Ao Mestre, com Carinho 2

Someone who knows how much I adore Poitier's no nonsense demeaner and noble characterizations taped this film for me one evening when I informally voted that it would not be worth my while to make a b line home to see it. Though I appreciated the favor, the tape sat on my shelf for many a year. All I recalled about the production were the brief previews that served as ample warning that the film would aire. Truthfully, I was kind of Poitiered out. Nobody went around public speaking talking about his book and showing clips of his works as much as I did. I particularly enjoyed the Bill Cosby pairings of comedies, the "In the Heat of the Night" and "Shoot to Kill" cop flicks and the career founding race films that literally and figuratively were black and white. The first "To Sir with Love" was passable but finding difficulty joining the lofty ranks of the aforementioned 3 category favorites. With "Fame" and "Good Will Hunting" among my favorite school theme films and "With Honors" and "Breakfast Club" doing admireable jobs at rounding out that theme category, I found it hard to believe there was a place for a partially commited to Poitier project to have any impact. For all intents and purposes, I wrote this project off and kind of kept my distance from it the same way a boxing fan might refuse to go see a very old Ali take on Berbick. Almost a decade after first recorded I watched this "To Sir with Love 2" and was surprised to find that it has it own healthy niche'. The first few minutes shows the 80 year-old thesbian playing a teacher moving about the city with a theme song that sounds both dated and amateurish, however this cheesiness is only misleading and does not hint of the good stuff that follows if you stick with it. There are plenty of good teaching techniques peppered with periodic morale lessons. Blunted violence and self censored language may come across as humorous or unrealistic, however it does not take away from the overall message and in the end plays a major part in the movie's charm. For the umpteenth time, another score for Poitier, even though I thought he was done.

Proof that Sidney Poitier does not always have the Midas touch. You knew all along that Mark Thackery was going to succeed, so no surprises there, and no real satisfaction either. But the BIG TURN-OFF was the sheer idealism of the movie. The teens Thackery is trying to convert just aren't gritty and dirty enough. The moment when Thackery returned from his short retrenchment and the class began chanting 'Thackery' in unison epitomised that for me. It was a moment was total unrealism. This movie just did not work, despite good intentions I'm sure. 4 out of 10 because I'm not feeling generous.

Flawed but watchable sequel to the phenomenally successful 1967 movie. Probably the major flaw of this television sequel is it's tenuous links with the original. After cameos from Lulu and Judy Geeson, in almost every respect this could be an entirely different film. With Poitier as Thackeray plunged into a Chicago school, there is a nice mention of Blackboard Jungle by one of the teachers, but after that everything we've previously come to expect from a Sidney Poitier film is left at the door. While this movie does contain the sentimentality of the original, its short length means we never really get to know the pupils and so this feels forced. Also, unlike the original, there is no sense of redemption or development for the pupils, who act pretty much the same at the climax as they did at the start of the film. Where it veers far out of the expected range is in its depiction of street violence, which does give a genuine racial tone to the proceedings, and seems more natural than in some previous offerings. The racial dynamic between Poitier as the England-acclimatised teacher and Travanti as the student who leads a gang to survive is strong. However, the rigid morality of Thackeray this time around lends Sidney a limited set of parameters in which to reenact his role.

Unfortunately this sequel lacks the passion of the original. It is the same story with a modern twist. Mr. Thackeray (Sidney Poitier) is faced with near identical trouble-minded students. The setting and characters have changed, though the central students are mirror images of those in the 1967 film. The acting in some instances is bad, in others just average. With the exception of Poitier who, as always, is terrific.

I loved the original. Despite my disappointment in this film, I wouldn't discourage you from seeing it if you enjoyed the first as much as I did. Just temper your expectations. To me, it does not have the same feeling and, accordingly, will not elicit the same emotion. Much of what was so special to me about the 1967 film was that it brought to mind the wonderful teachers I was privileged to have during my schooling. Amazing individuals who were fundamental in my development as a person. This sequel did not bring about the same memories and therefore falls far below it's predecessor.

I watched this movie expecting to revive the feeling I got (and still get,,,though diminished) from To Sir With Love (1967), which is my favorite film. Sadly, I was disappointed. The connection between the two films is tenuous. The students' characters are not sufficiently developed for me to feel anything for them. Plus, there doesn't seem to be any real change in them by the end. It all seems quite unrealistic. Also, at some points I felt as if I was watching an "ABC After School Special"