It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

I didn’t really have many expectations going into the movie (good or bad), but I actually really enjoyed it. I really liked the characters and the banter between them.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

Just intense enough to provide a much-needed diversion, just lightweight enough to make you forget about it soon after it’s over. It’s not exactly “good,” per se, but it does what it sets out to do in terms of putting us on edge, which makes it … successful?

Bo Widerbergs last movie All Things fair, the male lead is the directors son. It is the love fall between Stig, 15 and his teacher, Viola 37. 1942 in the Swedish town Malmö. The 1955-movie with the same theme is based on a true story ... while in the shadow of the moralizing the love affair between a students with the principals wife develops: "Så tuktas kärleken" with the yesterday-famous (even A Hitchcock heard of) the blonde Karin Ekelund. Significant for Bo Widerbergs movie is the students search for knowledge. He is in the classroom, searching for a word in the schools dictionaries. Enters the teacher, asking what he does and telling him the meaning of the word he looks for: middling/mediocre. He reads: "Latin, mediocre, person of moderate ability, work of no particular value." It is the beginning of their relationship: working class boy vs middle class woman. Primary not a love affair between them but she as the door to knowledge the working class is forbidden to have. The teachers guiding part, as member of the upper class, owns the power of knowledge. The end of their love story is not that her husband discovers their affair (he accepts what is going on) but the friendship between her husband and her lover that triggers her jealousy and ends the affair between upper and working class: doomed from its start. Who was used and who ...? She uses her power against the powerless. She tells the schools principal that Stig has to repeat his year and the principal tells Stig after the decision: "we are all in agreement that you should repeat the third year next term." The celebration in church of the schools years with the distribution of the certificates. The teacher in the place of the priest in front of the altar, calling the name/s of the pupil/s. Stig in his weekdays outfit enters, approaching her. We see only parts of his obscene gestures in front of his paralyzed teacher, Viola. He leaves the church, heading for the school. The doors are locked, entering as the working class boy he is by the cellar. He forces the classrooms door and takes the books. The books, the symbol for knowledge that always belonged to the ruling class. The last scene: above the schools entrance are carved in stone the sentence: Fear of the Lord is the Beginning of Wisdom. In two bags he carries the books: the wisdom that now belongs even to him, the working class Their relation was a wisdom-encounter and a time limited human encounter. It ended when Stig befriended with her husband. Stig is played by the editors/directors son. Some parts are autobiographic.

Technically speaking, this is an excellent film---with exceptional acting, direction, etc. However, as the main theme involves the sexual exploitation of a teen by his teacher, it is NOT exactly Disney fair! Apart from having a very adult theme and a fair amount of nudity, I felt very disturbed when the main character (Stig) had other sexual encounters with an apparently younger girl he knew from school. These scenes are awfully graphic and the girl appears to be about 12 years-old. I couldn't help but wonder if pedophiles would be particularly attracted to this film because of this. I really think these encounters COULD have been included but just not made so explicit. In a way, it seems almost like the director and producers may have sexually exploited this girl--as she was apparently well under the age of consent--even with her parents' permission.

This was to be director Widerberg's last movie. A sweet family farewell, since his son played the lead in it. What his last words may be, as expressed in this movie, though, is hard to say. There is no clear moral in it, for which I am thankful, but a somewhat distressing observation about love: it is a close neighbor to hate, and it will not leave without vengeance.The love affair between the school teacher and the teenage student is interesting when it starts to break up, but its beginning is too swiftly dealt with to make any sense, and its joyous, lustful phase is without depth. Only when things go awry, does the story get interesting, and the actors get to excel in their art.The title is from a psalm, which is traditionally sung by students when they leave school for the summer break - or for good. It's a hymn to the summer and its luscious splendor - therefore, a lust of another kind, than the carnal one the movie deals with. Some Widerberg irony, no doubt.Using his son as the student in the movie, was not that good an idea, although Johan Widerberg has a rare charisma on screen, and his own odd talent in acting. His father seems not to have been able to treat his son with the same merciless exploitation, as he was quite apt to do with other actors. So, the student is left hanging in a kind of vacuum, as if empty of his own intentions and conflicts. Things happen to him, as if he had nothing to do with them.In this type of drama, it is important that the characters are stripped naked - well, mainly their souls, but bodies too, if need be. Widerberg manages the latter with his son, briefly, but not at all the former. When wanting to protect his son, he actually abandons him - for no other reason than the inhibitions in his own fatherhood. Johan, on the other hand, seems to be prepared to do any sacrifice necessary, to make the movie work.I could be wrong. But the impression remains: the student's story never really gets to be told, because he is not allowed to be present, completely.

Watching "All Things Fair" as it showed on TV here in Canada on CBC public network last night, was a treat. Only my sensible, nagging partner coaxing me to get to bed on a work night persuaded me we could trust the VCR to tape the last hour or so. Fortunately for his neck, the tape ran out during the closing credits and not before!What I liked most about the film (with English subtitles) was the complexity of Sig's world and his relationships. It's a very real world feeling on screen, full of quirky believability, despite Sig's unusual arrangement with his teacher. Though I know of a real life story resembling Sig's relationship with his teacher that went very differently for the teacher--ending in her virtual ruin--the behaviour of these film characters, the outcome and the aftermath, rings true nonetheless. No character is one-dimensional, even though the film schools us to sympathize with the choices of some and to repudiate others.It's delightful to find in the credits that the director gave the plum lead role to his son. It takes an admirable trust, I think, to turn over a role like this to one's own young kin, complete with whatever there is in the script that MIGHT be autobiographical.The female solo vocals in the soundtrack were wonderful. Now, I just need to found out who was singing like a bell whenever love or pain swelled in the story.