still, Michael Apted could stand to not engage in flashbacks as much as he does and spend more time on the present. If you watch each show in order like we did, you do not need the flashbacks because you already know what has happened. These films should be viewed in order. Just watching "42 Up" is a mistake and a disservice. You need to watch how these people grow in order to see the whole picture.
My recommendation is, that if you are in the field of psychology, counseling, social work, teaching, etc. You should watch this series as mandatory to your education. If Mr. Apted continued with "49 Up" this year and then continues the series in the future, this project will be even more fruitful and valuable of just looking at how personalities are shaped and determine future choices and consequences.
A phenomenal work
waia200027 August 2001
One of the most important ongoing social and cultural projects of our time, this series of films has documented the lives of a number of people from the age of seven up. Currently the participants are in their mid-forties, now in a position to reflect on the past as well as to speculate about their future from a reasonably well-informed perspective. It is truly fascinating to get even this brief glimpse of how these people have progressed through their lives, from the fresh enthusiasm of early childhood through the angst and pain of the teen years, then coping with the various ups and downs of adulthood. Many have children of their own; some have lost parents along the way. Most have remained in their native England, where social class is more of an issue than here in the States. Class struggle is a topic of discussion in the film, though touched upon rather briefly.
This reviewer has been watching Michael Apted's project for the past fourteen years and is approximately the same age as the participants, a fact which makes the film that much more involving. One feels a connection with these people. Reviewing these people's lives is much like looking back at one's own, which strengthens the feelings of warmth and familiarity that this film evokes.
Mr. Apted has done an excellent job with these films and the reviewer wishes to express appreciation to him as well as to the interviewees.
This reviewer has been watching Michael Apted's project for the past fourteen years and is approximately the same age as the participants, a fact which makes the film that much more involving. One feels a connection with these people. Reviewing these people's lives is much like looking back at one's own, which strengthens the feelings of warmth and familiarity that this film evokes.
Mr. Apted has done an excellent job with these films and the reviewer wishes to express appreciation to him as well as to the interviewees.
Postcards from friends
johwarn10 September 2005
As a UK-born and resident who is 2 years older than the participants of this series, all I can say to Michael Apted is thank you. This series has been a record of the social, economic and cultural influences over my own life. It may surprise some of your US readers to know that there was a brief window of opportunity for working class (blue collar)kids in the late 70's and early 80's to access higher education in the UK. It is a pity that no-one in the 7up series accessed such chances as I did; now working as a forensic psychologist (having left high school at 16 with nothing worth a damn). Nevertheless, I feel enormously proud of the working class kids in the series in the way they have handled the challenges of their twenties and thirties; I am so pleased that Apted has reflected their lives without judgement. As a woman, I am equally proud of Suzie, who survived probably the most apparently 'deprived' childhood to grow into a confident, warm and happy wife and mother. Finally, who could fail to have a corner of their heart reserved for Neil and for Bruce who reached out a helping hand - these people feel like my friends. Thank you so much to all of you for sharing your lives so generously - please don't stop. I am REALLY looking forward to my next 'postcard' from you in 49 UP. You have been, and will continue to be,an inspiration to others in your simple humanity and your enormous dignity, reflected so skilfully by Michael Apted. Love him or hate him, at least he has remained loyal to this fantastic and unparallelled project.
42 Up
MartinTeller10 January 2012
Maybe it's because the participants are closest to my own age, but I found this the most interesting of the series. Many of the subjects are in some state of transition (new job, financial troubles, divorce) or are eloquent enough to reflect on their lives with insightful introspection. The most compelling one, Neil, has taken a turn for the better, though still struggling. John once again disappears from the picture, but Symon makes a return with a new family. Tony and Paul are both taking baby steps in upward mobility, but finding it difficult. The commentary on class at the end of the film was more thoughtful than previous attempts to address the subject. I still think the series is better as an idea than in execution, but I've got the next one queued up anyway, perhaps just out of habit, like a TV show you don't particularly enjoy but keep watching out of desire to know what happens next.
I couldn't be happier for Neil
Geekofriendly22 August 2022
Warning: Spoilers
My word, I've been binging from 7 Up till 42, and this one is easily my favourite of the lot (so far).
Perhaps because there, for the most part, were so many positive changes in so many of our TV friends' lives.
There was even an impeccably done surprise reveal of Bruce's wedding that brought me immense joy. I couldn't help but root and be in awe of how life can make such beautiful turns.
---
TONY seems content and is for the most part considerably successful at life, and yet some of his yearly decisions might start catching up with him.
SUZY already had such a bright transformation at 28 when she met her husband and had children that it's hard to imagine her to have an even warmer smile. And yet, she still seems happy and utterly content at 42.
SYMON has never looked happier or more confident. I couldn't believe how bright and glowing his eyes have become. The man has finally stepped into his own and seems to have a wonderful life partner by his side.
ANDREW continues his calm, wise, logical approach to life. I found him a bit unnoticeable for the first 21 years, but now his life seems more and more like a model version of stable happiness.
JOHN sadly decided to again skip on his educated witty comments.
As soon as NICK fund his way in life, I stopped worrying what would become of him. The most career-focused life story of the bunch, which does bring certain limitations.
Oh BRUCE, yes! The kindest of souls often end up lonely, but I'm betting it was worth the wait for Bruce.
PAUL continues to show aspirations, and yet he really does seem more confident and at ease with each passing episode. I can easily see him become enraged on those rare occasions, but fortunately he co-created a loving home.
LYNN has slowly but surely been "surpassing" her two school friends, Jackie and Sue in almost every aspect. She finally seems completely at peace with herself, even with a physical affliction. And yet, she has been showing her years the most for a while now. The tremendous sadness in her eyes does seem to have gone away ever so slightly.
I'm not worried for SUE. She seems to be managing well with what she's got at her disposal and her positive energy will be carrying her on in life. I interpreted her dependance on parental support as a social commentary of generational differences, particularly the nonsensical increase in workload our parents probably didn't have.
JACKIE was such a bubbly child and yet, this time around the change in her 7 years is perhaps the saddest. Single parent, 3 children with two ex partners, worrying chronic phisical pain. And yet, I found her decision to push her children just a tad bit more than she was utterly promising.
And then there's NEIL. I imagine we were all rooting for him. What a satisfying turn of events! He looked dreadful at 35, and lo and behold, the man hasn't seemed more vital and alive since 7. Welfare or no welfare, whatever he has been up to has been doing woders for him.
---
Because I am a mixture of many of our protagonists, the most rewarding part of these shows for me is the introspection that this sped-up aging can offer. Just as they can change considerably in a span of 7 years, so too can others. Which seems like an odd juxtaposition to the show's famous line "Give me a child until he is 7 and I will give you the man", but there you have it.
An always tasteful vouyeristic glimpse into other people's lives. And the most profoundly beautiful documentary about the human condition I've ever seen.
Perhaps because there, for the most part, were so many positive changes in so many of our TV friends' lives.
There was even an impeccably done surprise reveal of Bruce's wedding that brought me immense joy. I couldn't help but root and be in awe of how life can make such beautiful turns.
---
TONY seems content and is for the most part considerably successful at life, and yet some of his yearly decisions might start catching up with him.
SUZY already had such a bright transformation at 28 when she met her husband and had children that it's hard to imagine her to have an even warmer smile. And yet, she still seems happy and utterly content at 42.
SYMON has never looked happier or more confident. I couldn't believe how bright and glowing his eyes have become. The man has finally stepped into his own and seems to have a wonderful life partner by his side.
ANDREW continues his calm, wise, logical approach to life. I found him a bit unnoticeable for the first 21 years, but now his life seems more and more like a model version of stable happiness.
JOHN sadly decided to again skip on his educated witty comments.
As soon as NICK fund his way in life, I stopped worrying what would become of him. The most career-focused life story of the bunch, which does bring certain limitations.
Oh BRUCE, yes! The kindest of souls often end up lonely, but I'm betting it was worth the wait for Bruce.
PAUL continues to show aspirations, and yet he really does seem more confident and at ease with each passing episode. I can easily see him become enraged on those rare occasions, but fortunately he co-created a loving home.
LYNN has slowly but surely been "surpassing" her two school friends, Jackie and Sue in almost every aspect. She finally seems completely at peace with herself, even with a physical affliction. And yet, she has been showing her years the most for a while now. The tremendous sadness in her eyes does seem to have gone away ever so slightly.
I'm not worried for SUE. She seems to be managing well with what she's got at her disposal and her positive energy will be carrying her on in life. I interpreted her dependance on parental support as a social commentary of generational differences, particularly the nonsensical increase in workload our parents probably didn't have.
JACKIE was such a bubbly child and yet, this time around the change in her 7 years is perhaps the saddest. Single parent, 3 children with two ex partners, worrying chronic phisical pain. And yet, I found her decision to push her children just a tad bit more than she was utterly promising.
And then there's NEIL. I imagine we were all rooting for him. What a satisfying turn of events! He looked dreadful at 35, and lo and behold, the man hasn't seemed more vital and alive since 7. Welfare or no welfare, whatever he has been up to has been doing woders for him.
---
Because I am a mixture of many of our protagonists, the most rewarding part of these shows for me is the introspection that this sped-up aging can offer. Just as they can change considerably in a span of 7 years, so too can others. Which seems like an odd juxtaposition to the show's famous line "Give me a child until he is 7 and I will give you the man", but there you have it.
An always tasteful vouyeristic glimpse into other people's lives. And the most profoundly beautiful documentary about the human condition I've ever seen.
28 and 35 were good--this isn't
preppy-327 December 1999
I've only seen "28 Up" and "35 Up". Those were fascinating interesting films, dealing with all types of people and all types of issues in their lives. At ages 28 and 35 people are trying to see where to go what to do, etc. By 42 they're all married or bringing up kids. So the whole movie is about dealing with marriage and kids. Fascinating if you're one of two--dull if you're not. It started off well enough, but it seemed to keep rehashing itself (if I had heard ONE more comment about how hard it is to make marriage work...). About half of it was interesting, and it always a kick seeing these people literally grow up, but it's run it's course. Let's hope there's not a 49 Up!
Bring on 49!
Sinnerman21 November 2003
I loved the Up series, despite having seen only 35up & 42up.
For the uninitiated, this series was a pet "anthropological" cinematic project undertaken by director Michael Apted. In this series, he would revisit a group of British men and women and make a documentary film about their lives, every 7 years, starting from the age of 7. Of interesting note is the participant's differing social/ class divide; from the upper-middle class suburban homemakers to working class cabbies. (Note: 7up was originally only conceived as a television initiative if I'm not mistaken. But its underlying premise proved so intriguing, guess Apted just had to keep it going and see where it might end up. We are up to "42" now, nice....)
My thoughts...
These films might have shown mere glimpses of those ordinary lives, but I was still in awe of its premise no less. Like the flipping through of a moving photo album, we revisited the lives of these people.
Within a two hour period, we saw these people grow up right before our eyes. We saw their physical and psychological transformation over the years. We saw how they charted their lives and lived it. We shared in their joys and tribulations. Of course, there were harmony, or discordance over those many long years. But this series was contented in just showing us simple truths. It captured vignettes of youth's idealistic beauty and inevitable follies. It revealed life's vaunted fulfillment and crushing regrets. Most importantly, it attempted to shed light on one's happiness barometer; how our pursuit of happiness and attaining contentment is directly corresponded with our expectations in the past, present, and probably beyond.
We may not always tick like clockwork in this tragi-comedic mortal coil. But a rewind is often all it takes to get us back on track. This continuing Up series is thus IMO, a very worthy meditation on the meaning of our very own lives. I so wanna see what happens when those 7 year olds turn 49.
For the uninitiated, this series was a pet "anthropological" cinematic project undertaken by director Michael Apted. In this series, he would revisit a group of British men and women and make a documentary film about their lives, every 7 years, starting from the age of 7. Of interesting note is the participant's differing social/ class divide; from the upper-middle class suburban homemakers to working class cabbies. (Note: 7up was originally only conceived as a television initiative if I'm not mistaken. But its underlying premise proved so intriguing, guess Apted just had to keep it going and see where it might end up. We are up to "42" now, nice....)
My thoughts...
These films might have shown mere glimpses of those ordinary lives, but I was still in awe of its premise no less. Like the flipping through of a moving photo album, we revisited the lives of these people.
Within a two hour period, we saw these people grow up right before our eyes. We saw their physical and psychological transformation over the years. We saw how they charted their lives and lived it. We shared in their joys and tribulations. Of course, there were harmony, or discordance over those many long years. But this series was contented in just showing us simple truths. It captured vignettes of youth's idealistic beauty and inevitable follies. It revealed life's vaunted fulfillment and crushing regrets. Most importantly, it attempted to shed light on one's happiness barometer; how our pursuit of happiness and attaining contentment is directly corresponded with our expectations in the past, present, and probably beyond.
We may not always tick like clockwork in this tragi-comedic mortal coil. But a rewind is often all it takes to get us back on track. This continuing Up series is thus IMO, a very worthy meditation on the meaning of our very own lives. I so wanna see what happens when those 7 year olds turn 49.
Unique and amazing series of films
runamokprods26 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.
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.
Every seven years a slice of life
Philby-317 June 2001
Fourteen English children from various parts of society, all born about 1957, have their lives looked at every seven years by Michael Apted and his TV camera. This episode brings us up to 1999 and 42 years old. All are still alive and eleven out of the original fourteen are still participating. (Ironically, one of the drop-outs is a prominent BBC TV producer.)
The two continuing themes are 1) the Jesuit saying `give me the child before he is seven and I will give you the man' and 2) the power of the British class system to determine outcomes. Although the Jesuits suggest that by the age of seven it's too late, some of the kids from lower class backgrounds have done surprisingly well. Nicholas, a Yorkshire dales farmer's son has become a Professor of Physics. Tony, a cockney kid who wanted to be a jockey has finished up owning several cabs. Three working class girls have all finished up with better jobs than their parents though their marital relationships have been rocky. Even the shy son of a single mother has finished up happily married and employed. None of the better-off kids has failed either, though one or two went through rough patches in their early 20s. The three seven year old `upper class twits' (only one of whom still participates in the program) are all professionals and have all succeeded professionally - a QC, a solicitor and the aforesaid shy TV producer. Bruce, a kid with a flair for mathematics, after a varied career, has settled down as a fine teacher in a city high school. They only real stray has been Neil, the dreamy little kid from Liverpool, who after a lengthy period as a down-and-out has popped up as an elected official no less, a Liberal Democrat councillor in the London Borough of Hackney.
All the subjects tell their stories fairly fluently to the camera, even Paul, a very shy kid who migrated to Australia as a teenager. Several have now lost one or both parents and there have been several failed marriages. Apted is a gentle interviewer but there has obviously been a lot of pain with the gain.
This is a unique series and the group is not really a random sample (too many toffs and working class kids) but it can be said it shows the persistence of the class system: only one kid has really beaten it, the physicist, and he's left the country. There are no cockney accents in the courtroom except from the witness box. The standard of living in general has increased markedly since the 1960s and `trickle down' economics has ensured that the working class (what's left of them) is better off. Women have done better too, in terms of independence and money, but at a considerable emotional cost in some cases. For them the changes in the social landscape have made it harder than for the boys; the role of women in society has completely changed whereas men plod on much as before.
The one good indicator of future employment success is education, which is notoriously class-based in England (Scotland is a little different). If the (shy) QC had gone to the local council school instead of Charterhouse it is not likely he would he exercising his tonsils today in the High Court. Tony, our successful cabbie might have become a solicitor if he had come from a different social class. Some of the subjects say that class isn't what it was, but it, and the educational system it operates through, are still pre-ordaining outcomes. Perhaps it's the same in most countries (Paul has noticed a class system in Australia); it's just that the British class system stands out a bit more.
The two continuing themes are 1) the Jesuit saying `give me the child before he is seven and I will give you the man' and 2) the power of the British class system to determine outcomes. Although the Jesuits suggest that by the age of seven it's too late, some of the kids from lower class backgrounds have done surprisingly well. Nicholas, a Yorkshire dales farmer's son has become a Professor of Physics. Tony, a cockney kid who wanted to be a jockey has finished up owning several cabs. Three working class girls have all finished up with better jobs than their parents though their marital relationships have been rocky. Even the shy son of a single mother has finished up happily married and employed. None of the better-off kids has failed either, though one or two went through rough patches in their early 20s. The three seven year old `upper class twits' (only one of whom still participates in the program) are all professionals and have all succeeded professionally - a QC, a solicitor and the aforesaid shy TV producer. Bruce, a kid with a flair for mathematics, after a varied career, has settled down as a fine teacher in a city high school. They only real stray has been Neil, the dreamy little kid from Liverpool, who after a lengthy period as a down-and-out has popped up as an elected official no less, a Liberal Democrat councillor in the London Borough of Hackney.
All the subjects tell their stories fairly fluently to the camera, even Paul, a very shy kid who migrated to Australia as a teenager. Several have now lost one or both parents and there have been several failed marriages. Apted is a gentle interviewer but there has obviously been a lot of pain with the gain.
This is a unique series and the group is not really a random sample (too many toffs and working class kids) but it can be said it shows the persistence of the class system: only one kid has really beaten it, the physicist, and he's left the country. There are no cockney accents in the courtroom except from the witness box. The standard of living in general has increased markedly since the 1960s and `trickle down' economics has ensured that the working class (what's left of them) is better off. Women have done better too, in terms of independence and money, but at a considerable emotional cost in some cases. For them the changes in the social landscape have made it harder than for the boys; the role of women in society has completely changed whereas men plod on much as before.
The one good indicator of future employment success is education, which is notoriously class-based in England (Scotland is a little different). If the (shy) QC had gone to the local council school instead of Charterhouse it is not likely he would he exercising his tonsils today in the High Court. Tony, our successful cabbie might have become a solicitor if he had come from a different social class. Some of the subjects say that class isn't what it was, but it, and the educational system it operates through, are still pre-ordaining outcomes. Perhaps it's the same in most countries (Paul has noticed a class system in Australia); it's just that the British class system stands out a bit more.
Excellent series
Ripshin9 April 2005
Most of the posters here have already thoroughly covered the concept and content of this amazing docu series, so I'll avoid generalizations.
First of all, Apted began an American version years ago ["Age Seven in America," (91) and "14 Up in America"(98)], but I have been unable to locate them. He did not direct these versions, but acted as a producer. Ironically, 2005 is the year for "21 Up in America" and "49 Up." I certainly look forward to the latter.
It is quite interesting to see that the styles and "feel" of each original series entry appears about ten years off. In other words, the shows in the 80s feel like the 70s, and the 90s editions feel very 80s-ish. Has anyone else noticed this? Perhaps it is the difference in cultures, or the style of film-making. Regardless, the "Ups" are amazing. I watched all six documentaries within one week. Although I had been familiar with them as early as the 80s, I had never bothered to sample an edition. My loss.
There has been no document of human growth quite as effective as this.
First of all, Apted began an American version years ago ["Age Seven in America," (91) and "14 Up in America"(98)], but I have been unable to locate them. He did not direct these versions, but acted as a producer. Ironically, 2005 is the year for "21 Up in America" and "49 Up." I certainly look forward to the latter.
It is quite interesting to see that the styles and "feel" of each original series entry appears about ten years off. In other words, the shows in the 80s feel like the 70s, and the 90s editions feel very 80s-ish. Has anyone else noticed this? Perhaps it is the difference in cultures, or the style of film-making. Regardless, the "Ups" are amazing. I watched all six documentaries within one week. Although I had been familiar with them as early as the 80s, I had never bothered to sample an edition. My loss.
There has been no document of human growth quite as effective as this.
A graceful film -- but prereqs are recommended!
pdianek22 August 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Yes, you CAN view 42Up without having seen 35Up, 28Up, etc. But it would be wrong.
Because with each film, less of the past can be shown as each person's past increases -- thus you get only the highlights of each past: e.g., teenage Suzy's dad's death, which enormously affected her; the orphanage-reared Paul's move to Australia, and his marriage to an Oz woman with a big hearty family; Nick's move to the US -- with no class system surrounding him, he's been able to avoid what the rest are still struggling with, but is it worth the high cost of seeing his Yorkshire family no more than every other year?
The participants were all born circa 1956, so age 49 will be around 2005. There are some pasts I hope we hear less of in 49Up: I don't want to hear any more about Tony's casual infidelities, thank you very much. His wife's reactions to his self-justifications ("I'm not proud of it, but every man does it"...that kind of lame excuse), and her silent yet profound unhappiness and betrayal, are excruciating. Besides, these days, infidelity is simply a welcome mat to self-transformation into a disease vector.
But I would genuinely like to know how Neil descended into alarming solitariness and depression without getting therapy in what was then one of the world's largest venues for socialized medicine. (I hope by now he's been able to adjust his brain chemistry. Thank God for Bruce, another 'Up' man who befriended and helped Neil.)
These people become so known to us that every seven years it's like renewing acquaintance. Such fame has not been entirely welcome, though Tony has been able to parlay it into parts as an actor. It must feel uncomfortable to have complete strangers know what you were like at 14...an age most of us feel sincerely relieved to have left behind. That the ones who continue to say yes to Michael Apted and his crew generally handle their filming with immense dignity and humor speaks volumes about their generosity -- and their curiosity. How are the others doing? How am I compared to seven years ago? What have I learned during those years? What can I learn from this episode?
For the 'Up' people: thank you for your willingness to open your lives and homes, to answer intrusive questions, to demonstrate your values and what's brought you through, and to give us all a better understanding of what human growth is really about.
Because with each film, less of the past can be shown as each person's past increases -- thus you get only the highlights of each past: e.g., teenage Suzy's dad's death, which enormously affected her; the orphanage-reared Paul's move to Australia, and his marriage to an Oz woman with a big hearty family; Nick's move to the US -- with no class system surrounding him, he's been able to avoid what the rest are still struggling with, but is it worth the high cost of seeing his Yorkshire family no more than every other year?
The participants were all born circa 1956, so age 49 will be around 2005. There are some pasts I hope we hear less of in 49Up: I don't want to hear any more about Tony's casual infidelities, thank you very much. His wife's reactions to his self-justifications ("I'm not proud of it, but every man does it"...that kind of lame excuse), and her silent yet profound unhappiness and betrayal, are excruciating. Besides, these days, infidelity is simply a welcome mat to self-transformation into a disease vector.
But I would genuinely like to know how Neil descended into alarming solitariness and depression without getting therapy in what was then one of the world's largest venues for socialized medicine. (I hope by now he's been able to adjust his brain chemistry. Thank God for Bruce, another 'Up' man who befriended and helped Neil.)
These people become so known to us that every seven years it's like renewing acquaintance. Such fame has not been entirely welcome, though Tony has been able to parlay it into parts as an actor. It must feel uncomfortable to have complete strangers know what you were like at 14...an age most of us feel sincerely relieved to have left behind. That the ones who continue to say yes to Michael Apted and his crew generally handle their filming with immense dignity and humor speaks volumes about their generosity -- and their curiosity. How are the others doing? How am I compared to seven years ago? What have I learned during those years? What can I learn from this episode?
For the 'Up' people: thank you for your willingness to open your lives and homes, to answer intrusive questions, to demonstrate your values and what's brought you through, and to give us all a better understanding of what human growth is really about.
Probably the most fascinating film ever made.
TxMike27 August 2001
Brit Michael Apted began this film with "Seven Up!", in 1964, in black and white, followed in color every seven years by "7 Plus Seven(1970)", "21(1977)", "28 Up(1985)", "35 UP(1991)", and now in 1998, "42 Up." It follows several "randomly" selected boys and girls into manhood and womanhood. I found Neil most fascinating, he was a bright 7-year-old who wanted to be a "carriage driver", dropped out of college, worked at odd jobs, at 28 was homeless in Scotland, at 35 homeless in the Shetland Islands, obviously somewhat mentally unstable. Living off the British government payments, with no job. By age 42 he is in London, representing Hackney as the elected Liberal Democrat representative. He actually has a purpose now, does good for those he represents, still has no job. But he looks forward to each day now, something he had difficulty doing in past years.
The beauty of this film is its unique look at us, humanity, and how we grow up, dealing with "life." This was truly an inspired project Apted undertook, beginning about 40 years ago. I would not have understood this as a casual viewer, but the every seven year "engagement" is stressful for the participants, as if they don't want to disappoint the viewing audience. Several actually opted out and were only discussed, because they no longer wanted the pressure of participating.
I hope I am around to see "49 Up"!! The year 2005 is right around the corner (update December 2004).
The beauty of this film is its unique look at us, humanity, and how we grow up, dealing with "life." This was truly an inspired project Apted undertook, beginning about 40 years ago. I would not have understood this as a casual viewer, but the every seven year "engagement" is stressful for the participants, as if they don't want to disappoint the viewing audience. Several actually opted out and were only discussed, because they no longer wanted the pressure of participating.
I hope I am around to see "49 Up"!! The year 2005 is right around the corner (update December 2004).
It's like a fascinating telethon
edwartell28 June 2000
Although it might not be readily apparent to those who only know Michael Apted as the director of The World Is Not Enough, Michael Apted is in reality a skilled and experienced director. Here, Apted returns to his famous documentary series, in which he has followed London children from age 7 onward, returning every 7 years to chronicle where they are currently in their lives. Suffice it to say that even the world's worst filmmaker couldn't remove the inevitable fascination such a project automatically generates interest in anyone interested in either documentaries about people or the differences between the London social classes. This time around (as the title indicates) the subjects are 42 years old, and we find them settling down. They seem to be doing fine for the most part, as even the formerly homeless subject gets a job - albeit a low paying local government job. Yet the movie needs a more ruthless editor- 42 Up is 139 minutes long. It'll interest you, but you'll keep looking at your watch.
Mothers
tedg5 December 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Three things to say about this, which I consider the strongest entry in the series so far.
1) The point of these things has always seemed slippery to me. Ostensibly it is a study of the British class system. In reality, they've relied on simple voyeurism, cheap familiarity. But over time Apted's personal agenda has become clear. As a Xerox of a Xerox many times over displays the structure of the imaging system, over iterations we see what the filmmaker wants us to. And its all about mothers. With the exception of the final character, the somewhat pitiful Neil, every stroke, every arc, every dive is based on the notion of motherhood. Its cheap, but at least we now know.
2) There is a surprise in this one that was wholly unexpected by me. Until the last few minutes of this, we follow the model of 35 years. They exist, we see. The machinery of the film exists in our world, not theirs. Its obvious that they watch the results, but if they remark on it, it is about their participation, not the watching or making. But at the end, that takes an orthogonal shift and we see that the one soul at risk has been saved by the one soul that seems worthy, and this because of the intercession of the filming process. All of a sudden the project has become an agent in itself. Its a wonderful beam.
And that is quickly followed by a series of short comments about how participation has changed their lives.
3) Some of these people have grown not at all from when we saw them at 7. It isn't merely that they have not escaped their class constraints, they have literally been stillborn. Others a few have blossomed and matured, or changed. They still aren't interesting people in the slightest, but we do have evolution of spirit. I note this because it seems that Apted hasn't evolved at all in 35 years. The form of the thing is precisely the same. The intent, the style, the method. All as they were. There's a sameness of spirit that clouds this, as if no matter who gets married, divorced or born, life really does go on in the same way. Nothing real ever changes. Its particularly upsetting because he is us, in the bargain we make.
Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.
1) The point of these things has always seemed slippery to me. Ostensibly it is a study of the British class system. In reality, they've relied on simple voyeurism, cheap familiarity. But over time Apted's personal agenda has become clear. As a Xerox of a Xerox many times over displays the structure of the imaging system, over iterations we see what the filmmaker wants us to. And its all about mothers. With the exception of the final character, the somewhat pitiful Neil, every stroke, every arc, every dive is based on the notion of motherhood. Its cheap, but at least we now know.
2) There is a surprise in this one that was wholly unexpected by me. Until the last few minutes of this, we follow the model of 35 years. They exist, we see. The machinery of the film exists in our world, not theirs. Its obvious that they watch the results, but if they remark on it, it is about their participation, not the watching or making. But at the end, that takes an orthogonal shift and we see that the one soul at risk has been saved by the one soul that seems worthy, and this because of the intercession of the filming process. All of a sudden the project has become an agent in itself. Its a wonderful beam.
And that is quickly followed by a series of short comments about how participation has changed their lives.
3) Some of these people have grown not at all from when we saw them at 7. It isn't merely that they have not escaped their class constraints, they have literally been stillborn. Others a few have blossomed and matured, or changed. They still aren't interesting people in the slightest, but we do have evolution of spirit. I note this because it seems that Apted hasn't evolved at all in 35 years. The form of the thing is precisely the same. The intent, the style, the method. All as they were. There's a sameness of spirit that clouds this, as if no matter who gets married, divorced or born, life really does go on in the same way. Nothing real ever changes. Its particularly upsetting because he is us, in the bargain we make.
Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
