When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

To Sir with Love has one major asset and drawing card in the person of Sidney Poitier, acting icon of the 1960's. The way he walks into the classroom and uses his voice and mannerisms give him presence and authority. The movie did become known for the title song To Sir With Love. This movie and Up the Down Staircase were also movies of the 1960's when education reform aimed to make students the focus of a more stimulating learning environment. But without Sidney Poitier the movie would be long forgotten. Poitier takes a position as a teacher in the docklands of London, while applying to get work in his field of engineering. The work proves to be very unsettling because the challenge of teaching students who seem to have no manners or motivation is a huge hurtle. Only when he realizes that he needs to make a major change in his teaching style does he begin to win them over and make a difference. He asks them what they want to talk about; he gets permission to take his class to the Victoria and Albert Museum; he sets standards of dress and deportment that he says will give them more confidence. All this amounts to a major change in Poitier's students and in himself. The movie is still worth watching, mainly because of the leading character, as played by Sidney Poitier.

I finally watched this "Classic" earlier this week. I made it all the way through which is saying something given my short attention span. Although it was defiantly enjoyable, (certainly compared to some other classics) I found parts quite parochial. For example, why does Sir freak when he finds burning tampons - was knowledge of menses and it's accessories not well known? Sir resorts to calling his girls behavior slutty on several occasions, and Sir tells his students no one wants a girl who has been used or something like that. Sir leads by example - which is good but somehow his students behavior does not seem quite so menacing compared with today or even the 80s (think of the Students behavior in "The Substitute"). Also it seems quite unrealistic that the hardest case to win over (Denham) is suddenly converted by letting him beat up on Sir. Well the 60s music, dress, slang, dancing was all very interesting to see and the acting was mostly quite good.

I knew that the Australian-born novelist James Clavell also acted as a film scriptwriter, often adapting his own novels, but until I recently watched "To Sir, with Love" I had not realised that he was also a film director. This film, which marks his directing debut, was not based on one of his books but on an autobiographical novel by E. R. Braithwaite. "To Sir, with Love" is, along with "Goodbye Mr Chips", probably the best-known British entry in the "inspirational teacher" genre, but the two films are very different. Mr Chips was an elderly retired teacher looking back nostalgically at his long career. Mark Thackeray, the hero of this film, is not a career teacher but an unemployed engineer who only applies for a teaching position because he cannot find a job in engineering. Chips taught in a prestigious public school; Thackeray's job is at a secondary modern in the East End, a deprived working-class area of London.One thing that caused quite a stir in 1967, but which would not do so today, is the fact that Thackeray is black. (He is originally from what the film calls "British Guiana", although it had become independent as Guyana the previous year). His students are nearly all white, although today virtually all East End schools would have a sizeable number of pupils drawn from the black and other minority ethnic communities. Racial issues, however, play a relatively minor part in the film. One of Thackeray's less enlightened colleagues makes some insensitive remarks, but apart from that the only real hostility he experiences comes, surprisingly, from the only mixed-race pupil in his class, a boy who identifies as white and resents the way his white mother has been treated by his black father. The film is much more about social class than it is about race. Thackeray takes on the school's most troublesome class, working-class youngsters with a well-deserved reputation for disruptive behaviour, and teaches them about self-respect by treating them, for the first time in their lives, as responsible adults rather than irresponsible children. In return, Thackeray earns the class's admiration and realises that he has a vocation as a teacher. The film ends with his rejecting an offer of an engineering job to stay on at the school. Thackeray's class are all in their final term at school, which in 1967 would have meant that they would have been 14 or 15. (The school leaving age in Britain was 15 until 1972, when it was raised to 16). The actors who play them, however, are all considerably older; Christian Roberts, who plays class ringleader Bert Denham, was 23 when the film was made, and Judy Geeson, who plays his classmate Pamela Dare, was 19. This casting may have been intended to make some of the film's plot lines more acceptable in the eyes of the public. It is strongly implied that Pamela has a romantic crush on the handsome Thackeray, and such a storyline would have been far more controversial had she actually been played by a 15-year-old actress. Another member of the cast was Lulu, here making her acting debut. She also sang the film's title song, also known as "To Sir With Love", which became a huge hit in the American market, much to the surprise of the British. (In Britain it failed to make the Top Ten). Its transatlantic success may have contributed to Lulu concentrating more on singing than on acting in subsequent years; she became one of the most successful British pop acts of the late sixties and seventies, but only acted in a handful of later films, most of them now forgotten. The film's main drawback is its pervasive sentimentality and its simplistic assumption that all the problems of education in deprived inner-city areas can be overcome simply by drafting in better (by which it means more permissive) teachers. Yet it is saved from a lower mark by the arresting performance of that fine actor Sidney Poitier in the leading role. The plot may seem unrealistic, but Poitier does enough to make his character entirely believable and to make every adult watching the film wish that there had been a Mark Thackeray on the staff of his or her school. 6/10

There are so any things which date this film, you could lose count. Its outlook towards the generation gap, racism, sexism, music and more really do seem preserved in mid-60's aspic and while it has some vintage charm, it has many more embarrassing aspects of almost look-away gaucheness.In its favour are the exterior London locations, I suppose the feel-good nature of the plot and a mostly watchable star performance by Sidney Poitier as the "Sir" of the title. Supposedly the new teacher at a school for difficult near-adult pupils you too will be amazed at how he tames his class of young hooligans just by throwing away their text books and talking about life.Elsewhere clichés abound, from Poitier's encounters with the class rebel, who he eventually teaches a lesson in the boxing ring and the class beauty who eventually forms a crush on him, to the unconventional way he gives out lessons. Occasionally the film tries to grow up with some adult-banter on the bus at Poitier's expense or the strange ritual burning of a sanitary towel in class, but with its largely teenage cast and references to contemporary pop-culture, it seems definitely aimed at the younger movie-goer.Poitier is good right up until he does his silly one-on-one dance with the adoring Julie Christie lookalike Sally Geeson and you feel more could have been made of his relationship with Suzy Kendall as his white, female colleague who offers him support. The young cast of class pupils occasionally turn to wood but a very young Lulu does quite well in concealing her broad Scottish accent and singing the hit title tune.The direction tries to be hip too, never more so than with the photo-montage of the class trip to a museum, but the editing isn't always clear and you suspect many of the scenes are watered down for the benefit of the censor.Still it was nice to jump into my 60's time-machine and watch a reasonably entertaining film from that era