I saw this tonight and rather enjoyed it. The film itself is structured differently to what I expected but I found it to be engaging and rather interesting.

 

I don't like the woman, and the only policy I agree with is the defending of our sovereign territory against the Argentinians. (No Grimly I don't give a flying fuck how we ended up with those two rocks, nor do I care that they are probably rightfully Argentina's. They invaded British Sovereign Territory and this country would have done itself a great disservice if we sat back and allowed our soil and the home of some of our citizens to be invaded by a foreign nation.) HOWEVER I really did like the film. It doesn't paint her to be a saint at all, it shows both the good and the bad. It shows what she overcame to make it into power, her journey through the ranks to PM and her time as PM.

 

I will never, EVER agree with the Falklands, it was just another Colonialist "war" and Thatcher committed at least one war crime (on the Belgrano), if we were that concerned for our "subjects" (we're not "citizens" as you well know, because we have a monarchy), then we should've air-lifted them out of there and brought them home... But I dont want to get drawn on it.

 

As far as the film goes, I'm curious, but not curious enough to spend a tenner going to see it.. I think a "curious download" may be on the cards sometime soon as a decent copy becomes available....

I haven't seen this yet but I watched the Film 4 making of thing last ngiht and both Phyllia and Abi said they deliberately made the film non political because they wanted to focus on Margaret herself, rather than on her politics. So OF COURSE it isn't going to deal with political matters to any great extent. Personally I think that's the right way to play it, it's a film tracking the journey of a woman through many difficult hurdles in her life to become PM. Whether we agree with what she did when she got there or not, the journey is one that deserves recognition.

I haven't seen this yet but I watched the Film 4 making of thing last ngiht and both Phyllia and Abi said they deliberately made the film non political because they wanted to focus on Margaret herself, rather than on her politics. So OF COURSE it isn't going to deal with political matters to any great extent. Personally I think that's the right way to play it, it's a film tracking the journey of a woman through many difficult hurdles in her life to become PM. Whether we agree with what she did when she got there or not, the journey is one that deserves recognition.

 

Oh, great, so, it's "Margaret - one woman's struggle against adversity in a male-dominated world", please, gimme a break.... As if she was some kind of "Feminist Icon" or something..... lol

 

Are you seriously going to try and downplay her achievement in getting elected as Prime Minister now?

 

Are you seriously going to try and downplay her achievement in getting elected as Prime Minister now?

 

I doubt Grimly would give her credit for anything.

 

In other news I saw this on Saturday night and was largely unimpressed with it. Streep is clearly the draw here and delivers Thatcher excellently! The film does glaze over the politics and in VERY broad terms paints her as a sympathetic character (in terms of an old woman who suffers from dementia and lives in a mixture of the present and her years in power) apart from a few scenes in relation to her relationship with Howe which was by all accounts a shocker in terms of her treatment of him. The trouble is it ends up being a cruriously empty film, about neither politics nor the struggle it must have been for a woman, and does tend to deal with the dementia angle, I learnt little new about Thatcher after the film which must surely be the point of a biopic?

 

Broadbent is great and in general the acting I found to be practically flawless, it's just the story (or should I say the angle) they have done this from, whilst making sense from a commercail point of view, has stripped much out of the story that could have given it the power to be captivated (outside of Streep's performance). If you support her policies or you oppose them you will leave disappointed which just leaves those apathetic to the character, and I don't think there are many of those, who would fork out the money to see it and enjoy it. At times touching I can't say I came out and thought it was amazing, personally I preferred "The Long Walk to Finchley" which probably dealt with the female struggle angle far better.

The reviews haven't been too kind to this but 150 extra Odeon points I'M IN.

Are you seriously going to try and downplay her achievement in getting elected as Prime Minister now?

 

In general oppositions don't win elections, governments lose them. That was very much the case in 1979. Thatcher was not popular but the country wanted a change from five years of Labour government with little - or no - majority. The Tories won despite Thatcher not because of her. Similarly, Labour lost despite Callaghan (who was fairly popular) not because of him.

 

Even her winning the Tory leadership was a bit of an accident. She was meant to give Heath a bit of a fright but ended up doing well enough to get him to resign. That gave her the momentum to beat the other candidates who entered for the later rounds.

In general oppositions don't win elections, governments lose them. That was very much the case in 1979. Thatcher was not popular but the country wanted a change from five years of Labour government with little - or no - majority. The Tories won despite Thatcher not because of her. Similarly, Labour lost despite Callaghan (who was fairly popular) not because of him.

 

Even her winning the Tory leadership was a bit of an accident. She was meant to give Heath a bit of a fright but ended up doing well enough to get him to resign. That gave her the momentum to beat the other candidates who entered for the later rounds.

 

This is certainly true and similarly in 1997 I doubt there was anything the government could say or do to get elected again the country had simply had enough. Her biggest struggle in respect of being a woman game in getting into politics in the first place, but once in power she certainly showed she had the stuff to take the difficult decisions and I woudl say she was an electoral asset in both 83 and 87 but by 89 had turned into a drawback- she'd outstayed her sell by date. Of course it helped that the Labour party were bereft of any kind of contructive alternative during that time. If the film had explored all of that I think it would have been an infinitely better one.

 

I would add that though she did only intend to frighten Heath in standing against him she did attract enough votes to win the second round because she did have the guts to run in the first place.

This is certainly true and similarly in 1997 I doubt there was anything the government could say or do to get elected again the country had simply had enough. Her biggest struggle in respect of being a woman game in getting into politics in the first place, but once in power she certainly showed she had the stuff to take the difficult decisions and I woudl say she was an electoral asset in both 83 and 87 but by 89 had turned into a drawback- she'd outstayed her sell by date. Of course it helped that the Labour party were bereft of any kind of contructive alternative during that time. If the film had explored all of that I think it would have been an infinitely better one.

 

I would add that though she did only intend to frighten Heath in standing against him she did attract enough votes to win the second round because she did have the guts to run in the first place.

Yes, her biggest struggle was in getting selected for a winnable seat. Even her elevation to the Cabinet was because Heath felt he needed to have a woman in his team and there was precious little choice.

I live abroad and so I cannot find this film in any cinema, which is so annoying as I would have loved to see it. I am intrigued as to how Streep is going to play Thatcher, I think Thatcher used politics that were wrong for the UK, however as a leader she had more courage and strength than any of the political leaders today.

Finally got around to seeing this tonight. I went in with a full knowledge of what it was going to be like (not really a biopic, more of a tale of dimentia which happens to feature her) and came out fully satisfied. Meryl's performance was sensational, as expected, and actually the supporting cast did a great job all round too. There were a few issues, the removal of a few of my favourite lines from the trailera (namely: THAT'S the tone we want to STRIKE *smirk), but that's minor and only irked me because I wanted to see it on the big screen. Hopefully it'll be a deleted scene on the DVD.

 

All in all, a very well done film, not perfect, but a 9.5/10.

I'm truly surprised by how LITTLE interest I have in this. I'm sure Meryl is on top form but it looks a tad watery for me.

It's definitely going to be one to see PURELY for the performance I think. But I am a believer that an amazing performance can carry a middling film so I'm sure I'll enjoy it. I think the benchmark for this genre (biopic of a political icon/royal figure/similar) is The Queen and that was also carried by the two central performances (although the story was actually really interesting).

 

Well that was depressing. And pretty terrible, the whole glorifying of her character made the politics seem trivial and unimportant and it was essentially two hours of the same thing being repeated over and over again. There's a problem, then she gives an inspirational speech about being a woman in politics who succeeded against the odds and suddenly everything's fine and everyone's really impressed. Poor.

I'm truly surprised by how LITTLE interest I have in this. I'm sure Meryl is on top form but it looks a tad watery for me.

 

That's about all this film is good for - another Oscar nomination for Meryl....

 

And if there's any justice in the world, a long deserved third WIN. I don't think its her best performance (hello Devil Wears Prada) but it's a close second.

Good grief, this is nowhere CLOSE to being Meryl's second best performance, and I think she's quite good as much as the restrictive role allows. Silkwood, Sophie's Choice, Postcards from the Edge, Kramer vs. Kramer... I love Meryl, but she hasn't challenged herself in years. Her projects are ones with very limited directors and basically hand themselves to her on a silver platter.

And if there's any justice in the world, a long deserved third WIN. I don't think its her best performance (hello Devil Wears Prada) but it's a close second.

 

HUH?? Good lord, if you actually think Devil Wears Prada is Meryl's best performance, you've clearly never seen Silkwood, Sophie's Choice, A Cry in the Dark, Kramer vs Kramer, Ironweed, The French Liuetenant's Woman, Out of Africa.....

 

Good grief, this is nowhere CLOSE to being Meryl's second best performance, and I think she's quite good as much as the restrictive role allows. Silkwood, Sophie's Choice, Postcards from the Edge, Kramer vs. Kramer... I love Meryl, but she hasn't challenged herself in years. Her projects are ones with very limited directors and basically hand themselves to her on a silver platter.

 

And therein lies the problem.. She's basically now got this massive reputation, that most of the directors she now works with are probably too intimidated to actually "direct" her....

'The Hours' was probably the last film of hers I actually liked and even then she was far from the highlight (hello Julianne Moore, how you don't have an Oscar already CONFUSES me greatly). 'Doubt' was alright, patchy when you look beyond the incredible cast though. 'The Devil Wears Prada' wasn't for me, neither was 'Julie & Julia'. She's an undoubtable talent but I'd love to see her work with someone like Darren Aronofsky, Paul Thomas Anderson, Terrence Malick, Lars von Trier, Coen brothers etc.