I haven't read the book, so don't know whether the fault lies with Garfield or Loach, but the over-inflated amounts of money bandied about completely ruined the otherwise reasonably convincing look and feel of the 1750s in this film. The few stars I've given are for the sets and costumes.
As an example, near the beginning, Jack is given over 3 POUNDS for helping to push a coach out of a pothole - not remotely feasible, given a farm labourer's wage around that time was in the order of 10 SHILLINGS per WEEK.
Similarly, the amounts demanded by the urchin Hatch are also off the scale. I found the credence given to him by the doctor and father equally unbelievable - I'd have thought they'd have been more likely to cart him off to the local constable or watch, or send him packing with a kick.
These anachronisms, and the amateurish acting in places, meant I gave up before the end of this movie. So disappointingly poor compared to Loach's Kes (1969). That film I saw as a child around the time it came out and it had a huge impact on me.
As an example, near the beginning, Jack is given over 3 POUNDS for helping to push a coach out of a pothole - not remotely feasible, given a farm labourer's wage around that time was in the order of 10 SHILLINGS per WEEK.
Similarly, the amounts demanded by the urchin Hatch are also off the scale. I found the credence given to him by the doctor and father equally unbelievable - I'd have thought they'd have been more likely to cart him off to the local constable or watch, or send him packing with a kick.
These anachronisms, and the amateurish acting in places, meant I gave up before the end of this movie. So disappointingly poor compared to Loach's Kes (1969). That film I saw as a child around the time it came out and it had a huge impact on me.