Suffragette

2015

Action / Biography / Drama / History

15
Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Certified Fresh 73%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Upright 73%
IMDb Rating 6.9 10 26968

Synopsis


Uploaded By: LINUS
Downloaded 69,740 times
January 22, 2016 at 05:16 AM

Director

Cast

Carey Mulligan as Maud Watts
Ben Whishaw as Sonny Watts
Meryl Streep as Emmeline Pankhurst
Helena Bonham Carter as Edith Ellyn
720p 1080p
779.67 MB
1280*720
English
PG-13
23.976 fps
1hr 46 min
P/S 6 / 19
1.62 GB
1920*1080
English
PG-13
23.976 fps
1hr 46 min
P/S 5 / 25

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by planktonrules 8 / 10

It's hard to watch this one without becoming angry...or incredibly sad.

This film is a fictionalized story of a woman caught up in the suffrage movement in Britain in the early 20th century. Carry Mulligan plays Maud Watts...a woman who slowly comes into the movement and the sacrifices she personally made as a result.

I noticed that a few of the reviews on IMDb hated the film and by the way they worded the reviews, they seemed upset that women earned the right to vote or thought women never had fight to achieve this!! Strange...very strange. Women DID have to fight and fight hard to earn their rights and the film does a very nice job of it. Why anyone would give the film a 1 or see it as some lie is just baffling...and ignorant of British history. The fictionalized life of Carry Mulligan's is essentially true of many women and the horrific event concerning Emily Davison DID occur in 1913....so why hate that the film dramatizes this?

Overall, the film is extremely compelling and very emotional to watch. Seeing women abused and mistreated is tough....and should grab your heart. Well acted and worth seeing. My only complaint is ts are that the film, at times, is a bit sterile...which is odd considering the events. And, it uses a modern device I hate--the roving camera (hold that camera still #@&@#%^...it's NOT arsty to have bad camera work--particularly on closeups). Still, well worth seeing-- particularly for teens to realize how bad things were and how far we've come.

Reviewed by RichardAlaba-CineMuse 7 / 10

Despite its limitations, this is a finely crafted British film

It can be risky critiquing a film homage to heroines of feminism, especially one with a star cast that includes Carey Mulligan, Helena Bonham Carter, Ben Whishaw and a Meryl Streep cameo. Respect for the cause, however, does not guarantee respect for the film, and this one chooses a very limited lens with which to view this episode of history. It does have high production values, narrative authenticity and sensitivity for the feminist struggle in early 20th century Britain. But it gets lost in balancing the broader sweep of history that shapes gender relations and the impact of particular individuals.

The story line is uni-linear, the atmosphere dark and claustrophobic, and much of the acting is melodramatic, with long close-ups of Mulligan's finely nuanced expressions recording her progress from an abused laundry worker to what today would be called a radicalised political terrorist. The historical lens is so myopic that you could walk away believing the vote was won by a few protesting women, the bombing of some public letterboxes and a suffragette who threw herself under the King's horse. No more struggle…job done! Of course, that is not true and the struggle continues.

Despite these limitations, it's a finely crafted British film. The fictional heroine Maude Watts is an avatar for the British working class women who risked everything, including their lives, in fighting for the vote. Men of all classes are the demons of this tale, and one of its chilling insights is how the most dangerous enemies of suffragettes were husbands. Patriarchal governments left it to ordinary menfolk to sort out their unruly women in an era where wives were legally subordinate to husbands. Maude's contempt for her treatment at work and home propels her into the swirling orbit of violent protest where "war is the only language men listen to". Evicted by her husband for shaming him, she is left with nothing; by law, even her son was her husband's property. During the struggles, over one thousand British women were imprisoned and treated shamefully, a fact only acknowledged in the film's closing credits. Admittedly, historical judgement is difficult to translate into cinematic language, but many films have done it better. If you are interested in the history of feminist struggle from the viewpoint of the small people who made up the bigger story you will like this film.

Reviewed by Gizmo 1 / 10

Ideological Propaganda With Little Grounding In Reality

Another user here put it best when saying it is "a fundamentalist feminist glossing over of a nuanced historical series of events, which fails to show the real work for equal voting rights (which most people, men included, did not have at this point in history) was done by the suffragISTS (not the suffragettes), composed of men & women, who lobbied for 1 person = 1 vote...rather than the openly racist suffragettes who only wanted white, upper class women to have the vote. At this point in history, usually only white, upper class men holding large property holdings could vote (although some women holding equivalent property, for example widows running a business, with a number of employees could and DID vote.)"

The Suffragettes were (rightly) seen at the time as violent and irrational terrorists, attacking people, blowing up buildings and making plans to assassinate the Prime Minister. The historical revisionism of this film and the present day feminist narrative of history in general does a great disservice to the reality of the time. Rather than win women the vote, it's very likely the suffragettes delayed it happening, because their violent actions made it impossible for the government of the day to address the issue and not be seen to be giving in to terrorists.

At the time this film is set, the vast majority of men did not have the vote either, and it has been estimated that 9 out of 10 of the men who died in the trenches of the first world war did so without that privilege. Men as a class 'got' the vote the same year all women over 30 did: 1918. But of course, even though a matter of historical record, this is not something the film can address at all without discrediting both the suffragettes cause and its own reason for existing.

The depiction of almost all the men, too, as an inhuman, monolithic class of brutal oppressors is also mean-spirited, ahistorical and unpleasantly manipulative, and it's hard to imagine such scapegoating being considered acceptable today if it were any other group of people being vilified in this manner.

The film is very well-acted, particularly by Streep and Carey Mulligan, it's just a shame they worked so hard on such an ugly and dishonest piece of ideological propaganda.

Read more IMDb reviews

9 Comments

Be the first to leave a comment