La classe dirigente

This movie has EVERYTHING!!!!! I'm serious. Does it have musical numbers? Yes, it does. Beautiful costumes, fabulous sets, serial killers, witty dialogue, burlesque striptease, opera and aristocracy, romance and insanity, jealousy and drama, comedy and theology? Yes, yes, yes!!! Oh, why couldn't there be more films like this? In a way, it reminded me of "The Ninth Configuration" although that movie lacked humor. Peter O'Toole is just gorgeous, as well. My father (psychiatrist) says that this film is just about the only accurate film representation he's seen of MANIA, but when i asked him about it, he didn't recall the musical numbers. So i suppose it's got something for everyone. I could write about THE RULING CLASS for hours and hours and compare it to everything in the entire world but i don't want to give anything away. This is an absolute MUST-SEE for anyone with an interest in film, England, mental disorders, or dancing the Varsity Rag.

The Ruling class is a disturbing commentary on the nature and necessity of our whole belief systems. It both highlights the extreme fragility of those beliefs, and takes gently mocking aim at us for our dependency on them. Viewed in that light, the film succeeds 100%. When viewed merely as a satire on the British ruling classes, of course it doesn't. It goes far deeper, becoming also an essay on our tendency to manipulate others for our own benefit: the characters' collective idiosyncrasies serve as punctuation for that essay. Brilliantly acted, often hilarious but always profoundly moving, it is a genuine classic of its kind, notwithstanding its undeniable, though relatively minor, flaws. I'd love to have it on DVD!

British `dark comedy' was possibly as its zenith with this rich Peter O'Toole offering by director Peter Medak. O'Toole is Jack Gurney, the youngest and `somewhat eccentric' heir to the House of Gurney. He suddenly finds himself being forced by his late father's will into taking up his role in British society - assuming the family seat in the House of Lords. The biggest problem is not that the late Earl of Gurney has just accidentally hung himself wearing a cocked hat and a ballet skirt, or that Jack has just released himself from `hospital' where the doctors were treating his `nerves.' No the biggest problem is that, on a good day, the new 14th Earl of Gurney thinks he's Jesus Christ and, on a bad day, he thinks he's Jack the Ripper!

And if that mix of the macabre doesn't make you chuckle, try this unexpected twist. At several poignant moments throughout the film, the cast will suddenly break from straight-faced dialogue into a full-blown, song and dance numbers, some of which would make Busby Berkley proud. In one case, the tune of `Connect 'dem Bones' is ushered up to punctuate a scene with O'Toole lecturing the local gentry about the need for capital punishment. Herein lies one of the big reasons why this film is so off-the-wall and refreshingly funny.

For my money, this is one of the most original, thought-provoking and honest critiques of the British class system ever to be put on film. O'Toole is simply mesmerizing as he juggles Jack's multiple personalities, the funniest of which is Christ or, as he prefers it, `J.C.' It's hysterical to watch the cumulative effect of J.C.'s `touched' outlook on the members in his stuffy, conspiring family who are out to get Jack committed permanently.

A true `Must See Film' for anyone who enjoys a juicy, sardonic, intelligent black comedy, especially when the topic focuses on the silly pomposity of the British upper classes.

Back in 2001, The Criterion Collection saw fit to add "The Ruling Class" (1972) to their catalog; which means there is now a good print available in the correct aspect ratio, one that includes the entire original release running time of 154 minutes. It also means that "The Ruling Class" is now regarded in film circles as a "significant" movie. Of course almost any film student will tell you that "significant" is not necessarily synonymous with entertaining, critically acclaimed, or well-made.

So if you are considering a purchase or have just had a confused post-purchase viewing experience the following discussion may prove useful. This is a British film, one I originally watched on the BBC a few months after its release. It was neither a critical success (mixed reviews) nor a box office sensation and hitting the BBC so soon after a theatrical release back then was not much different from going direct-to-video today.

It was a counter-culture film, and much of my original enjoyment came from the obvious tweaking of certain cultural and political institutions. Much of this stuff has lost its power and appeal over the years.

It has a lot of expressionistic and allegorical elements; this sort of stuff was (and is) relatively rare in an English language film and probably accounts for much of the current cult status of the film. The black comedy aspect of these elements has held up very well and you will understand the film better and enjoy it more if you don't take it literally.

Jack, the 14th Earl of Gurney (Peter O'Toole), has recently inherited the family title and a place in the House of Lords of the British Parliament. The story actually begins with a cheerfully provocative black comedy sequence as his father, the 13th Earl (Harry Andrews), accidentally hangs himself while performing what is apparently a long-standing self-pleasuring ritual.

Jack believes himself Jesus Christ and his family believes that they can get their hands on the estate once he produces an heir. Their idea being to have him committed and then become guardians of the child. Carolyn Seymour plays his uncle's mistress who is brought in to marry Jack. Her character throws a wrench in the works by falling in love with her new husband. Other than Jack, Seymour's character is the only one that undergoes any real change during the course of the film and she sells this transformation quite nicely while also providing one of the best striptease sequences you are likely to stumble across in a mainstream movie.

As already noted the running length is 154 minutes, that's about the length of two movies and if the film were being produced today I suspect that it would be done as two separate films. Indeed it is really two stories with each having an entirely different tone. About midway through the film, the Jesus version of the 14th Earl is replaced by a Jack the Ripper version. In the process a farcical and relatively light-hearted black comedy is instantly transformed into a much darker story. Black comedy gives way to dark fantasy and hallucinations as the wheels fall off the story until a visually stunning ending.

The 1972 theme being essentially that being forced to conform to the ritualistic practices of upper class British society produces a monster. That not being able to "do your own thing" unleashes a monster on the world. Unfortunately the basic cause and effect of this whole process is glossed over and one is left wondering why the film you have been watching has been replaced with something entirely different and far less entertaining.

O'Toole underplays his two characters, don't expect a lot of Gary Oldham type excess. Jesus is more a mild narcissist than a booming holy roller. Jack (the Ripper) is much better mannered but obviously smoldering beneath his polite exterior.

The laughs mostly come from the discomfort of Jack's family and from Alastair Sim's apoplectic bishop and Authur Lowe's collectivist butler who abuses the family with a "Benson" type frankness.

There are two great musical sequences, a hunt club performance of "Dem Bones" (a homage to "The Prisoner") and the climatic scene in the House of Lords (a surreal montage of decay to the music of "Pomp and Circumstances" and "Onward, Christian Soldiers").

Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.

This is an excellent movie, but don't watch it expecting it to be purely a dark comedy. There is a lot of humor in it--often very bizarre humor--but it is primarily a very powerful statement about what can happen when, for the sake of social acceptability, a human mind is forced into a mold that doesn't fit. In my opinion, the British ruling class was chosen to illustrate this point only because they do have very rigid rules about what kind of behavior is socially acceptable and what is simply "not done." It's statement about the dangers of excessive self-repression apply equally to us all.