This film left me with many emotions such as: anger, pity, cynicism. My frustration turned to anger as I noted that it was a woman cleaning the cinema, and wondered what had changed. Have women gained true equality? Was the 'right to vote' just 'lip service' to the women's cause?
The film got me wondering about my grandmothers, and the exciting period they witnessed, and yet my grandmothers still struggled as a woman. My grandmothers were always scrubbing floors, washing clothes, cooking whilst still going out to work in some menial, low paid job. This despite gaining the right to vote!
The film is set in London's East End, and looks at the life of one woman in particular. This woman might represent all of our grandmothers, and great grandmothers; the typical lives they lead and the low expectations of a working class woman at that time. This part was delivered competently by actor Carey Mulligan as Maud the laundry worker, who was swept up into the movement by default.
Her plight was a daily grind of hard, physical labour in a low paid job, daily sexual harassment from her boss, and obedience to her Edwardian husband. Therefore, not much different from the lives of many working class women today.
To that end, this film was not essentially one about the first wave women's movement, but about working class women's lives. These women were at the bottom of the social pile, and subject to exploitation by their employers, their men folk, and by middle class women and their causes! You might say, as suggested in the film, fodder of the cause!
As for the acting, the part of Maud was played well by Mulligan; she and other actor, Anne-Marie Duff, who played Violet, were the epitome of careworn working class women, who were vitamin deficient and malnourished and plainly worn out.
However, superstars such as Meryl Streep just re-acted the part she played as Mrs. Thatcher in The Iron Lady (2011). Accordingly, she just didn't convince me that she was the great Emmeline Pankhurst of the women's moment. I expected more acting ability from Streep gven her world class record. As for Helena Bonham-Carter, she just playis the same part in every role. She never changes her style of acting. She is also typecast as an Edwardian woman in most films.
And while this film is set in an Edwardian period of British history, it has many anachronisms, such as when the suffragettes chained themselves to the railings of the period were wrongly situated. But, I won't nitpick, as the main point was made! That point was to protest in a radical way.
This radical method of protest was met with the ultimate sacrifice to the cause, by Emily Davidson, who died in the name of the cause at the feet of the King's house at the Epsom Derby. The film portrayed her as an almost innocent protester, who thought that the horse would stop and acknowledge her protest. But the most telling aspect of this ultimate sacrifice was, as the the film points out, that the derby officials, medics and spectators rushed to tend to the jockey and the horse as opposed to Emily Davidson.
At this juncture in the film, it morphs into the actual black and white film reel of the real suffragettes, who marched, agitated and died for women all over the world. This was illustrated beautifully with a roll call of countries where women gained the right to vote, and the one that has yet to give women the vote.
All in all, a great film, directed by Sarah Gavron in tribute to these brave women. The question is, was their bravery all in vain? Moreover, where are the feminists to the cause those days?
The film got me wondering about my grandmothers, and the exciting period they witnessed, and yet my grandmothers still struggled as a woman. My grandmothers were always scrubbing floors, washing clothes, cooking whilst still going out to work in some menial, low paid job. This despite gaining the right to vote!
The film is set in London's East End, and looks at the life of one woman in particular. This woman might represent all of our grandmothers, and great grandmothers; the typical lives they lead and the low expectations of a working class woman at that time. This part was delivered competently by actor Carey Mulligan as Maud the laundry worker, who was swept up into the movement by default.
Her plight was a daily grind of hard, physical labour in a low paid job, daily sexual harassment from her boss, and obedience to her Edwardian husband. Therefore, not much different from the lives of many working class women today.
To that end, this film was not essentially one about the first wave women's movement, but about working class women's lives. These women were at the bottom of the social pile, and subject to exploitation by their employers, their men folk, and by middle class women and their causes! You might say, as suggested in the film, fodder of the cause!
As for the acting, the part of Maud was played well by Mulligan; she and other actor, Anne-Marie Duff, who played Violet, were the epitome of careworn working class women, who were vitamin deficient and malnourished and plainly worn out.
However, superstars such as Meryl Streep just re-acted the part she played as Mrs. Thatcher in The Iron Lady (2011). Accordingly, she just didn't convince me that she was the great Emmeline Pankhurst of the women's moment. I expected more acting ability from Streep gven her world class record. As for Helena Bonham-Carter, she just playis the same part in every role. She never changes her style of acting. She is also typecast as an Edwardian woman in most films.
And while this film is set in an Edwardian period of British history, it has many anachronisms, such as when the suffragettes chained themselves to the railings of the period were wrongly situated. But, I won't nitpick, as the main point was made! That point was to protest in a radical way.
This radical method of protest was met with the ultimate sacrifice to the cause, by Emily Davidson, who died in the name of the cause at the feet of the King's house at the Epsom Derby. The film portrayed her as an almost innocent protester, who thought that the horse would stop and acknowledge her protest. But the most telling aspect of this ultimate sacrifice was, as the the film points out, that the derby officials, medics and spectators rushed to tend to the jockey and the horse as opposed to Emily Davidson.
At this juncture in the film, it morphs into the actual black and white film reel of the real suffragettes, who marched, agitated and died for women all over the world. This was illustrated beautifully with a roll call of countries where women gained the right to vote, and the one that has yet to give women the vote.
All in all, a great film, directed by Sarah Gavron in tribute to these brave women. The question is, was their bravery all in vain? Moreover, where are the feminists to the cause those days?