Tom Brown's Schooldays

This adaptation has been tried and tested on four separate occasions. Right from the outset you could tell this screening of the famous story was sticking to the old traditional set. This was reassuring. Stephen Fry played the Doctor well with the casting of both Flashman and Tom Brown accurate. It was an average performance from Flashman, but a strong performance from the youngster who played Tom. Especially since it was his debut acting role. The story was intended for light entertainment and had no real meaning, therefore I can't scrutinise it for lacking depth. The other roles seemed too minor and the rest of the cast played their part well enough to go unnoticed. The viewers of this will forget it ten minutes after they've seen it but entertaining nonetheless and better than most in this genre.

This at least fifth adaptation of Thomas Hughes' 1857 autobiographical novel "Tom Brown's School Days" provides a classic comparison to Harry Potter's Hogwarts, which has probably revived curiosity in portrayals of English boarding school life.

While I presume any 90 minute version (2 hours on BBC America with commercials), has to cut a lot more from the book than the 1971 mini-series that I haven't seen (nor have I read the book), the characters and the situations came through strongly.

Not the Dickensian deprivations of the poor house in "Oliver Twist", Ashley Pharoah's adaptation is much more about typical behavior in an all male environment that is a precursor to "Lord of the Flies," the dark side of "Peter Pan" where boys do adult actions without growing up, or at least various military movies (I only knew the naval song "Heart of Oak," used in a humiliating scene, because of "Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World").

Key to enlivening this from just another costume drama with stock characters (the bully, the victim, the ineffectual leader, etc.) is the wonderful titular performance of Alex Pettyfer, billed as "introducing." I can't recall seeing a boy actor transform so much in front of our eyes other than Christian Bale in "Empire of the Sun," as he develops from timid to athlete to swaggerer to mature leader.

Stephen Fry is particularly good at conveying his guilt at the hypocrisy he gets trapped into as a well-meaning new headmaster trying to change a traditional den of testosterone gone wild. Jemma Redgrave doesn't get do very much as his oblivious wife.

Joe Beattie, in the thankless role of the arrogant, wealthy villain a la Malfoy in the Potter oeuvre, plays him foppishly, like Guy Pearce in the most recent version of "The Count of Monte Cristo." I was actually surprised when he cruelly seduced a maid, as I thought the homo-erotic potential in this hot house environment was implied, particularly when it is emphasized how "different" the weakest victim is as he shines at poetry readings.

A story of the perniciousness of bullying left unchecked never goes out of date, and this portrayal is universal and timeless, regardless of its period setting.

Purchased DVD to have bonus material, which advertise Cast and Thomas Hughes biographies, History of Rugby School, Production Notes and Picture Gallery. What I was expecting was a short history of Rugby School featuring old clips of the School up to the present day, and perhaps what life is like for boys today at Rubgy School. How the production company cast for the roles, how the different parts were filmed in a School in use. Interviews with the Actors about what drew them to the part and what the film meant to them, the picture gallery featuring off screen images of the actors rehearsing/relaxing. What a disappointment. EVERY section is a let down. The cast biographies only feature four actors, two men and two women. Why, with a film using 99% of male actors, do we have a 50/50 split between men and women. Perhaps it's because most of the actors were young boys with little acting history ? This does not hold up to scrutiny, as the film did feature other well known and established male actors, which are not featured. The two male biographies are Steven Fry ( Doctor Arnold ), and Joe Beattie ( Flashman ), the main actor Alex Pettyfer is not featured, which I find unbelievable. A short History of Rugby School, Thomas Hughes Biography and Production Notes are only text, not even any pictures. The picture gallery was poor. I have seen two lovely images publicising the DVD, including one on the DVD cover itself, yet they are not featured. In conclusion, only buy the DVD for the film, which is very good. For the extras, forget it. Although not experienced in this area, even I could have made far superior bonus features. It seems the production company were not bothered with this part, and it probably only took one person a few hours to produce.

what a wonderful adaptation of the novel! Beautifully filmed on location in rugby school,David Moore the director has made a really fantastic drama which is modern and exciting....better than any period drama on itv all year!!

the acting was first rate...Steven Fry was Super as Dr Arnold and really nice to see this actor leading a drama rather than playing the comic relief of a piece...maybe an award in the wings for this performance!! young Alex Petyfer was a good Tom Brown..holding his own in some tough scenes with fry.Joe Beattie was a satisfactory Flashman running the school house with his bunch of cronies! Clive Standen playing Brooke was a Magnicent Hero and really electrifyed the screen when he was on!the perfect juxtaposition to Beatties Flashman. And the two young Boys playing East and Tadpole were really quite brilliant...especially Dane carter playing Tadpole in the most memorable scene in the film where he is accused of lieing to Steven fry!! a jolly good film which i would advise all to watch AND HOPE TO SEE SOME OF THE ACTORS TO GO ON TO GREAT THINGS

Well done ITV

Over the holiday period I enjoyed Martin Clunes' "Mr Chips" and "Pollyanna", both recent ITV adaptations, so was looking forward to this offering. I have never read the book, so cannot judge how close it was to the original story, but did see the 1971 BBC series, which I remember enjoying immensely.

I think the problem may be that it tried to squeeze three hours of story into two hours, (less ad breaks) and there is a sense of non-resolution at the end. Ending on the funeral of the unfortunate Arthur leaves things weirdly up in the air. There is no sense of catharsis that there is with the well received 1971 version. It all seems to be made up of bits and pieces of story stuck together without any real narrative thrust.

I remember the BBC series ending with the sweeping reforms of pay and conditions for masters and boys introduced by Arnold, this being the culmination of his experience and his journey to restore Rugby to its former status as a place fit for "gentlemen and Christians". In this version this is dealt with over a brief conversation while walking with an elderly master, asking him to spend the nights on the premises.

Flashman's comeuppance is disappointingly glossed over, and the consequences of incurring the wrath of one of the school's major benefactors are not addressed.

The film looks good and the acting is competent (although I too, found the "reality" camera work intrusive), but I feel that, as I have already said, the problem may well may on the cutting room floor and the amount of footage that had to be excluded to fit into 1 3/4 hours.