Tim Marshall
I was either the age of thirteen or fourteen when I first watched Être et Avoir in my high school French class. Present day I am twenty-two years old and for some unknown reason, today I had memories of this film.miraculously, my search for a French school film where at some point, I believe this may be in the additional extras of the making of the film, the students where not so happy about being filming in the shower, being embarrassed which is what I remember this for because where sub titles where not available, she would tell us and she laughed at their reactions telling us.The compassion you see in this film makes it all worthwhile, you learn so much yet I avoid to explain without spoiling any information for people reading my experience wanting to watch this film.
heislloyd
This film manages to pull off an unusual double: it is both boring and hellish. It is very slow, and very little happens, and most that does happen happens several times. It is about dull people in a dull world, doing nothing of merit or novelty.So much for the boring aspect of it, now on to the hellish:- The job of a psychotherapist is to convince people that they need his help in the first place, and then to convince them if they come to him that they are being helped by him, even if he is (as statistics consistently reveal) not helping at all. Similarly, the job of the teacher in this documentary is to convince the viewer that he is a nice, patient, caring man. This way, he gets to come across well, and the film-makers have a hero.The teacher we see in this film and the film-makers behind the camera are presumably sadistic uncaring bastards. Several times in this film we see a scene in which the teacher has isolated one pupil from the rest, and sets him up in front of the unforgiving and ever-judging camera, and slowly pushes him and pushes him until eventually he cracks and bursts into tears. For those who enjoy child psychological torture porn, this is a feast. For others, imbued with some modicum of empathy and perception, this is hellish. I wanted step into the picture and rescue those poor children from his vile clutches. All the time, he is selling himself to the viewer and the child as kind and gentle, and all the time he is anything but. The film makers do not intervene. Instead, the camera is rock steady on its tripod, out-staring the children, and intimidating them. All the director has to do is wait, and he will get his golden moment of child tears.The children in this film are not bright, or at least, not the ones the editor has chosen to show us. Again, several times we see a child picked on and humiliated for the camera. One child counts to six, and then fails to say the next number, and the teacher asks him what they have been working on all morning. The boy is told the answer a few times, but still cannot repeat it. I think if I were four years old and had a film crew, a teacher, and the rest of my class all looking at me like that, I might too be intimidated into silence. At another point, a boy is pushed over and bursts into tears. He is four. When the film came out he would have been about five, when the DVD came out he would have been about six. He was sentenced to a childhood of being the one who was pushed over and burst into tears. A newspaper report says that since the film came out, nine of the eleven children featured have sued the film makers for compensation for trauma.There is another scene in which one boy is at home trying to do his maths homework and is having trouble. More and more members of his family step in to try to help, and the way the scene is cut strongly suggests that none of them can solve the one problem that the little boy has been set. I strongly suspect that the editor has made them look dimmer than they really were. We urban film-going intellectuals are treated to an opportunity to laugh at the stupid rustics. Okay, the boy is bit dim, and his family is a bit dim - I get it - but there is no need to rub anyone's face in it.The teacher is forever fishing for compliments, both from the pupils and the viewers. To watch this smug man go utterly unchallenged was near unbearable. No one questions his methods or his authority. The parents all seem to defer to him, and to the children he is all-knowing. The school actually has two teachers, but the second one is almost entirely ignored. We are invited to feel sorry that the man is retiring. I am disappointed that he wasn't sacked thirty years ago. That he has no children of his own and is apparently single is not investigated. There may be very good or very bad reasons for this.I say that the people who write in other reviews that the perpetually black-clad teacher is saintly, the school idyllic, and the film charming, have been successfully conned. That was clearly the intent of the film makers, and that they have succeeded with so many people is praise-worthy in terms of film-making technique, but utterly condemning in terms of morality.If you hated school, as very many (most, I suspect) people did, then this film is a disturbing reminder of the sheer hellishness of it all. It is reasonable to suspect that the people who chose to see a film about school days are a sample biased towards those who liked school and were blind to its dark side.I can recall one shot that I enjoyed: a small boy, looking quite content and able, driving a massive tractor on his family's farm.
BuffsRawlinson
Don't they salute the Flag, Pledge Allegiance or hold Assemblies in French schools? I did not see any reference to the World outside the rural part of France: is that any help to the next generation of French students trying to survive in a modern world? By the age of 6 or so all of us at school were expected to be able to locate England and the main Dominions, Colonies and Commonwealth members. Maybe they cannot do tha in France for good reason? I can see the point of this movie; it celebrates the joy of looking inward in a French way. Nothing wrong with that, I'm just saying. It's cute, amusing and diversionary but perhaps there is a temptation to deify this beyond its self referential framework?A story of a rural Canadian, American or English school could be equally appealing: perhaps it's the effect of being a non English speaking / foreign language movie that moves it up through the ranks. Do go and watch this - don't take my word for it. Tongues in cheek are in season at the moment. The teacher is sincerity personified and the story of his Spanish father's migration to France, his parents' financial sacrifices and the hidden sacrifices he has made in his life go to make this a story that is more interesting about the man than the children. Break out the sincerity popcorn folks and wallow in French arcadia for an hour or two; can't hurt can it?
momorguci
I can't say much about the film except that I love it. I don't want to come across like a 12 year old fan club president, but oh well. The main problem I have with many contemporary documentaries these days is that they tend to go for maximum entertainment, and little else. Overly slick, often gimmicky in nature, with flash editing and a cynical tone, they are instantly forgotten (i.e. Super Size Me, Inside Deep Throat, Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room, among many many others) To be and To have, beyond entertaining is an INSIGHTFUL look into us as human beings, I know I know, a movie about the human condition, sounds corny or worse dull but it is far from either of those adjectives. The film follows a class of kinder gardeners in the French rural countryside for a year. It is both profound and simple to watch these children learn the everyday lessons of life. Even more amazing is that it does so without becoming overly sentimental or sugary. The film's point of view inevitably takes on that of a five year old, finding magic and greatness in the everyday mundane aspects of life. Highlights: When the teacher explains the concept of infinity to the children. Marie and Jojo in general are a delight. The handwriting lesson as insight into personality. I could go on and on. Just see it
