Suffragette * * *

There are two ways you can look at this (actually there are a lot more I suppose) but one can appreciate Suffragette as a drama of a fictitious woman, Maude; or one can look at it as the telling of the rise and eventual success of the Suffragette movement.

On one level it is quite a good yarn- like a BBC serial condensed into a movie.  But on the other - the rise of the Suffragette movement - it is probably not the best education one could receive.

Maude works in a laundry and has done all of her life.  She endures hard work and virtually no workers rights. She and everyone else in this steaming hell hole need an improvement to their conditions - and where do you think that might come from?
I’m no expert (No shit! I hear you say) but the trouble with Suffragette is that it seems to want to credit the achievements of the Union to the Suffragettes; and they really were quite different movements. It was the Union that would have improved Maude’s lot, not the Suffragettes. And I really think Maude is the kind of girl who'd more likely be inspired by the immediacy of the Union than a bunch of posh ladies who want the vote.

As I understand it, to tell the story of the Suffragettes they would need to tell the story of  middle-class, mostly kept women with sympathetic husband's. That is not to belittle the movement in any way, for these women did take enormous risks, the fight was far from easy and they worked tirelessly for the cause and they did suffer and die and their outcomes ultimately did improve the lot of the working woman.

But Suffragette almost seems embarrassed about the real background of the Suffragettes movement and prefers to offer the story of a working class girl.  We watch Maude have every trial thrown at her and even lose that which is most precious to a mother. They make us care about her, and then they kind of dump her and all her troubles by resolving everything with the infamous event concerning a Suffragette and the Kings horse at Epsom Derby. An event which brought huge attention to the movement and the collapse of resistance to the Suffragettes demands. A fine resolution to that part of the story; but what about Maude's dire situation? It looked like the film was happy to vicariously use and exploit her just like everyone else.

Otherwise, Suffragette is beautiful to look at.  Great re-creation of England at that time. Fine acting, especially Carey Mulligan as Maude (but isn’t she always good?)  Helen Bonham Carter as one of the militants. Brendan Gleeson as a special ops man who’s mission is to undermine these troublesome women. Meryl Streep is listed as one of the “stars” but forget about her; she just gives a one minute speech pretending to be Suffragette leader Emmeline Pankhurst.  I think they just wanted to borrow her bankable name. It might have been better if they gave Carey that role and made Suffragette the story of Emmeline Pankhurst.