Hubbry Logo
Up (film series)Up (film series)Main
Open search
Up (film series)
Community hub
Up (film series)
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Up (film series)
Up (film series)
from Wikipedia

Up
DVD cover
GenreLongitudinal study Documentary
Directed byPaul Almond (Seven Up!)
Michael Apted (all subsequent films)
StarringBruce Balden
Jackie Bassett
Symon Basterfield
Andrew Brackfield
John Brisby
Peter Davies
Susan Davis
Charles Furneaux
Nicholas (Nick) Hitchon (died 2023)
Neil Hughes
Lynn Johnson (died 2013)
Paul Kligerman
Suzanne (Suzy) Lusk
Tony Walker
Narrated byDouglas Keay
Michael Apted (all subsequent films)
Theme music composerTrevor Duncan
Opening theme"Syncho-Jazz"
Ending theme"Syncho-Jazz"
Country of originUnited Kingdom
Original languageEnglish
No. of episodes9 (in 16 parts)[1]
Production
ProducerClaire Lewis
Production locationsUnited Kingdom
Bulgaria
France
Australia
United States
Spain
Portugal
CinematographyGeorge Jesse Turner
EditorKim Horton
Running time40–150 mins. per film
1,018 mins. total
Original release
NetworkITV (Granada Television) (1964–1991, 2005–2019)
BBC One (1998)
Release5 May 1964 (1964-05-05) –
6 June 2019 (2019-06-06)

The Up series of documentary films follows the lives of ten boys and four girls in England, beginning in 1964, when they were seven years old. The first film was titled Seven Up!, with later films adjusting the number in the title to match the age of the subjects at the time of filming. The documentary has had nine episodes—one every seven years—thus spanning 56 years. The series has been produced by Granada Television for ITV, which has broadcast all of them except 42 Up (1998), which was broadcast on BBC One. Individual films and the series as a whole have received numerous accolades;[clarification needed] in 1991, the then-latest instalment, 28 Up, was chosen for Roger Ebert's list of the ten greatest films of all time.[2]

The children were selected for the original programme to represent the range of socio-economic backgrounds in Britain at that time, on the assumption that each child's social class would determine their future.[3] The first instalment was made as a one-off edition of Granada Television's series, World in Action, directed by Canadian Paul Almond, with involvement by "a fresh-faced young researcher, a middle-class Cambridge graduate", Michael Apted, whose role in the initial programme included "trawling the nation's schools for 14 suitable subjects".[4] About the first programme, Apted has said:

It was Paul's film ... but he was more interested in making a beautiful film about being seven, whereas I wanted to make a nasty piece of work about these kids who have it all, and these other kids who have nothing.[4]

After Almond's direction of the original programme, director Michael Apted continued the series with new instalments every seven years, filming material from those of the fourteen who chose to participate.[4] The aim of the continuing series is stated at the beginning of 7 Up as: "We brought these children together because we wanted a glimpse of England in the year 2000. The shop's steward and the executive of the year 2000 are now seven years old." The most recent instalment, the ninth, titled 63 Up, premiered in the UK on ITV in 2019.[5][6] A special episode featuring celebrity fans of the series, 7 Up & Me, also aired on ITV in 2019.[7] Apted is reported to have said, "I hope to do 84 Up when I'll be 99";[8] however, he died in 2021.[9]

In July 2025 it was confirmed that the series will continue with a new director for the next instalment, 70 Up.[10]

Creation

[edit]

The first film in the series, Seven Up! (1964), was directed by Paul Almond,[4][11] and was commissioned by Granada Television as a programme in the World in Action series.[4] From 7 Plus Seven until 63 Up the films were directed by Michael Apted, who had been a researcher on Seven Up! and was involved in finding the original children,[4] with Gordon McDougall.[citation needed] The premise of the film was taken from the Jesuit motto "Give me a child until he is seven and I will give you the man".[12][13] The 1998 edition, 42 Up, was broadcast on BBC One but was still produced by Granada Television.[citation needed]

List of films and premiere dates

[edit]
No. Title Director Original air date Channel Length
1 Seven Up! Paul Almond 5 May 1964 ITV (Granada Television) 40 minutes
2 7 Plus Seven Michael Apted 15 December 1970 53 minutes
3 21 Up 9 May 1977 100 minutes
4 28 Up 20, 21 November 1984 136 minutes
5 35 Up 22 May 1991 116 minutes
6 42 Up 21, 22 July 1998 BBC One 133 minutes
7 49 Up 15, 22 September 2005 ITV 134 minutes
8 56 Up 14, 21, 28 May 2012 144 minutes
9 63 Up 4, 5, 6 June 2019 150 minutes

Participants

[edit]

The subjects are first seen on a group visit to London Zoo in 1964, where the narrator announces "We brought these 20 children together for the very first time." The series then follows fourteen of the children: Bruce Balden, Jackie Bassett, Symon Basterfield, Andrew Brackfield, John Brisby, Peter Davies, Susan Davis, Charles Furneaux, Nicholas Hitchon, Neil Hughes, Lynn Johnson, Paul Kligerman, Suzanne Lusk and Tony Walker.

The participants were chosen in an attempt to represent different social classes in Britain in the 1960s. Apted states in the 42 commentary track that he was asked to find children at the extremes. Because the show was not originally intended to become a repeating series, no long-term contract was signed with the participants.[citation needed] According to Apted, participants in the subsequent programmes since Seven Up! have been paid a sum for their appearance in each instalment, as well as equal parts of any prize the film may win. Each subject is filmed in about two days and the interview itself takes more than six hours.

Apted has said that it was a poor decision to include only four female participants.[14]

Andrew

[edit]

Andrew Brackfield was one of three boys chosen from the same pre-preparatory school in the wealthy London district of Kensington (the other two being Charles and John). The three are introduced in Seven Up! singing "Waltzing Matilda" in Latin. At the age of seven, when asked which newspaper he reads, if any, Andrew stated that he reads The Financial Times (although he later revealed he was just repeating what his father had told him when asked the same question). All three could say which prep schools, public schools and universities they planned to attend (Oxford or Cambridge in all cases); two named the specific Oxbridge college they intended to join.

Andrew's academic career culminated in his studying at Trinity College, Cambridge. Andrew subsequently became a solicitor, married and raised a family. He is the only one of the three Kensington boys to have appeared in all the Up films. Both Andrew and his wife, Jane, are most satisfied with how their children have turned out, followed by their relationship.

Charles

[edit]

Charles Furneaux did not get into Oxford, saying in 21 he was glad to have avoided the "prep school–Marlborough–Oxbridge conveyor belt" by going to Durham University instead; however, he later attended Oxford as a post-graduate student. Charles has worked in journalism in varying capacities over the years, including as a producer for the BBC, and in the making of documentary films, including Touching the Void. When contacted to appear in 28, Charles declined; a subsequent phone conversation during which Apted, by his own admission, "went berserk", destroyed the relationship to the degree that Charles has refused to participate in all subsequent films, and even attempted to force Granada to remove archive images of him from the films in which he did not appear.[15]

During an on-stage interview at London's National Film Theatre in December 2005, Apted alleged that Charles had attempted to sue him when he refused to remove Charles from the archive sequences in 49. Apted also commented on the irony that as a documentary maker himself, Charles was the only one who refused to continue.[16][17]

By the time of 63, all references to Charles have been removed save for fleeting glimpses of joint shots with Andrew and John.

John

[edit]

John Brisby KC, who was vocal on politics by 14, attended Oxford and became a barrister.[18] He married Claire, the daughter of Sir Donald Logan, a former ambassador to Bulgaria.[19] Brisby devotes himself to charities related to Bulgaria, and hopes to reclaim family land there that had been nationalised. He is a great-great-grandson of the first Prime Minister of Bulgaria, Todor Burmov.[20]

Brisby said in 35 that he only does the films to give more publicity to his chosen charities. In 56, he criticised Apted's decision to originally portray him as part of the "privileged upper class". He disclosed that his father had died when he was 9 and his mother worked to put him through elite private schools; he had attended Oxford on a scholarship. In 56, he remains a litigator who feels very blessed in almost all aspects of his life. In 63, he refers to the series as a "poison pill" but also says he sees that it has value.

Suzy

[edit]

Suzanne (Suzy) Lusk comes from a wealthy background and was first filmed at an independent London day school. Her parents divorced around the time of 7 Plus Seven. She then dropped out of school at the age of 16, deciding to travel to Paris. By 21, she had formed a strong negative opinion about marriage and being a parent, though this soon changed dramatically. By 28, she was married with two sons, and credited her marriage with bringing her the optimism and happiness that was not evident in the earlier films. Her husband, Rupert Dewey, is a solicitor in Bath and they have three children, two boys and a girl. She became a bereavement counsellor. In 7 Plus Seven, she stated that she thought Apted's project was pointless and silly, a point that she restated in 21. At 49, she believed that she would not participate again, but in 56, she admitted that she felt an obligation to the project regardless of how she feels about it. Suzy did not appear in 63 aside from footage from previous films.[21]

Jackie

[edit]

Jackie Bassett was one of three girls (the others being Lynn and Sue) who were chosen from the same primary school, in a working-class neighbourhood of east London. She eventually went to a comprehensive school and married at age 19. Jackie went through several different jobs, divorced, remarried and moved to Scotland, divorced again and raised her three sons as a single parent. As of 56, she had been receiving disability benefit for 14 years, due to rheumatoid arthritis.[22] Her family remains close and lives near each other in Scotland.

Lynn

[edit]

Lynn Johnson, after attending the same primary school as Jackie and Sue, went on to attend a grammar school. She married at 19, had two daughters, and became a children's librarian at 21. She later became a school librarian and remained in that position until being made redundant due to budget cuts.[23] At 56, she continued to believe her career as a librarian was of great value and it helped define her life. She was a doting grandmother with three grandchildren, and still married to her husband Russ, whom she considered her soulmate. In May 2013, after a short illness, Lynn became the first participant to die. She served as Chair of Governors of St Saviour's primary school in Poplar, London, for over 25 years; after her death, a section of the school library was renamed in her memory.[24]

In 63, after much of the earlier footage, particularly from 56, Russ and her daughters recall her death and discuss its effect on them.[3]

Sue

[edit]

Susan (Sue) Davis attended the same primary school as Jackie and Lynn and following that attended a comprehensive school. Sue married at 24 and had two children before getting divorced. She has been engaged to her current boyfriend, Glenn, for 21 years as of 63. She works as a university administrator for Queen Mary, University of London, despite not having gone to university herself, and is fond of amateur dramatics. By 63, she is looking forward to retiring in the near future.

Tony

[edit]

Tony Walker was chosen from a primary school in the East End of London and was introduced along with his classmate Michelle, who Douglas Keay, the narrator, stated was Tony's "girlfriend". At age 7, Michelle described Tony as a "monkey". He wanted to be a jockey at 7 and was at a stable training as one by 14. By 21, his chance had come and gone after riding in three races before giving it up. He was proud to have competed against Lester Piggott. He then gained "the Knowledge" and made a comfortable life for himself and his family as a London taxi driver. His later dream of becoming an actor has met with modest success; he has had small parts as an extra (almost always playing a cabbie) in several TV programmes since 1986, including The Bill and twice in EastEnders, most recently in 2003. His wife, Debbie, was carrying their third child in 28, and she reveals in 35 that she lost that baby but has since had another; she admits that losing their third child placed a tremendous stress on their relationship. Tony admitted in 35 that being in a monogamous relationship was becoming a strain, and by 42, he had committed adultery, though he and his wife have got past it and are still together. By 42, he had moved to Essex, and by 49, owned two homes, including a holiday home in Spain. In 63, he and his wife had settled in the English countryside.

Paul

[edit]

Paul Kligerman was at an orphanage (called Children's Home) in the East End of London at 7, his parents having divorced and he having been left with his father. Soon after Seven Up!, his father and stepmother moved the family to Australia, where he has remained in the Melbourne area ever since. By 21, he had long hair and a girlfriend to whom he is still married.[3] After leaving school he was employed as a bricklayer and later set up his own business. In 49, he is working for a sign-making company. In 21, 49 and 63, Paul was reunited with Symon, who had attended the same boarding school; portions of their time together are included in all three films. By 56, Paul had started work at a local retirement village with his wife Susan. He does odd jobs and maintenance of the small units and gardens.

Symon

[edit]

Symon Basterfield, given name also spelt Simon in previous films, chosen from the same orphanage (called Children's Home) in the East End of London as Paul, is the only mixed-race participant.[22] He never got to know his black father, and had left the orphanage in the East End of London to live with his white mother by the time of the 7 Plus Seven filming; her depression is alluded to as the cause for his being in the home. As filming for 35 took place, he was going through a divorce from his first wife and mother of his five children, and he elected not to participate. Symon returned for 42 and 49, remarried with one son and one stepdaughter. In 49, he and his wife had become foster parents.[22] By 56, he regretted his lack of formal education, which he felt limited his income over the years. He remains happily married and looks forward to the next chapters of his life. In 63, his relationship with his children from his first marriage is mending and he has 10 grandchildren.

Nick

[edit]

William Nicholas "Nick" Hitchon was born on 22 October 1957 and raised on a small farm in Arncliffe, a tiny village in the Yorkshire Dales. (He was only 6 when Seven Up! was first broadcast, and therefore always remained a year younger than the episodes' nominal age.[25]) He was educated in a one-room school four miles' walk from his home, and later at a boarding school. He went to Oxford University (where, he mentions in 63 Up, Theresa May was a contemporary) and then moved to the United States to work as a nuclear physicist. He married Jackie, another British immigrant, who participated in 28 but was displeased with how her comments were received by viewers, many of whom apparently concluded that the marriage was doomed. She declined to appear in 35 and 42. By 49, the couple had divorced and Nick had remarried, this time to Cryss Brunner, ten years his senior, and at that time taught in Minneapolis. Nick was a professor at the University of Wisconsin–Madison in the Electrical & Computer Engineering Department from 1982 to 2022, serving as department chair from 1999 to 2002.[26][25] He appeared as a guest on NPR's quiz show Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me aired 21 June 2014, and spoke briefly about his participation in the Up series.[27] By 63, he had developed a cancerous mass in his throat and had recently lost his father, leading him to contemplate mortality and the future of his family after his death (he says at one point that if there is a 70 edition of the series, he will not be alive to participate in it).[3] Nick retired from the university in spring 2022 and died on 23 July 2023 at the age of 65.[28][25]

Peter

[edit]

Peter Davies went to the same middle-class Liverpool suburban school as Neil, who, like Peter, wanted to be an astronaut. Peter drifted through university, and by age 28, he was an underpaid and seemingly uninspired school teacher. Peter dropped out of the series after 28, following a tabloid press campaign against him after he criticised the government of Margaret Thatcher in his interview. The director's commentary for 42 revealed that he later divorced, took up study of the law, became a lawyer, remarried, had children and moved back to Liverpool. He returned in 56 to promote his band, the Liverpool-based country-influenced The Good Intentions;[29] the group was still together, although one member had died, in 63.

Neil

[edit]

Neil Hughes, from a Liverpool suburb, turned out to be perhaps the most unpredictable of the group.[30] At seven he was a happy child, funny and full of life and hope, but by 7 Plus Seven, he was nervous and stressed. By 21, he was living in a squat in London, having dropped out of Aberdeen University after one term, and was finding work as he could on building sites. During the interview, he was in an agitated state. At 28, he was still homeless, although now in Scotland; by 35, he was living in a council house in the Shetland Islands, writing and appearing in the local pantomime. By 42, he was living in Bruce's apartment in London and Bruce had become a source of emotional support.[30] He was involved in local council politics, as a Liberal Democrat in the London Borough of Hackney, and had completed a Bachelor of Arts degree from the Open University.[30] He was first elected to Wick ward on Hackney London Borough Council in 1996, and resigned his seat in 2000.[31][32]

By 49, he was a district councillor in the Eden district of Cumbria.[33] He was first elected for Shap on Eden District in 2003.[34] He was a candidate for Eden Lakes on Cumbria County Council in 2005 and 2009, coming second to the Conservative candidate on both occasions.[35] In 2013, following new division boundaries, Neil was elected to Eden Lakes, and did not stand again for Shap. He was re-elected to Eden Lakes in 2017.[36][37]

He stood as the Liberal Democrat candidate for Stockton North in the 2005 general election and for Carlisle in the 2010 general election, finishing third on both occasions.[38][39] Neil stood for Penrith and the Border—which covers the same area he represents as a councillor—at the 2015 and 2017 general elections. In 2015, he came fourth, whilst in 2017, he came third. At the 2019 general election, Hughes contested the Labour–Conservative marginal seat of Workington in Cumbria. Finishing fourth, he increased the party's vote share, but lost his deposit.

By 63, Neil has married; however, he and his wife have separated due to unspecified difficulties. He is a lay Baptist preacher, district councillor and also has a home in France.[30]

Bruce

[edit]

Bruce Balden, as a child, was concerned with poverty and racial discrimination and wanted to become a missionary. He was attending a private boarding school. At the age of seven, he said that his greatest desire was to see his father, a soldier in Southern Rhodesia, and he seemed brave though a little abandoned. In 21, Bruce was studying mathematics at Oxford University. After graduation, he worked in an insurance company for a short term. He then began to teach maths at a school in the East End of London. He said that he enjoyed being a part of people's advancement. In 35, he was taking a sabbatical leave and teaching maths and English in Sylhet, Bangladesh, as well as helping teachers design courses. He subsequently returned to London and continued teaching in the East End. Just before 42, he married a fellow teacher: Apted broke the seven-year structure to film the wedding, which was also attended by Neil. Eventually becoming worn down by teaching in the East End, Bruce got a teaching position at St Albans School, Hertfordshire, a prestigious public school. Between 42 and 49, he had two sons. In 56, he admitted he still had a hard time expressing his innermost feelings, in particular to his wife, but was a happily devoted father and husband. Still teaching at St Albans School with his wife, he had no regrets about the development of his career.[22]

Participation record

[edit]
Age
(Year)
7
(1964)
14
(1970)
21
(1977)
28
(1984)
35
(1991)
42
(1998)
49
(2005)
56
(2012)
63
(2019)
1 Andrew Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
2 Charles Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No
3 John Yes Yes Yes No Yes No Yes Yes Yes
4 Suzy Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
5 Jackie Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
6 Lynn Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes [a]
7 Sue Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
8 Tony Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
9 Paul Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
10 Symon Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes
11 Nick Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
12 Peter Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes
13 Neil Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
14 Bruce Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
  1. ^ Lynn died in May 2013. A segment on Lynn being discussed by her husband and her daughters was included on 63.[24]

Motifs

[edit]

A number of themes have appeared repeatedly over the course of the series. Questions about religion, family, class, happiness and psychological state dominate many of the interviews, as well as inquiries about the worries and concerns subjects have for their future.[40] In addition, questions often take a personal tone, with Apted noting that viewers often respond to his questioning of Neil's sanity or his perception of Tony's success in life as being too personal, but that he has been able to do this because of the friendship he has developed with the subjects over the course of their lives.[41][full citation needed]

Critical responses, including awards

[edit]

The series has received high praise over the years. Roger Ebert said that it is "an inspired, even noble, use of the film medium", that the films "penetrate to the central mystery of life", and that the series is among his top ten films of all time.[40] Michael Apted won an Institutional Peabody Award in 2012 for his work on the Up series.[42] In a list of the 100 Greatest British Television Programmes drawn up by the British Film Institute in 2000, voted for by industry professionals, 28 Up placed 26th.[43]

The Up series has been criticised by both ethnographers and the subjects themselves for its editing style. Mitchell Duneier has pointed out that Apted has the ability to assert causal relationships between a character's past and present that might not actually exist.[44] Apted has acknowledged this fact, pointing out that in 21 Up he believed Tony would soon be in prison, so he filmed him around dangerous areas for use in later films.[45] Apted also portrayed the troubled marriage of Nick earlier in the film, although his time frame for anticipating their divorce was premature. Apted has stated in interviews that his "tendency to play God" with the interviews was "foolishness and wrong."[41] In 21 Up, the women participants were offended that all the questions concerned domestic affairs, marriage and children, rather than politics.[46] A New Yorker article by Rebecca Mead noted "[Apted] can be unbearably patronizing toward his subjects, particularly the working-class women, while he sets his more affluent participants up to look ludicrous." However, she did note that "To his credit, Apted has shown participants arguing back against the show's premise and against his own prejudices. One of the most exhilarating moments in the series occurs in '49 Up', when Jackie [...] rounds on Apted, castigating him for his decades of underestimating her. Apted's implied humility is ultimately, if belatedly, Jackie's vindication."[47]

Influence on participants

[edit]

Over the course of the project the programme has in varying degrees had a direct effect on the lives of its participants. The series participants often speak of the series having become popular enough that they were recognised in public. For instance, in 56 Up, Tony related an anecdote about giving a ride to Buzz Aldrin, and being surprised when a passerby asks him, not Aldrin, for an autograph.

The participants' opinions regarding being involved in the series are often mentioned, and varied greatly among the participants. John refers to the programme as a poison pill that he is subjected to every seven years, while Paul's wife credits the series for keeping their marriage together. Michael Apted has commented that one of the big surprises between filming 42 Up and 49 Up was the impact of reality television—i.e., that the subjects wanted to talk about their contribution to the series in the light of this genre.[citation needed]

In addition, there have been instances of the interactions of participants being engineered by the programme's producers. For instance, Paul and Nick were flown back to England at Granada's expense for the filming of 35 Up and 42 Up respectively. In addition, Paul was flown back again for 49 Up and visited Symon; Symon and his wife were in turn flown to Australia to visit Paul in 63 Up. In addition, Bruce was affected by Neil's plight and offered him temporary shelter in his home shortly before 42 Up, allowing Neil time to get settled in London; despite Neil's eccentricities during his two-month stay, they clearly remained friends, with Neil later giving a reading at Bruce's wedding. In 56 Up, Suzy and Nick are interviewed together, having become friends due to their shared rural upbringing.

Cultural and broader influences

[edit]

The original hypothesis of Seven Up! was that class structure is so strong in the UK that a person's life path would be set at birth. The producer of the original programme had at one point thought to line the children up on the street, have three of them step forward and narrate "of these twenty children, only three will be successful" (an idea which was not used). The idea of class immobility held up in most, but not all, cases as the series has progressed. The children from the working classes have by and large remained in those circles, though Tony seems to have become more middle class. Apted has said that one of his regrets is that they did not take feminism into account, and consequently had fewer girls in their study and did not select them on the basis of any possible careers they might choose.

Although it began as a political documentary, the series has become a film of human nature and existentialism. In the director's commentary for 42 Up, Apted comments that he did not realise the series had changed tone from political to personal until 21 Up, when he showed the film to American friends who encouraged him to submit it (successfully) to American film festivals. Apted also comments that this realisation was a relief to him and allowed the films to breathe a little more.

The series has also been satirised. The Simpsons' 2007 episode "Springfield Up" is narrated by an Apted-like filmmaker who depicts the past and current lives of a group of Springfield residents he has revisited every eight years. The "37 Up" segment of Tracey Ullman: A Class Act, first aired in 1992, parodies the series. Harry Enfield parodied the series in a spoof titled "2 Up" with his characters Tim Nice-but-Dim and Wayne Slob. The Australian comedy TV series The Late Show satirised the series with a version in which participants were interviewed every seven minutes.[48]

Similar documentaries

[edit]
  • Multinational
    • I Am Eleven (2012) by Geneviève Bailey, features participants from Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, and North America.
  • Australia
  • Belgium
    • Jambers, 1980–1990. Two-part documentary by TV journalist Paul Jambers on Flemish public TV channel about secondary school students in Kapellen, near Antwerp.
  • Canada
    • Avoir 16 ans (Being 16 years old) (1992) and Avoir 32 ans (Being 32 years old) (2010), directed by Robbie Hart and Luc Côté of National Film Board of Canada.
    • Du premier au dernier baiser (From the first to the last kiss) (2-part program, 2003), by reporter Hélène Courchesne and director Nicole Tremblay of Société Radio-Canada.
    • Talk 16 (1991) and Talk 19 (1993), directed and written by Janis Lundman and Adrienne Mitchell of Back Alley Film Productions.
  • Czech Republic – by Helena Třeštíková.
    • René, a single-episode portrait of a man over 20 years, starting in the late 1980s. René at IMDb
  • Denmark
    • Årgang 0 (Generation 0) by TV2 (2000) – The show follows the children, born in the year 2000, from birth.
  • France
  • Germany
    • Die Kinder von Golzow (The Children of Golzow) by Winfried Junge, set in former East Germany as well as in unified Germany after 1990 (1961–2006)
    • Berlin – Ecke Bundesplatz (Berlin – On the Corner of Federation Square) (1985) by Detlef Gumm and Hans-Georg Ullrich. The documentary follows individuals, families or groups of related people in separate episodes of around one hour in length each. The sequel was broadcast in four seasons on 3sat.
      • 1999: Der Prominenten-Anwalt (The Society Lawyer), Bäckermeister im Kiez (Neighborhood Baker), Wilmersdorfer Witwen (Widows in Wilmersdorf), Die nächste Generation (The Next Generation), Die Alleinerziehende (The Single Mother), Der Aussteiger (The Dropout)
      • 2001: Grenzgänger (Tightrope-walkers), Solisten (Nonconformists)
      • 2004: Kinder! Kinder! (Children! Children!), Alte Freunde (Old Friends), Vereinigungen (Associations), Recht und Ordnung (Law and Order)
      • 2009: Mütter und Töchter (Mothers and Daughters), Die Aussteiger (The Off-beats), Schön ist die Jugend... (Youth is Beautiful...), Die Köpcke-Bande (The Köpcke Gang), Der Yilmaz-Clan (The Yilmaz Clan)
  • Italy
    • Intervista a mia madre (Interview to my mother) (2000) and Le cose belle (The beautiful things) (2014) by Agostino Ferrente and Giovanni Piperno: the documentaries show two periods in the life of a group of teenagers living in Naples.
  • Japan
    • Kimiko Fukuda made a series following thirteen children living in different parts of Japan:
      • Sekai no 7 sai Nippon (World 7 years in Japan,7 Up Japan)(1992)
      • 14 sai ni narimashita Kodomotachi 7nen gotono seicho kiroku (I turned 14 Growth records every 7 years,14 Up Japan)(1999)
      • 7nen goto no seicho kiroku 21sai Kazoku soshite watashi (Growth records every 7 years 21 Family and me, 21 Up Japan) (2006)
      • 7nen goto no seicho kiroku 28sai ni narimashista(Growth records every 7 years I turned 28 ,28 Up Japan) (2013)
      • 7nen goto no seicho kiroku 35sai ni narimashista(Growth records every 7 years I turned 35 ,35 Up Japan) (2020)
    • Joe, Tomorrow (2015), by Junji Sakamoto, follows the life of boxer Joichiro Tatsuyoshi.
  • Latvia
    • Ivars Seleckis film series following the lives of five different children.
  • The Netherlands
    • Bijna volwassen (Almost Grown-up) (1982) – follows a group of 17–18-year-olds.
    • Bijna 30 (Almost 30) (1994)
    • Bijna 40 (Almost 40) (2005)
  • South Africa – by Angus Gibson
  • Spain
    • Generació D by TV3 (1989–2019, ongoing). About a group of children from Catalonia.
  • Sweden
    • Jordbrosviten by Rainer Hartleb. About a group of children from Jordbro, a suburb of Stockholm.[49]
      • Från en barndomsvärld (From a Childhood World) (1973)
      • Barnen från Jordbro (Children from Jordbro) (1982)
      • Tillbaka till Jordbro (Jordbro Revisited) (1988)
      • Det var en gång... en liten flicka (Once Upon a Time... there was a Little Girl) (1992)
      • En pizza i Jordbro (A Pizza in Jordbro) (1994)
      • Nya barn i Jordbro (New Children in Jordbro) (2001)
      • Alla mår bra (All are doing Well) (2006)
    • Student 92 by Gunilla Nilars. About a group of high school graduates of '92, class of E3b from Gångsätra gymnasium in Lidingö, interviewed every five years for a total of twenty years.[50]
      • Student 92...men sen då? (High school graduate of '92...and then what?) (1997)
      • Student 92, tio år senare (High school graduate of '92, ten years later) (2002)
      • Student 92, femton år senare (High school graduate of '92, fifteen years later) (2007)
      • Student 92, tjugo år senare (High school graduate of '92, twenty years later) (2012)
  • USSR/Russia/Former Soviet republics – by Sergei Miroshnichenko and Jemma Jupp.
  • United Kingdom
    • A new version of the Up series titled Up New Generation began with 7Up 2000 (2000, Julian Farino) and continued with 14 Up 2000 in 2007, 21 Up: New Generation in 2014 and 28 Up: Millennium Generation in 2021.
    • Child of Our Time (2000–2020), a BBC/The Open University documentary series following the lives of 25 children who were born around the turn of the millennium
    • Born to be Different, a Channel 4 documentary series which follows six children who were born with a disability
  • United States

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
The Up series is a British longitudinal series that began with Seven Up! in 1964, profiling the lives and attitudes of fourteen children aged seven from varied socioeconomic backgrounds across the , and revisiting most of them every seven years thereafter to document their development into adulthood. Originally conceived as a one-off for ITV's strand, inspired by the Jesuit maxim "Give me the child until he is seven and I will show you the man," the project evolved under director —who started as a researcher on the initial installment—into a recurring examination of themes like persistence, upward mobility, and personal agency. The series includes eight subsequent films: 7 Plus Seven (1970), 21 Up (1977), 28 Up (1984), 35 Up (1991), 42 Up (1998), 49 Up (2005), 56 Up (2012), and 63 Up (2019), spanning over five decades and capturing the subjects' trajectories amid Britain's evolving social landscape. Apted's death in 2021 halted further planned updates, though some participants have expressed interest in continuing without him, highlighting the series' intimate yet intrusive filming process that elicited both candor and resentment from subjects over time. Renowned for pioneering long-term observational documentary techniques, the Up series has been voted the most influential British television program of the past 50 years and praised as a profound sociological experiment revealing the enduring impact of early-life circumstances on outcomes. Its global influence extends to analogous projects tracking cohorts over time, underscoring empirical patterns of limited intergenerational mobility despite individual aspirations.

Concept and Origins

Inspirations and Core Hypothesis

The Up series originated from the 1964 Granada Television program Seven Up!, broadcast as part of the investigative strand , with the core hypothesis drawn from the Jesuit maxim attributed to : "Give me the child until he is seven and I will show you the man." This principle posited that a child's , early environment, and experiences by age seven would predominantly shape their adult character, opportunities, and life trajectory, reflecting the perceived rigidity of Britain's stratified society at the time. The initial selected participants from diverse socioeconomic strata—ranging from aristocratic to working-class—to empirically test this deterministic view through longitudinal observation, aiming to document whether early influences inexorably predetermined outcomes or if other factors could intervene. Director , who served as a researcher on the original episode and helmed subsequent installments, framed the project as a first-principles examination of class-based predetermination, challenging viewers to assess whether societal structures locked individuals into fixed paths from childhood. The hypothesis emphasized nurture's dominance over nature in a class-bound context, critiquing the 's postwar social immobility by predicting that upper-class children would ascend to privilege while lower-class ones remained constrained, with minimal deviation expected. However, the series' design allowed for potential falsification through repeated check-ins every seven years, enabling observation of how personal agency, unforeseen events, and merit-based choices might interact with or override , thus incorporating a causal framework beyond strict predestination. This empirical approach prioritized verifiable data from real-life trajectories over theoretical assertions, positioning the Up films as a critique of overly rigid class narratives while remaining open to evidence that individual resilience and decisions could mitigate inherited disadvantages. Apted later reflected that the maxim served as a provocative starting point rather than an unassailable truth, with the series ultimately revealing nuances in how early conditions influence but do not wholly dictate adult fulfillment.

Selection of Original Participants

In 1964, the production team for Seven Up!, directed by Paul Almond with Michael Apted serving as a researcher and assistant, selected 14 children aged seven to represent a cross-section of British socio-economic backgrounds, emphasizing class divisions as a lens for examining early influences on life trajectories. The group comprised 10 boys and 4 girls, drawn primarily from institutions and locales in and around London, with selections made from private preparatory schools, middle-class grammar schools, and working-class neighborhoods to capture observable variance in upbringing without predetermined quotas for ethnicity or other traits. All participants were white British, mirroring the predominant demographics of mid-1960s Britain where non-European immigration, though increasing, had not yet significantly diversified child populations in the sampled urban and educational settings. Selections prioritized empirical representation of class-based opportunities and environments over balanced , a choice Apted later critiqued as impulsive and limiting in retrospect. Upper-class children included Charles Furneaux, from an affluent preparatory school, and Andrew Brackfield, attending an elite private institution where early education emphasized classical traditions. Working-class examples comprised Tony Walker, sourced from a in London's East End with a background in manual labor, and Symon Basterfield, from a Liverpool-area working-class tied to dock work, highlighting contrasts in housing, aspirations, and parental occupations. Middle-class participants, such as those from suburban grammar schools, filled the spectrum to test assumptions of relative mobility without engineering outcomes. This relied on direct observation and institutional access rather than random sampling, aiming to juxtapose children whose responses and settings would empirically demonstrate class-conditioned worldviews at age seven. No evidence indicates affirmative selection for ethnic minorities, aligning with the era's limited urban diversity in the targeted pools and the filmmakers' focus on intra-British class realism over broader .

Production of the Initial Film (Seven Up!)

Seven Up!, the inaugural installment of the Up series, was directed by Paul Almond and produced as a 40-minute television special for Granada Television's World in Action current affairs strand. The episode premiered on ITV via Granada on May 5, 1964, featuring direct interviews with 14 seven-year-old children selected to illustrate socioeconomic diversity across British society. Interviewer Douglas Keay posed questions about the children's future expectations, family lives, play activities, and perceptions of social class, capturing their unfiltered responses in everyday contexts such as homes, schools, and playgrounds. The production emphasized observational , eschewing scripted narratives or heavy editorializing in favor of straightforward, vérité-style footage that prioritized empirical glimpses into the subjects' nascent worldviews. For instance, East End working-class participant Tony Walker articulated his ambition to become a , reflecting the program's focus on personal aspirations amid class-determined opportunities. This approach extended to depicting the children in unposed activities, like Suzy thinking aloud about Kensington's exclusivity or and John discussing preparatory schooling, to underscore innate attitudes without artificial prompting. Logistically modest, the filming relied on a compact —including experienced David Samuelson for and Lewis Lindsay for —conducted over brief sessions without extensive resources, aligning with the era's television production norms for investigative specials. Almond's direction set a foundational of longitudinal tracking, explicitly framing the piece to revisit the participants at age 14 (and hypothetically into adulthood) as a means to test presumptions about predestined life trajectories, though initially conceived as a standalone rather than an ongoing commitment. This raw-data emphasis, free from dramaturgical embellishment, established the series' commitment to causal observation over interpretive overlay.

Series Production and Evolution

Subsequent Installments and Premiere Dates

The Up series continued with installments revisiting the original participants every seven years, capturing their reflections on , careers, , and personal fulfillment through extended interviews interwoven with archival footage. These films maintained the core methodological consistency of the inaugural Seven Up!, adhering to the Jesuit maxim "Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you ," while allowing for evolving personal narratives. Premiere broadcasts occurred primarily on ITV via Granada Television, with later entries expanding to multi-part formats and longer runtimes to accommodate deeper discussions, progressing from approximately 50 minutes in the early sequels to over two hours by the most recent. Minor deviations from exact septennial intervals occurred, such as the gap between 21 Up (1977) and 28 Up (1985), influenced by production scheduling amid economic challenges in the UK during the .
InstallmentPremiere DateBroadcasterRuntime (approx.)Participants' Age
7 Plus SevenDecember 15, 1970ITV52 minutes14
21 UpMay 9, 1977ITV56 minutes21
28 UpNovember 30, 1984ITV136 minutes28
35 UpMay 22, 1991ITV123 minutes35
42 UpJuly 21, 1998139 minutes42
49 UpSeptember 14, 2005ITV150 minutes49
56 UpMay 14–28, 2012 (3 parts)ITV144 minutes56
63 UpJune 4–18, 2019 (3 parts)ITV150 minutes63
International theatrical and streaming releases followed UK premieres, often in edited or compiled forms, enabling global academic and public engagement with the series' longitudinal data on and life trajectories.

Directorial and Crew Changes

Michael Apted, a 22-year-old researcher on the original Seven Up! in 1964 directed by Paul Almond, took over as director starting with 7 Plus Seven in 1970 and helmed every installment through 63 Up in 2019, preserving a consistent interview style rooted in Jesuit maxim "Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man" while adapting to participants' evolving lives. Apted's middle-class upbringing, including a Cambridge education, informed his early approach, which some analyses describe as initially stereotyping subjects by class—prompting working-class participants like Tony to challenge perceived condescension—though he later reflected on this as stemming from a liberal optimism about social mobility rather than overt prejudice. Apted died on January 7, 2021, at age 79 in Los Angeles. Key crew members provided stability across decades, notably cinematographer George Jesse Turner, who joined for 21 Up in 1977 and upheld the series' aesthetic—minimal intervention, handheld shots emphasizing authenticity—earning a BAFTA in 1999 for sustained contribution; sound recordist Nick Steer and editor Kim Horton also maintained continuity from later films. This personnel consistency minimized disruptions to methodology, focusing interviews on life reflections without introducing new stylistic experiments under Apted's leadership. After Apted's death, Granada Television (now under ) announced plans to produce 70 Up for 2026 broadcast, adhering to the established seven-year cycle and core format, but no replacement director has been specified, raising questions among participants about preserving the intimate rapport Apted built; production oversight remains with the original commissioning entity to avoid altering the series' longitudinal integrity.

Technical and Methodological Adaptations Over Time

The inaugural film, Seven Up! (1964), employed black-and-white 16mm with synchronized sound recording via portable equipment, reflecting the technical constraints of mid-1960s British production. This format prioritized portability for on-location interviews with children across diverse social settings, yielding raw, unpolished visuals that captured unmediated responses but limited later archival interoperability. Subsequent installments shifted to color film starting with 21 Up (1977), enhancing chromatic detail for environmental and expressive cues, which facilitated more nuanced longitudinal visual analysis of participants' life contexts. By 49 Up (2005), the series adopted acquisition, supplanting prior 16mm and 35mm workflows, which streamlined editing, reduced costs, and improved resolution for integrating historical clips. These upgrades augmented by enabling sharper depictions of aging and socioeconomic indicators, aiding empirical assessments of continuity in trajectories; however, format transitions sparked methodological critiques regarding visual homogeneity, as disparate media qualities could subtly influence viewer interpretations of temporal and causal progressions. Methodologically, interview protocols evolved from concise, Jesuit-inspired queries in the original to extended sessions in later films, accommodating accumulated life data while preserving repetition of foundational questions on ambition, , and societal roles to quantify predictive fidelity and isolate causal factors like class persistence. Beginning with 21 Up, protocols incorporated brief segments with spouses and offspring, broadening evidential scope to familial influences without diluting the core hypothesis, thereby enriching causal inferences on versus personal agency. For non-participating subjects, such as early dropout Charles post-21 Up, reliance on prior archival material upheld longitudinal integrity, favoring evidentiary completeness over speculative filler.

Post-Michael Apted Developments

Michael Apted, who directed the series from 7 Plus Seven (1970) onward, died on January 7, 2021, at age 79, raising immediate questions about the future of the project he had helmed for over five decades. Participants expressed mixed sentiments, with some viewing continuation without Apted as challenging due to his unique rapport and consistent interviewing style, while others saw potential for fresh perspectives. The absence of Apted, combined with the advancing age of subjects—many now in their late 60s by 2021—introduced logistical hurdles, including health declines; notably, participant Nicholas Hitchon died of cancer in July 2023 at age 65, reducing the active cohort. Despite these uncertainties, ITV confirmed in July 2025 that production on 70 Up had commenced, with the tenth installment slated for broadcast in 2026, adhering to the septennial schedule and focusing on the remaining participants now aged 70. Filming relies on the willingness of surviving subjects, bound loosely by original participation agreements from , though no new director has been publicly named, suggesting a potential shift toward producer-led or collaborative oversight by . Logistical challenges persist, including mobility and cognitive health issues among septuagenarians, as well as ethical considerations for documenting end-of-life trajectories without Apted's established trust. The 70 Up edition offers empirical continuity to the series' core —that early socioeconomic conditions largely predict life outcomes—by capturing an additional decade of data unfiltered by Apted's interpretive lens, potentially allowing for unbiased reassessment of long-term patterns in class mobility, personal agency, and resilience. This installment could validate or refine the observable trends from prior , such as limited upward mobility for working-class participants and relative stability for upper-class ones, based on unaltered participant self-reports and archival comparisons. However, reduced participation—exacerbated by deaths and opt-outs—may limit sample size, underscoring the series' vulnerability to attrition as a in longitudinal observation.

Participant Profiles

Upper-Class Participants

The upper-class participants in the Up series—John Brisby, Andrew Brackfield, and Charles Furneaux—were selected from St. Aubyn's Prep School, reflecting early access to elite private education typical of Britain's stratified system. All three demonstrated high academic attainment, attending or universities, which facilitated entry into professional fields. Their outcomes empirically underscore the enduring benefits of inherited privilege in securing educational and career stability, with deviations primarily attributable to personal decisions rather than systemic barriers. John Brisby, vocal about political ambitions from age 14, studied law at and qualified as a , eventually rising to (KC) with a practice in commercial and chancery litigation. He married Claire Logan, daughter of Sir Donald Logan, and maintained a conventional upper-middle-class trajectory, including family life in , with no major public disruptions to his professional stability. His career exemplifies how preparatory schooling and networks translate into sustained legal success, yielding financial security and social continuity. Andrew Brackfield pursued law at , qualifying as a solicitor and establishing a partnership in a firm focused on commercial work. By middle age, he had married, raised two children, and achieved , including property investments and international relocations such as to New York. Brackfield's path highlights the reliability of class-derived opportunities in fostering predictable professional advancement, tempered by modest personal reflections on work-life balance rather than upheaval. Charles Furneaux, who initially aspired to , attended a top public school before university and entered television production, directing documentaries for the . He withdrew permanently after 21 Up (1977), at age 21, citing discomfort with the series' portrayal of him as a symbol of class privilege and a strained relationship with director . This choice represented an assertion of individual agency, allowing him to forge a career outside the series' constraints, including work on historical films, while avoiding further public scrutiny—demonstrating that even within privileged cohorts, personal rebellion can redirect trajectories without derailing overall socioeconomic stability.

Middle-Class Participants

Neil Hughes, originating from a middle-class in Liverpool's suburbs, exhibited early charm and engagement at age 7 but showed anxiety by 14 and dropped out of by 21. His trajectory included prolonged challenges and unstable housing into middle age, including periods of isolation in , yet he later achieved stability through persistent self-directed efforts, such as community involvement and political engagement, underscoring individual resilience against deterministic class expectations. Peter Davies, from a solicitor's family in , trained as a teacher and participated until 28 Up, when he exited following backlash from a folk song criticizing , which sparked controversy in conservative media. He subsequently transitioned to work and emigrated abroad before rejoining the series at 56 Up, demonstrating adaptability amid professional and public pressures rather than rigid adherence to middle-class stability. Bruce Balden, raised in a family that sent him to boarding school, pursued mathematics and became a teacher dedicated to inner-city London comprehensives, prioritizing educational equity over higher-status paths. He married in his 40s, started a family later in life, and selected progressive schooling for his children, reflecting deliberate choices for personal fulfillment and social contribution that evolved beyond early institutional influences.

Working-Class Participants

Tony Walker, selected from a working-class East End family, aspired at age seven to become a , a goal reflecting his early ambition despite limited formal education. He briefly trained and raced as a jockey in his teens but transitioned to driving a taxi after mastering "The Knowledge," a rigorous examination requiring of thousands of streets and landmarks, which he completed through persistent self-study. By his 20s, Walker owned his cab and built financial stability through consistent work, marrying and raising two daughters while maintaining an optimistic outlook on over systemic advantages. His trajectory underscores how individual determination in skill acquisition and steady employment enabled upward mobility, as he achieved homeownership and family security without inherited wealth or elite schooling. Symon Basterfield, raised in a children's home after his parents' separation and never knowing his , faced early hardships including his mother's depression and early , yet persevered to establish a stable career as a operator by adulthood. After a in his 20s, Basterfield remarried in 1998, forming a supportive that motivated his involvement in fostering children, including his biological son and stepdaughter, demonstrating resilience through personal choices in relationships and community roles. By age 56, he expressed regret over youthful decisions but affirmed satisfaction in his working-class vocation and family life, attributing stability to proactive efforts in overcoming orphanhood and emotional challenges rather than external interventions. Paul Kligerman, also from the same children's home as Basterfield due to his parents' , emigrated to shortly after age seven to join , a relocation driven by his father's initiative for better opportunities amid British constraints. There, Kligerman trained as a and established a self-employed building business in , marrying and fathering children while achieving modest prosperity through trade skills honed via apprenticeships and hard labor. His path illustrates how decisive geographic and vocational choices, independent of British class structures, fostered self-sufficiency, as he reflected on the move enabling a grounded, family-oriented life unburdened by early institutionalization.

Notable Dropouts and Limited Participation

Charles Furneaux, selected as an upper-class participant, withdrew from the series after the 21 Up installment aired in 1977, opting out of all subsequent films despite initial involvement from age seven. His decision left a permanent gap in the upper-class cohort, with filmmakers relying on archival footage from earlier episodes to represent his trajectory in later installments, though this approach limited fresh insights into his career as a . Suzanne "Suzy" Lusk, another upper-class subject, expressed ongoing discomfort with the filming process, describing persistent and reluctance that intensified over time. She participated in installments through 56 Up in 2012 but refused involvement in 63 Up released in 2019, citing a desire to end her commitment despite earlier feelings of obligation. This partial withdrawal reduced contemporary data on her life as a bereavement counselor and mother, prompting use of prior interviews and raising questions about the series' ability to capture evolving upper-class experiences without her input. Peter Davies, a working-class participant from , exited after 28 Up in 1985 following tabloid criticism for his outspoken views on the education system under Thatcher's , which portrayed him negatively and prompted his departure to avoid further scrutiny. He rejoined briefly for 56 Up in 2012 after a 28-year absence but maintained limited engagement thereafter, contributing to gaps in working-class narratives and reliance on historical material that may underrepresent mid-life challenges like his teaching career. While Lynn Johnson, Jackie Bassett, and Sue Davis from the working-class group remained consistent participants across most films, they frequently voiced frustrations over the personal burdens of repeated public exposure, including intrusions into family life and the emotional toll of revisiting past statements. Their candor highlighted how sustained involvement, even without dropout, imposed ongoing costs, potentially skewing the series' longitudinal data by favoring those tolerant of scrutiny over full empirical breadth. These absences and hesitations collectively compromised the project's completeness, as filmmakers filled voids with archives, which critics argue distorts causal inferences about life outcomes by omitting real-time updates from key demographics.

Themes and Sociological Analysis

Class Predictability and Social Mobility Outcomes

In the Up series, initial at age seven exhibited strong predictive power for adult socioeconomic outcomes, with most participants adhering closely to trajectories aligned with their origins by the 63 Up installment in 2019. Upper-class subjects such as John Brisby and Andrew Brackfield sustained elite positions through careers in and , reflecting institutional advantages like private education and family networks. Similarly, the majority of working-class participants, including Jackie Bassett and Lynn Johnson, remained in lower-strata roles involving manual labor, retail, or administrative work, often facing health and economic challenges that reinforced class stasis. Analyses of the series confirm that was rare, with childhood circumstances largely dictating adult attainment for the group. Quantifiable deviations were limited, underscoring environmental bounds on outcomes. Tony Walker, originating from a working-class East End family, achieved modest upward mobility by age 63 through persistent , evolving from a failed in the to owning a small fleet of and supplementing income via acting gigs. Other upward shifts included Nicholas Hitchon, a rural working-class who leveraged academic aptitude to become a professor in the United States by the 1990s. Emigration facilitated relative gains for Paul Kiraly, who relocated to in the and secured steady employment in and driving, and Symon Basterfield, who pursued skilled work after disrupted his roots. Downward mobility proved exceptional and transient, as in the case of Hughes, selected from a comfortable suburban middle-class background with aspirations of , who by the 28 Up film in 1991 had descended into , , and odd jobs like grouse-beating amid struggles, before partial recovery as a low-paid Liberal Democrat in the Scottish by 2019. These patterns—stability for most, bounded exceptions via targeted skills or —indicate that while originating class circumscribes opportunities through and capital access, verifiable instances of ascent via competence challenge absolute , aligning with broader British showing intergenerational persistence exceeding 70% in occupational class.

Individual Agency Versus Environmental Determinism

The Up series' foundational premise, drawn from the Jesuit maxim that a child's character at age seven predicts their adult life, posits environmental and class factors as primary determinants of outcomes, yet longitudinal evidence from participants' trajectories reveals significant instances of individual agency overriding early predictions. For example, Neil Hughes, selected at age seven for his upper-middle-class background and aspirations to become a missionary or astronaut, experienced severe mental health breakdowns, including homelessness and unemployment by his late 20s and 30s, contrary to expectations of privilege ensuring stability. However, through personal perseverance—seeking therapy, relocating to rural Scotland, and engaging in local politics—Neil recovered sufficiently to serve as a Liberal Democrat district councillor by his 40s and maintain public office into later installments, demonstrating how deliberate choices and resilience mitigated environmental stressors like isolation and illness. Similarly, working-class participant Tony Walker exemplifies agency through calculated risks that defied deterministic forecasts of perpetual manual labor. Initially a whose career stalled due to limited opportunities, Tony pivoted to taxi driving and later ventured into entrepreneurial pursuits, including a business that provided financial security despite economic volatility in post-industrial Britain. This adaptability, rooted in proactive rather than passive acceptance of class constraints, allowed him to achieve middle-class stability, including homeownership and family life, underscoring how personal initiative can alter trajectories beyond socioeconomic origins. Critics of the series' class-centric lens argue it overemphasizes structural while downplaying intrinsic factors such as and family formation, as seen in Symon Basterfield's case. From a disadvantaged background with absent parental figures, Symon pursued steady employment in manual trades, prioritizing and fatherhood over material ambition, which fostered long-term emotional and despite lacking early advantages. His emphasis on relational commitments and consistent labor—eschewing high-risk pursuits—contrasts with predictions of inevitable , highlighting how volitional choices in personal conduct contribute to outcomes more than isolated environmental inputs. While some analyses, often from academic or left-leaning perspectives, stress persistent class barriers limiting mobility (e.g., limited upward shifts for most working-class subjects), empirical patterns in the series refute absolute determinism: no participant descended into destitution as early indicators might suggest, with even lower-class individuals like Paul and Symon attaining modest security through adaptive behaviors. This resilience aligns with causal evidence favoring agency, where interventions like education, relocation, or relational stability—chosen by individuals—intervene in environmental chains, rather than fatalistic predestination.

Recurring Motifs in Interviews and Life Trajectories

A consistent pattern across interviews is the enduring emphasis on as a core value, particularly evident in Tony Walker's trajectory, where he repeatedly affirms loyalty to his wife of over 50 years, children, and grandchildren, crediting them for emotional resilience amid professional disappointments like failed aspirations and cab driving challenges. Multiple participants articulate concerns over Britain's societal shifts, with Tony Walker critiquing uncontrolled and its impact on working-class communities, while in 63 Up (2019), several reflect on as emblematic of national fragmentation and economic uncertainty, contrasting their early optimism with later disillusionment. Male subjects often revisit career trajectories with hindsight, as Andrew Brackfield expresses regret for prioritizing professional ascent over family time in his youth, acknowledging in 56 Up (2012) that such ambitions obscured personal costs until midlife. Neil Hughes similarly traces unfulfilled ambitions—from astronaut dreams to political setbacks—evolving into pragmatic acceptance by 63 Up, where he contemplates mortality alongside stalled aspirations. Female participants highlight marital and maternal strains, with Jackie Bassett discussing in later films the toll of early marriage, multiple divorces, and health-compromised motherhood, framing these as deviations from anticipated stability. Sue Davis, in 63 Up, balances reflections on divorce and child-rearing with fulfillment in family bonds, underscoring adaptive realism over initial expectations. Over successive installments, responses evolve from 7-year-olds' unbridled hopes—rooted in 1964's affluent Britain—to 63 Up's meditations on aging, health declines (e.g., Lynn Johnson’s 2013 passing from ), and finite time, with participants like Suzy Lusk voicing discomfort with early exposures that amplified life's unpredictability. This progression underscores empirical divergences from childhood projections, tempered by accumulated experience rather than deterministic outcomes.

Critical Reception and Awards

Acclaim and Scholarly Praise

The Up series has garnered extensive acclaim for its pioneering longitudinal format, which captures unscripted interviews at seven-year intervals to reveal evolving life trajectories and underlying causal influences on . Critics and filmmakers have lauded its commitment to raw, observational over dramatized scripting, enabling viewers to discern patterns in how early socioeconomic conditions shape long-term outcomes such as career stability and family dynamics. In scholarly contexts, the series is frequently cited for illuminating the persistence of class-based predictability and limited in Britain, providing a rare of individual life courses that challenges overly optimistic narratives of upward progression. Sociologists have drawn on its footage to analyze how interacts with personal agency, with the recognizing its contributions to understanding following the 2005 installment, 49 Up. Academic analyses, including those in peer-reviewed journals, highlight its value as an ethnographic tool for connecting personal narratives to broader sociological trends, such as the enduring impact of childhood circumstances on adult fulfillment. The series' influence extends to elevating documentary standards, with Michael Apted's direction earning BAFTA recognition for factual innovation across multiple entries, underscoring its role in advancing unvarnished empirical filmmaking. In a 2024 poll by the Broadcasting Press Guild, comprising television journalists and critics, the Up series was voted the most influential British television programme of the preceding 50 years, ahead of landmark dramas and news formats, due to its transformative impact on observational and public .

Awards and Recognitions

The Up series has garnered recognition from major industry bodies, including British Academy of Film and Television Arts (BAFTA) awards and nominations. The 1985 installment, 28 Up, won a BAFTA Television Award for Best Factual Series. Subsequent entries received BAFTA nominations, such as 42 Up (1999) and 49 Up (2006) in the Best Factual Series category. In 2019, 28 Up also secured a Royal Television Society (RTS) award, highlighting its impact on documentary storytelling. The series was voted the most influential UK television programme of the last 50 years in a 2024 poll by the Broadcasting Press Guild, surpassing other landmark shows in a survey of media professionals. Internationally, the Up format has been adapted or broadcast in multiple countries, including adaptations in , , and , extending its reach beyond the .

Methodological and Ethical Criticisms

The Up series' methodology has been critiqued for its non-random sampling of just 14 children in 1964, selected primarily to exemplify British class divides rather than to represent the broader population, limiting its empirical generalizability to claims about or determinism. The group consisted overwhelmingly of participants, with only one non-white subject (Symon, who is ), rendering it unrepresentative of the era's growing ethnic diversity and post-war patterns. Gender imbalance further compounded selection flaws, with only four girls chosen out of 14 total, excluding middle-class or university-aspiring females; director later described this as a "horrible error" that overlooked evolving female roles in British society. Editing practices introduced potential by initially framing participants through class , such as grouping working-class girls in interviews to evoke collective over individual nuance, and selecting clips to underscore hierarchical predictions that participants often rejected. Apted's leading questions in early installments reinforced deterministic assumptions about limited opportunities based on birth class, amplifying a of environmental despite of agency in later lives. This selective emphasis on class extremes—five from schools, six from working-class backgrounds, and just two middle-class—prioritized illustrative anecdotes over balanced longitudinal data, potentially distorting causal inferences about societal influences. Ethically, the series originated without explicit long-term consent for recurring intrusions into participants' , as no permissions were sought in for the ongoing format that evolved into deeply personal interrogations. The filmmaker-subject dynamic exhibited power imbalances, with Apted's privilege as a director enabling probing questions that participants, particularly those from lower classes, felt compelled to answer despite growing discomfort. For instance, participant Neil Hughes' crises were extensively documented, including over 20 minutes in one installment devoted to his breakdown and , raising concerns about the of filming vulnerability without safeguards against exacerbation, even as Hughes later viewed Apted as professional. Such practices highlight unresolved tensions in ethics regarding privacy boundaries and the psychological toll of perpetual public exposure.

Controversies and Participant Perspectives

Withdrawals and Discontent Among Subjects

Charles Furneaux, one of the upper-class participants, withdrew permanently after 21 Up (1985), citing the embarrassment of public exposure from his early interviews as a primary factor in his decision to exit the series. This reaction highlights a causal link between the series' longitudinal scrutiny—beginning with childhood statements that later clashed with adult self-perception—and participant discomfort, as Furneaux later pursued a career in documentary filmmaking, potentially seeking control over his own narrative absent the Up format's constraints. Suzy Lusk, selected from a private school background, expressed regrets over her initial involvement, particularly lamenting the filming of her younger self in the early installments, which she viewed as an unwelcome intrusion that persisted into later reflections during 42 Up (1998) and beyond. While Lusk continued participating through 49 Up (2005), her minimized engagement in subsequent films—skipping 56 Up (2012) and 63 Up (2019)—suggests a strategic reduction in exposure to mitigate the psychological burden of repeated self-examination, though she maintained a complex, almost morbid fascination with the process. Among working-class subjects, Jackie Bassett cited ongoing health challenges, including rheumatoid arthritis diagnosed in adulthood, as contributing to her reluctance in later interviews, though she persisted in most installments despite physical and financial strains that amplified the emotional toll of revisiting typecast early-life portrayals. Broader discontent emerged in complaints of typecasting, where participants like Bassett felt constrained by juvenile images that overshadowed personal growth, yet empirical participation patterns indicate voluntary continuation for the majority—11 of the original 14 appeared in at least some later films—suggesting that while the series imposed burdens akin to public accountability, intrinsic motivations such as reflection or closure outweighed full withdrawal for most.

Alleged Biases in Editing and Selection

Critics have alleged that the selection process for the 7 Up participants introduced foundational biases, as Michael Apted and original director Paul Milne deliberately chose 14 children—ten boys and four girls—from London's socioeconomic extremes to test the premise of class-locked destinies inspired by the Jesuit maxim "Give me the child until he is seven and I will show you the man." This non-random approach overrepresented elite private-school attendees (five) and working-class state-school children (six) while underrepresenting middle-class experiences, included only one non-white participant (Symon Basterfield), and limited female inclusion, with three girls selected as a pre-existing friend group rather than for broader diversity. Apted later acknowledged that foreseeing the series' longevity might have prompted a more representative sample. In editing subsequent installments, Apted—himself middle-class and Oxford-educated—has faced accusations of applying a preconceived lens that prioritized class stereotypes over nuanced life trajectories, often through leading questions and footage juxtapositions that emphasized predictive continuity from childhood rather than disruptions from agency or merit. Working-class subjects like Tony Walker and the women (Jackie, Sue, Lynn) were grouped thematically in early films to underscore limited horizons, with patronizing probes into their aspirations (e.g., manual labor or domestic roles) that downplayed resilience, while upper-class poise in figures like John Brisby was framed as inherent advantage; Jackie later critiqued gendered biases in 49 Up. Participants such as John alleged outright misrepresentation to fit this narrative, calling the series a "complete " for rigid class determinism that ignored post-1960s social shifts and individual volition. These claims are tempered by the series' empirical divergences from pure class predictability, as several trajectories defied early forecasts: working-class Tony transitioned from jockey ambitions to stable success as a cab driver and property owner via entrepreneurial effort, exemplifying merit's influence, while Hughes—initially upper-middle-class—endured struggles before partial recovery as a local , highlighting environmental and personal factors over deterministic editing. Analyses confirm socioeconomic origins failed to predict outcomes in multiple cases, suggesting the biases, while present, did not wholly eclipse evidence of agency.

Long-Term Effects on Participants' Lives

Several participants have reported that involvement in the Up series fostered opportunities for self-reflection and personal development over decades. For instance, Peter Davies, who withdrew after 28 Up due to negative press but returned in 56 Up, leveraged the platform to promote his folk band, resulting in increased CD sales and a record deal. Similarly, while Neil Hughes endured public exposure of his mental health struggles—including periods of homelessness and instability documented in 28 Up and 35 Up—his continued participation coincided with later stabilization as a local councillor in Scotland, with some retrospective accounts suggesting the series prompted introspective growth amid emotional strain from intrusive public feedback. No verified cases attribute suicides, nervous breakdowns, or severe mental health deteriorations solely to the series' demands. Conversely, participation has imposed lasting burdens, particularly regarding and perception. Suzy Lusk expressed over childhood remarks on race replayed in later films, feeling "picked on" by intrusive questioning and treated as an outsider, which eroded her comfort with the exposure of her . Nick Hitchon similarly resented early portrayals as a simplistic rural boy, citing staged filming that amplified feelings of and contributed to a perceived loss of over time. Working-class subjects, such as Jackie Bisset, have faced amplified scrutiny of family hardships—including chronic illness and child-rearing challenges—potentially exacerbating stigmatization through narratives that invite or judgment. Heightened recognition has occasionally disrupted professional lives, though specific instances like impacts on Tony Walker's taxi or racing endeavors remain anecdotal without documented causation beyond general fame-related intrusions.

Cultural and Intellectual Impact

Influence on Documentary Filmmaking

The Up series, originating with Seven Up! in , pioneered the longitudinal format by committing to revisit a fixed group of subjects at seven-year intervals, spanning over five decades and allowing filmmakers to document evolving personal narratives through direct, unmediated observation rather than scripted reenactments. This structure emphasized unstructured interviews and minimal editorial intrusion, drawing on principles to capture spontaneous responses and life events in real time, thereby reducing directorial bias from voiceovers or selective staging. The approach transformed documentary technique by demonstrating how periodic, low-intervention filming could yield authentic longitudinal data on human change, setting a precedent for empirical depth over episodic . Subsequent filmmakers have adopted these methods in global projects, replicating the template of sustained subject tracking to explore temporal progression with heightened observational fidelity. For example, the series' model of infrequent but consistent check-ins has informed other extended works that prioritize raw interview footage and chronological juxtaposition of footage across installments, elevating technical standards for veracity in tracking real-time development. This influence extends to the integration of archival revisits, where earlier recordings serve as baselines for assessing in life outcomes, encouraging a shift toward more rigorous, evidence-based storytelling in vérité-inspired documentaries. In terms of ethics, the Up series raised benchmarks for long-term consent protocols by navigating the challenges of participants aging into adults with agency over their involvement, requiring ongoing reaffirmation of participation amid evolving personal circumstances. Apted's practice of building relational trust through sparse interventions—limiting contact to filming periods—highlighted the ethical imperative of preserving subject outside production windows, influencing contemporary standards that demand explicit, renewable in prolonged observational projects to mitigate exploitation risks. This framework has prompted practitioners to incorporate safeguards against unintended life disruptions, fostering greater accountability in formats that span lifetimes.

Sociological and Public Discourse Contributions

The Up series has contributed to sociological by offering empirical observations of class persistence alongside instances of intergenerational mobility, thereby challenging deterministic views of social stasis rooted in circumstances. Longitudinal tracking of participants revealed that while socioeconomic origins heavily influenced outcomes—such as upper-middle-class individuals accessing elite education—deviations occurred through personal initiative, as seen in working-class Tony Walker's transition from apprentice to self-employed cab driver and property owner by his 20s, attributing success to diligence rather than systemic aid. This evidence contradicted the series' initial framing inspired by the Jesuit proverb emphasizing at age seven, with later installments documenting contingencies like career shifts and relocations altering expected paths. Public discourse shifted toward reevaluating , as the films highlighted successes amid Britain's welfare expansions, prompting critiques of overreliance on state intervention for mobility. For instance, participants from modest backgrounds who advanced often cited individual effort and opportunity exploitation, fueling debates that questioned academia's tendency to predict class-locked trajectories based on structural barriers alone. Right-leaning analyses underscored agency and resilience over victimhood frameworks, interpreting outcomes as validation of personal responsibility in a stratified . The series' small cohort, while not statistically representative, paralleled larger birth cohort studies like the National Child Development Study (1958 cohort), which have informed policy reports on mobility stagnation since the 1970s, revealing absolute upward movement for about 20-30% of working-class individuals via and . These contributions debunked myths of normalized immobility by showcasing causal factors like ambition and adaptability, though academic critiques noted the films' early overprediction of class determinism, later tempered by observed variations in gender dynamics and economic shifts. Referenced in social mobility discussions, including parliamentary inquiries into opportunity gaps, the series emphasized that while class origins constrain, they do not preclude advancement through verifiable self-directed actions.

Broader Media and Academic Legacy

The Up series has permeated broader media through parodies that highlight its distinctive longitudinal format and social commentary. In the 2007 episode "Springfield Up" of The Simpsons (Season 18, Episode 1), filmmaker Declan Desmond tracks Springfield residents at ages 8, 16, 24, and beyond, mirroring the Up subjects' seven-year intervals and probing class, aspiration, and life's ironies, such as Moe Szyslak's unchanging tavern existence. This spoof underscores the series' cultural osmosis into animated satire, emphasizing its premise of early-life prediction over dramatic invention. Academically, the series endures as a for sociological into British class structures and intergenerational mobility, often deployed in curricula to bridge personal narratives with . Scholars have praised its raw depiction of how socioeconomic origins shape trajectories, as seen in its use as a tool in courses where students dissect participant outcomes against theories of . The has highlighted it as a "natural" of class persistence and limited upward movement, informing debates on whether early circumstances predetermine adult fates—a nod to the Jesuit maxim invoked in its —while empirical divergences among subjects challenge rigid . Its archival footage offers unscripted evidence for causal patterns in life courses, prioritizing observed data over imposed narratives in .

Future Prospects

Announcement and Planning of 70 Up

In July 2025, ITV announced the continuation of the Up series with 70 Up, its tenth installment, slated for broadcast in 2026 on and . This edition marks the first without original director , who directed every prior film until his death in January 2021, and production commenced that same month to capture the subjects at age 70. Planning for 70 Up centers on interviewing the surviving core participants from the original 1964 cohort of 14 children, including figures such as Tony Walker, a former turned cab driver, and Neil Hughes, who has pursued varied careers in academia and local politics. Producers intend to integrate archival footage from the preceding nine films to provide longitudinal context, illustrating changes and continuities in the subjects' lives over seven decades. The film's scope adheres to the series' established format, featuring extended interviews that revisit foundational Jesuit maxim-inspired questions on personal fulfillment, social mobility, and life reflections, while accommodating the participants' current health and logistical constraints. Direction has transitioned to Richard Denton, a collaborator with Apted on earlier entries, ensuring stylistic fidelity amid the absence of the original filmmaker.

Potential Challenges Without Original Director

The absence of , who directed every installment from 7 Plus Seven (1970) to 63 Up (2019), introduces risks to the series' methodological consistency and longitudinal comparability. Apted's established interviewing technique—characterized by recurring questions on aspirations, regrets, and —fostered a uniform narrative thread across decades, enabling viewers to assess changes empirically against a fixed baseline. A successor risks stylistic divergences, such as altered question phrasing or editing emphases, which could distort perceived trajectories and undermine the series' value as a controlled . Participants like Jackie Bassett have highlighted the need for continuity with the original crew, including producer Claire Lewis, to preserve this integrity, warning that unfamiliar direction might compromise the raw, unvarnished portrayals central to the project's credibility. Participant trust and engagement pose additional empirical hurdles, as Apted cultivated deep, decades-long that elicited candid disclosures on personal failures and societal shifts. Without him, subjects may exhibit reluctance or guardedness toward a new interviewer, potentially yielding shallower data or increased withdrawals; for instance, Bruce Balden indicated willingness to participate only under familiar oversight, reflecting broader unease about an outsider's ability to replicate Apted's nonjudgmental dynamic. This relational gap could exacerbate sample attrition in an already diminished cohort—marked by deaths such as Lynn Johnson's in 2013 from and Nick Hitchon's in 2023 from throat cancer—further shrinking the representative cross-section of class and opportunity originally selected in 1964. A reduced or less forthcoming group risks biasing outcomes toward outliers, skewing insights into life-course patterns. Maintaining the series' purported neutrality faces scrutiny absent Apted's guiding vision, which balanced portrayals despite criticisms of early class-laden selections. Participants have credited his recusal from certain editing decisions as key to avoiding overt manipulation, but a new director might inadvertently—or deliberately—amplify themes like decline in later life, given the cohort's advancing age (70–74 for the planned installment). Such shifts could introduce causal interpretive biases, prioritizing dramatic narratives over the factual progression that defined prior films, thus eroding the project's status as an unbiased chronicle of British . While producers have enlisted Denton, a prior Apted collaborator, to helm 70 Up, the transition nonetheless heightens these risks to data fidelity.

Implications for Longitudinal Studies

The Up series exemplifies the capacity of extended longitudinal observation to illuminate causal pathways in human development, as its multi-decade tracking from age 7 in 1964 reveals how early socioeconomic positions interact with intervening life choices to influence outcomes like career stability and relationship formation, offering insights into cumulative effects that obscure. Such long spans facilitate stronger by isolating time-invariant factors from dynamic ones, such as persistent traits versus adaptive behaviors, though the series' qualitative focus underscores the value of integrating personal narratives with quantitative metrics for robust etiological understanding. Notwithstanding these strengths, the series' modest cohort of 14 individuals—predominantly from mid-20th-century British contexts—exposes limitations in and statistical robustness, necessitating larger, demographically heterogeneous samples in prospective designs to ascertain whether observed trajectories generalize beyond narrow class or cultural confines. Future iterations should emphasize retention protocols to combat attrition, which erodes power in small-scale efforts, and incorporate diverse global participants to counteract selection artifacts inherent in early analog-era projects. To advance truth-oriented inquiry, subsequent studies adapting the Up framework must foreground empirical evidence of personal agency—such as volitional decisions amid constraints—over reductive deterministic framings that privilege structural forces, thereby enabling clearer delineation of causal multiplicities rather than singular narratives. Digital innovations, including AI-driven analytics on longitudinal datasets from electronic records and sensors, promise scalable implementation by automating trend detection and confounding adjustment across expansive populations, while facilitating bias mitigation through algorithmic transparency and inclusive data sourcing. This evolution could yield higher-fidelity causal models, unencumbered by the resource-intensive interviews of prior models, provided ethical safeguards preserve participant autonomy.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.