Film

What's on at the cinema plus reviews of the latest movie and DVD releases

Updates:

An Education (2009)

Director: Lone Scherfig

Time Out rating

Average user rating

16 reviews

Movie review

From Time Out London

Read an interview with Scherfig here

This is ‘Fish Tank’ for the suburbs: semis, not slums; safe, not sorry. Journalist Lynn Barber’s spiky memoir of striking up a relationship with an older man in early 1960s west London has been turned into an accessible comedy romance by screenwriter Nick Hornby that seems designed to play extraordinarily well in the very same privet-lined streets it describes.
It’s true that Barber, in her book, saw more absurdity than seediness in her youthful engagement to a criminal Jack the Lad at the same time as she was preparing to apply to Oxford from her Twickenham grammar school. But Hornby softens the edges further so that David (Peter Sarsgaard), her flashy suitor, is more charming than predatory, more vulnerable than cunning. The paedophile question is side-stepped entirely, even turned into a gag, and good-looking, redeemable Sarsgaard doesn’t appear to be in his late thirties, as Barber assumes in her memoir, even if he claimed to be 27 to her 16. Hornby’s script also makes too much of the peril of – God forbid – not getting into Oxford so that the film ends on an odd note that seeks false drama and resolution in Jenny being accepted or not at the university.

Luckily, Danish director Scherfig and star Mulligan give the film considerable weight by surrounding this lightly played, strange romance with both an acute understanding of Barber’s endearing screen alter ego, Jenny (Mulligan), and incisive material about the differences between this know-it-all young lady and her less worldly mum (Cara Seymour) and dad (Alfred Molina), for whom wine is a Christmas treat and the French are the enemy across the water. It’s through them that we see the first chink of light in the generation gap that would widen as the decade went on.

There’s a persistent comic tone which makes the light treatment of Jenny and David’s affair more palatable than it should be. This is provided partly by Molina and Seymour as the likeable, misguided parents, but partly by Rosamund Pike’s brilliant empty-headed posh fluff, Helen, one of the early 1960s urban beau monde that includes Dominic Cooper as Helen’s louche boyfriend, who glides with David from nightclub to art auction to dog track with Jenny in tow.

As Jenny, Mulligan offers a great impression of Audrey Hepburn once she ties up her hair, throws off her school uniform and puts on an expensive, modish dress and jewellery. She is simply excellent in the role, the perfect mix of naivety and maturity beyond her character’s years. She has a strong but down-to-earth beauty which alone does much to compensate for some of the film’s less convincing, broader moments.

Read an interview with Scherfig here

Author: Dave Calhoun 2009-09-30 12:15:17

Time Out London Issue 2045, Oct 29 – Nov 4 2009

Bookmark

User reviews of this film

Phil said...

Posted on Jan 17 2010 14:49 disappointing

Report as inappropriate
ALFREDO said...

Posted on Jan 05 2010 00:28 JOOLS MADE THE BEST REVIEW SO FAR.

Report as inappropriate
jools said...

Posted on Jan 01 2010 22:43 A lovely litte film about being young, headstrong and unworldly, despite thinking you know it all. The female lead was the sort of up-herself, effortlessly academic girl who could have done with a good bog-washing in a modern comprehensive. Her much older lover was brilliantly charming and deeply creepy all at once and the way her parents innocently fell for his manipulative patter was well-portrayed, though Alfred Molina over-acted. Rosamund Pyke stood out as the funny but dim beauty and Dominic Cooper can almost be forgiven for 'Mama Mia' for his role here as a posh criminal: Clever, calculating but strangely sympathetic.
There was a slight whiff of the props department when it came to the '60's interiors and fashions, which takes away some of the authenticity of the film. Too over-observed and perfect, but ultimately, a good film

Report as inappropriate
Jan said...

Posted on Dec 15 2009 17:49 I was desperate to leave after ten minutes but the person I went with didn't want to which just shows I am not very good at choosing my mates. This was boring, boring, boring.
Lots of reasons: a) Character /setting disonance - a very modern girl, circa 1991 was superimposed onto a 1961 landscape (where when it stopped raining five hudnered yards after she takes a lift, the pavement was not even wet) No one spoke back to a teacher without being expelled in 1961 which was closer to 1861 than we realise......yes folks it was was at that level - you did not need to throw a chair at a teacher to get evicted and the head's word was law). Maybe the Mitfords could do it but this was not an aristocratic bore but a middle class bore. The dad character was a cartoon caracature straight out of the first Harry Potter film; 'David' is suppopsed to have checked out her breasts and then gone to sleep -give me a break. No mention of birth control when she primly loses her virginity by a mathematically calculated decison at 17. And they had no obvious physical contact = or even chemistry - at all - it was as sexual as watching an amoeba. I cannot believe the script allowed for a banana to be introduced as a potential prop. What is wrong with carrots if they have to do that sort of rubbish - less air miles......
This was not paedophila - she was almost 17 and the throw away very mild anti Jewish line from the head was not necesary: Jews faced a lot of quiet and overt antisemitism in 1960s Brtiain......Unbeleviable that David could live round the corrner and no one realised, go off to Paris, theatres etc ( what did he tell his missus?) etc etc and all his wife said when she saw the girl was " You're just a child!" No, she woudl not have said that. She would not have used the word "child". She would have done a Mrs Tiger Woods.
Maybe the middle classes were different in 1961 - but this girl was amoral ( she happily learnt of an old lady being ripped off) and I juet hoped she'd fall off her smug Oxford bike into the world of my toffee factory which is where I was at the time.
I preferred Ice Age 3 - there was a better script and more passion.
I would only recommend this film for the reasonable cinematography. Otherwise go bowling.

Report as inappropriate
editorial moo said...

Posted on Dec 05 2009 12:07 'The paedophile question is side-stepped entirely, even turned into a gag.' This film could only have been based on a memoir by a journalist. Otherwise it would have been annihilated by any film critic worth their job. An offensive vanity project.

Report as inappropriate
ALFREDO BORRAS said...

Posted on Dec 01 2009 20:23 AT LAST!. A MOVIE FOR ADULTS. NO SPECIAL EFFECTS BUT A STORY, JUST A MORAL STORY. I LOVED IT. BRAVO!.

Report as inappropriate
Christian said...

Posted on Nov 21 2009 17:07 Refreshing at first....but like a mohito without the essential dosage of lime. No spark. Mildly entertaining and worth a watch on the tv......as part of the tv drama schedule ....etc

Report as inappropriate
philmk said...

Posted on Nov 16 2009 09:15 The purpose of this film appears to be to make Lynn Barber look clever by getting into Oxford in spite of interrupted and deficient preparation. The principal character's background seems relatively humble, home counties suburban semi, probably state grammar rather than private school. The disturbance comes in the form of an older man, charming but uneducated, who, surprise surprise, isn't what he appears to be. There's so much about this film that's fake, down to the detail of the communication from Oxford - it's the colleges that award places, not the university. Will Jenny go to Oxford, or will her life pursue some other course? I found it difficult to care. The principal actress does look a bit like Audrey Hepburn, though.

Report as inappropriate
Manu said...

Posted on Nov 15 2009 17:57 A poor production, tv quality.
I love Nick Hornby novels but as a screenwriter is quite disappointing.

Report as inappropriate
Helen said...

Posted on Nov 14 2009 23:10 Thanks Time Out for revealing that David is a criminal - something the film doesn't reveal for about half an hour. Try not spoiling the plot next time.

Report as inappropriate
Mary said...

Posted on Nov 11 2009 10:52 A little correction for the review - the school that Lynn Barber ("Jenny" in the film) went to was not a Twickenham grammar, but an independent school in Hampton - The Lady Eleanor Holles School. I am being a stickler because I went there!

Report as inappropriate
Ben said...

Posted on Nov 09 2009 10:53 how to waste 10 quid

Report as inappropriate
andrea said...

Posted on Nov 08 2009 20:17 I've been to see it reading your review, I want my money back!
very bad acting: the main character only switches between two expressions. very poor screenplay, cheesy, predictable, with unexplainable gaps: why would he ask to marry her? embarassing scenes, check the banana scene: the whole cinema was in astonished silence

Report as inappropriate
usman khawaja said...

Posted on Nov 08 2009 03:40 there is an idea here which evolves to an intelligent parafdigm ,where jenny played by a 17 year old mulligan ,starsts to question the idea of formal education itself ,here she is challenging the shallow and hollow social and redundant traditions that insist on education being an obligatory essence for anyone who has the ability to think .
At the same time we see the past consequences of what has happenned to the other so-called successful icons of educational triumphs played by a dowdy frustrated bored school headmistress in a brilliant cameo by emma thompson .
THE ENCOUNTERS BETWEEN the teacher and pupil about her extra curricular romance and affair with an older good looking rich jewish man , and their french adventures in sixties paris are both charming and very intriguing as they raise some relevant questions about what is happiness and what is pseudo -satisfaction .
the scenes where jenny challenges her peers -parents and teachers are zealously executed with a pomposity which is commendable and convincing simultaneously .
Jenny is happy with her illicit lover who drives a posh bristol and takes her away from her twickenham suburbia to the wonders of saint germaine with the eclectic FRENCH music ,CAFES,CUISINE and movies to tempt her .
Yet the discovery of her ultimate betrayal by Skarsgard ,her tender and conscientious lover brings this lovely gallic liaision to a halt and brings us full circle into the frustrated world of reality but as for the movie it delivers and mulligan as jenny is a contemporary brilliant talent who reminds one of katherine hepburn in her forties classics where the project was based upon the strong shoulders of an eccentric talent and an innovatively written script -a definitely entertaining and provoking movie which takes a very wicked tongue in cheek view of the english education system and the satirical remarks about OXFORD ,JEWS AND LATIN itself are hiariously divine yet very subtle where no one is forcing anything down your throat in the name of so-called romcom .
intelligent cinema and art too with mellow entertainment like summer rain with a tongue in cheek ending which is priceless .

Report as inappropriate
Jo said...

Posted on Nov 05 2009 12:58 I could see this was a well produced and acted film, but I didn't enjoy the story.

Report as inappropriate