I agree with and cannot improve on many of the comments already posted: 1) superficial references to poetry undermine John Keating's supposedly transformative message, so that his instruction becomes messianic or charismatic rather than revelatory (BUT the chanting and marching while reciting "The Congo" seemed authentically musical and revealing of the poet's intentions); 2) sophomoric excesses undermined the authenticity of multiple issues, especially Neil Perry's relationship to his father (BUT Keating's interaction with Charlie Dalton after his realistic prank was a useful and effective exception); 3) failures to flesh out other students at Welton or students at other schools defaulted on definition of what made Keating's classes different, other than terrific impressions of Marlon Brando and John Wayne (BUT that certainly captures part of the entertainment culture in secondary and higher education TODAY, albeit perhaps not in 1962); and 4) utterly false notes such as Mr. Cameron's craven speech to his comrades in the closet (BUT great scenes such as Neil's and Todd's conversing over the desk set partly redeem the film).
I am grateful for a previous poster's having posted the Robert Frost poem, for I believe that the use of that poem in the film by itself diagnoses a major flaw in the film's makers. Please read the Frost poem carefully. I believe that Frost unambiguously tells us that, RETROSPECTIVELY, we claim that we took a less popular path and that that choice explains our difference or betterness. Frost carefully and repeatedly makes it clear that the two paths were almost indistinguishable. Only when reviewed later and from a distance does the preferred road get redefined as "striking out for new ground" and other pretentious nonsense. When I first watched the film, I was incensed when Keating retraced the popular misconception that Frost was advising his readers to dare the road less traveled by because that would make all the difference. I found that part of the film doubly disappointing because Frost's important insight was distorted and because Keating, by restating the popular view, was violating his own advice. At that moment, Keating made his students' and my lives quite ordinary!
I doubt that the screenwriter or director ever read the poem carefully. Indeed, I hope for their sakes that they did not. Instead, they took the after-dinner speaker's misappropriation of Frost's poetry for the words that Frost selected.
For the reasons above and others, then, I concur that "Dead Poets Society" butchered poetry and the teaching of poetry (BUT I agree with Keating about the "American Bandstand" approach in the preface to the assigned text).
However, I also agree with commenters who laud the film as a coming of age film. If one "read" DPS as the story of Todd Anderson (and, to a far lesser degree, Knox Overstreet), it would be a far better film. Indeed, Todd likely remembers Mr. Keating for Todd's impromptu rap on Walt Whitman, sweaty teeth, and truth as an inadequate blanket. Looking back, Todd may indeed see a road less traveled by. That road's reward had far more to do with risk-taking, personalized instruction than with poetry.
In sum, this movie is nowhere near as bad as contrarians have asserted. It is nowhere near as good as admirers have claimed. It is an incomplete accomplishment.
I am grateful for a previous poster's having posted the Robert Frost poem, for I believe that the use of that poem in the film by itself diagnoses a major flaw in the film's makers. Please read the Frost poem carefully. I believe that Frost unambiguously tells us that, RETROSPECTIVELY, we claim that we took a less popular path and that that choice explains our difference or betterness. Frost carefully and repeatedly makes it clear that the two paths were almost indistinguishable. Only when reviewed later and from a distance does the preferred road get redefined as "striking out for new ground" and other pretentious nonsense. When I first watched the film, I was incensed when Keating retraced the popular misconception that Frost was advising his readers to dare the road less traveled by because that would make all the difference. I found that part of the film doubly disappointing because Frost's important insight was distorted and because Keating, by restating the popular view, was violating his own advice. At that moment, Keating made his students' and my lives quite ordinary!
I doubt that the screenwriter or director ever read the poem carefully. Indeed, I hope for their sakes that they did not. Instead, they took the after-dinner speaker's misappropriation of Frost's poetry for the words that Frost selected.
For the reasons above and others, then, I concur that "Dead Poets Society" butchered poetry and the teaching of poetry (BUT I agree with Keating about the "American Bandstand" approach in the preface to the assigned text).
However, I also agree with commenters who laud the film as a coming of age film. If one "read" DPS as the story of Todd Anderson (and, to a far lesser degree, Knox Overstreet), it would be a far better film. Indeed, Todd likely remembers Mr. Keating for Todd's impromptu rap on Walt Whitman, sweaty teeth, and truth as an inadequate blanket. Looking back, Todd may indeed see a road less traveled by. That road's reward had far more to do with risk-taking, personalized instruction than with poetry.
In sum, this movie is nowhere near as bad as contrarians have asserted. It is nowhere near as good as admirers have claimed. It is an incomplete accomplishment.