Suffragette (2015) User Reviews

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

[planktonrules · 8/10 · 8 March 2016]

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.

Despite its limitations, this is a finely crafted British film

[CineMuseFilms · 7/10 · 11 February 2016]

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.

Re-Telling of a Seminal Moment in British Women's History

[l_rawjalaurence · 7/10 · 6 February 2016]

Years ago the BBC did a series SHOULDER TO SHOULDER (1974) that told the story of the origins and development of the Women's Movement in Britain, with special attention paid to the WSPU (Women's Social and Political Union).

Sarah Gavron's film revisits the same territory as it tells the story of the gradual awakening of Maud Watts (Carey Mulligan) as she sets her marriage and family aside in favor of the Women's Movement. The crux of the action centers around the death of Emily Wilding Davison (Natalie Press) at the 1913 Derby, as she stepped out in front of the horses finishing the race and was crushed to death.

In view of the film's earnestness of purpose, it seems a shame to criticize it. However there are certain jarring elements that do stand out. Abi Morgan's screenplay seems uncertain whether to focus on the political or the familial elements. Maud's husband Sonny (Ben Whishaw) is just too placid a personality to become truly angry about his wife's decision to embrace the Suffagette cause, and the emotional scene where he decides to let his son George (Adam Michael Dodd) to for adoption is straight out of KRAMER VS. KRAMER.

Director Gavron seems too concerned with showing tight close-ups of Mulligan's face as she struggles her way through a dead-end job at the local laundry. Hence we get little sense of the slave-like existence pursued by most working-class women at that time. Meryl Streep, in the cameo of role of Emmeline Pankhurst, simply reprises her Margaret Thatcher turn in THE IRON LADY (2011).

On the other hand, the film does have its moments, especially when Maud goes to the Houses of Parliament and ends up talking about her life in front of David Lloyd George (Adrian Schiller). We get the sense of how much courage it takes to speak up in front of a group of unsympathetic middle-aged men. Helena Bonham Carter is quite surprisingly good as Edith Ellyn, especially in a sequence where she and her co- conspirators plan to blow up a private property constructed for Lloyd George's personal pleasure. The way Edith grinds up the gunpowder reveals her inherent anger at the ways in which women are treated.

The ending is also powerful, as Gavron fades out from the film into faded black-and-white films of Emily Davison's actual funeral taken in 1913. Through this technique we are made aware of the film's importance to an understanding of British social history.

Get's my vote (with some reservations)

[bob-the-movie-man · 7/10 · 13 October 2015]

Whilst most men would agree that giving women the vote was a dreadful mistake (put that stone down ladies…. it's just a joke), the astonishing story behind the UK social upheaval that was the Suffragette movement is well overdue a serious cinematic treatment. And a serious treatment Sarah Gavron's new film most certainly is: you exit the cinema feeling about as wrung out as the linen in the heroine Maud's workhouse-style laundry.

Carey Mulligan plays Maud Watts, an ordinary and anonymous working woman who progressively gets sucked into the anarchic rabble-rousing of an East-end branch of the Pankhurst's Women's Social and Political Union (WSPU). With operations run out of a chemist's shop by Edith Ellyn (Helena Bonham Carter) and her sympathetic husband, Maud risks a criminal record and the shame associated with that to pursue her ideals. Police pressure is applied by special forces copper Arthur Steed (Harry Potter's Brendan Gleeson) and personal pressure is put on her by her husband (played by Ben Whishaw, soon to be seen again as 'Q') and her alleged fitness to be a mother to their young son George (Adam Michael Dodd). As politicians continue to ignore the issue, the actions build to one of the most historic events of the period.

The struggle is seen very much through the limited prism of this select group of women. But where I really liked this film is in the slow awakening of Maud's character. In many ways it is like the germination of a seed that we are seeing on the screen. She starts without any interest in the movement and even mid-way through the film she is adamant that she is "not a suffragette", despite evidence to the contrary. Mulligan is, as always, completely brilliant in the role.

The supporting cast are all strong with Gleeson being particularly watchable as the lawman with a grudging respect for Maud and her cause. Meryl Streep makes a powerful cameo as Emily Pankhurst: but it is a short and sweet performance. Maud's friend Violet (Anne-Marie Duff) is also outstanding, her gaunt face delivering a haunting performance.

Whilst there are some highly emotionally charged scenes in the film, in a political sense the film has a curious lack of passion at times. A keynote speech to Lloyd George for example should have been electric - yet the Abi Morgan's script doesn't quite do the scene justice and if I was the MP I wouldn't have been impressed (which perhaps was the point).

I also had issues with some of the cinematography. Carey Mulligan has such an expressive and photogenic face that extreme close ups should work brilliantly. And yet filming it with a hand-held camera produces a constantly shifting image which was extremely distracting. Elsewhere in the art department though 1912 London is beautifully recreated, through both special effects, costume and make-up.

Alexandre Desplat delivers a touching score with a clever underlying drumbeat of change.

Suffragette is a solid historical drama, that tells an important social tale… a tale that graphically illustrates how much the world has really changed, and changed for the better, in a mere hundred years. Above all, the film concludes with the astounding fact that Switzerland only gave women the vote in 1971 (and in fact with one canton holding out on local issues until 1991). Shameful!

(Please find the full graphical review at bob-the-movie-man.com and sign up to receive future reviews).

Solid film, but does not fulfill its potential

[Horst_In_Translation · 6/10 · 9 February 2016]

"Suffragette" is a British 105-minute movie that was initially considered one of the big players during awards season, but came surprisingly short in pretty much all areas. And that includes Carey Mulligan playing the lead character, a young woman who gets sucked in by England's women's movement in the early 20th century. It is all about getting the right to vote. Helena Bonham Carter plays one of the major supporting players and Meryl Streep appears in one scene during which she gives a speech to the women listening to her. The director is Sarah Gavron and maybe she is not yet good enough to deal with such a star-studded cast as the outcome was a bit underwhelming given the material she had in terms of the cast.

The script comes from Emmy winner Abi Morgan, who has also written "Shame" and "The Iron Lady" and here I see room for improvement as well. This is without a doubt a really important story, but somehow they did not really manage to bring true overwhelming emotion to the audience. Of course, the times were dark (World War 1) and most of the action takes place in British industrial cities, so I am not saying this should be an uplifting movie of any kind because it would not have worked as such. But it should have done a better job in letting us feel the injustice that the characters complain about. Brendan Gleeson has one or two good moments, but overall he cannot make this a great watch either. Quite a shame as I really like him and Mulligan, so I hoped this could have been better. Of course, I am not saying this is a weak film, not at all, but I personally believe there was potential in this story for a lot more than they actually delivered. Still I give it a cautious thumbs-up. Recommended.

Ticks some boxes

[Lejink · 6/10 · 28 December 2015]

The first feature film I can remember dealing with the fight for women's voting rights in the United Kingdom, puts its subject across respectfully, if carefully. Most of the major events I've read about historically on the movement's road to enfranchisement are covered in the film, like the letterbox campaign, attack on Lloyd George's house, their hunger strike and resultant force-feeding in prison and most famously the shocking martyrdom of Emily Davidson who ran onto Epsom racecourse on Derby Day in front of the King's horse, the latter very realistically.

The device used by the writer and director to get the viewer close to the action is through the invented Carey Mulligan character Maud Watts, a young factory worker, docilely married to her husband and the doting mother of their infant son, who develops an interest in the suffragette movement through a work colleague. Stepping in for the latter at an important consultation with a UK Government committee on votes for women, she finds herself, initially unwillingly, drawn into activism on behalf of the cause.

I did feel the film somewhat overdid her travails and some of the coincidental events in her life. We learn indirectly that her male employer has abused her at work since she was a child and is now doing so to another pre-teen girl at the factory. Her husband doesn't understand her new found politicism and in short order expels her from their house, denies her access to her son and eventually has him adopted without her knowledge. She too is the one accompanying Davidson to the Derby. While I laud the equally important political point of maternal rights to their children in the event of marital separation being argued along with voter's rights, I did feel that the world seemed to revolve too much around Mulligan's character. She thus comes across more as a cipher than a real person and the film might have played better if she had been based on a real person.

I also felt the sub-plot about the child-molesting boss jarred somewhat and belonged in a different film entirely, the two main causes didn't need this extra justification, heinous as the crimes are. While I'm criticising, I also felt the cliff-hanging direction style employed (especially in the build-up to the Derby climax) was overdone with looming orchestral swells in the background and a virtual countdown to the incident itself, to be somewhat inconsistent with the seriousness of the subject matter.

The acting is good by most of the leads, Mulligan in particular. Quite why they rolled out the barrel to find a place in the cast for Meryl Streep to deliver a brief but showy cameo as the cause's figurehead Emmeline Pankhurst, I don't know. Nevertheless in its gritty depiction of the privations and struggles of the brave women who challenged the male-dominated political landscape of the day, this film deserves admiration and recognition for its subject matter if not quite for its execution.

The high price of Votes For Women

[davidgee · 8/10 · 28 October 2015]

Scripted by Abi Morgan, who gave us THE IRON LADY four years ago, this is a finely judged snapshot of a key year (1912-13) in the decades-long battle for women to get the vote in England. Meryl Streep has brief but commanding appearances as cranky old Mrs Pankhurst, imperiously redirecting her campaign from the ruling class to the working class. The key character here is the fictitious Maud Watts (Carey Mulligan), a young laundrywoman and mother who is drawn into the new campaign of 'civil disobedience', which will soon include blowing up post boxes and cutting telegraph wires.

Of the male characters, only Helena Bonham Carter's husband (Finbar Lynch) is sympathetic to the Cause. Brendan Gleeson's police inspector is well-served by the writer: central to the brutally repressive treatment of the Suffragettes, he is allowed a moment of doubt towards the end. Ben Whishaw seems uncomfortable in the challenging role of Maud's husband, totally intolerant her involvement with the Movement.

This is, in the fullest possible sense, a Women's Picture, written and directed (Sarah Gavron) by women, and it is the women who make it work and make it pull at your heartstrings. Bonham-Carter, Anne-Marie Duff and Romola Garai give telling performances. Carey Mulligan, who somehow didn't seem to get the period right in the remake of FAR FROM THE MADDING CROWD, is at her absolute best here, utterly convincing as an oppressed working mother reluctantly drawn into the campaign to give women fairer pay and a voice in the governance of the realm.

The Dickensian factory-sized laundry (a museum piece or a reconstruction?) is magnificently awful, and the teeming crowd scenes outside Parliament and at the fateful Epsom Derby suggest the production must have had a good budget (or some crafty CGI). There are moments of humour in the grim struggle, but this movie brings to life vividly and touchingly the high price paid by some women to obtain the right to vote for all women.

Worthy and accomplished but somehow lacking

[rogerdarlington · 30 October 2015]

This story of how in 1912 and 1913 British women fought for the right to vote is immensely worthy, technically accomplished and well-acted but, as cinema, it somehow fails to engage. At the conclusion of the movie, we are reminded that it was not until 1928 that full women's suffrage was achieved in the UK and even today women in a country like Saudi Arabia do not have the vote. The very act of creating this film is a contemporary testimony to female equality since, as well as all the lead acting roles, women fill the positions of writer (Abi Morgan) and director (Sarah Gavron) as well as producers (six out of the nine). The female domination of "Suffragette" serves to underline how few films ate directed and written by women and how underpaid female actors are compared to their male counterparts. The struggle for equality is not over.

Although the leadership of the suffragette movement came from middle-class women, Morgan has chosen to tell the story through the eyes of a working class laundry worker Maud Watts, wonderfully portrayed by Carey Mulligan - whom I have admired since her performance in "An Education" (2009) - who is brought into the movement by fellow worker Violet (Anne-Marie Duff). Other suffragettes are played by Helena Bonham- Carter (actually a descendant of a Prime Minister who opposed votes for women), Romola Garai (whose career does not seem to have taken off as much as she deserves), and - in an all too tiny cameo - Meryle Streep as Emmeline Pankhurst.

Inaccurate

[kaydenpat · 6/10 · 20 February 2017]

At the end of the movie, the claim was made that in 1920 women gained the right to vote in the United States. This is inaccurate. Only White women gained this right. Black women didn't get the right to vote until the 1960s. This fact should have been clarified.

The film itself was okay. Not sure how accurate it was which is what you can expect with most "based on true events" movies.

What's more inspiring than a film about half the population, fighting back against the corrupt system, which oppresses it?

[Hellmant · 8/10 · 3 December 2015]

'SUFFRAGETTE': Four Stars (Out of Five)

Historical drama flick; about the beginning of the first feminist movement, in early 1900's Britain. It was directed by Sarah Gavron and written by Abi Morgan. It stars Carey Mulligan, Helena Bonham Carter, Brendan Gleeson, Ben Whishaw, Anne-Marie Duff, Natalie Press and Meryl Streep (in a cameo appearance). The film has received mostly positive reviews from critics, and it could possibly become an upcoming awards contender. I found the movie to be educational, somewhat emotional (at times) and inspiring.

The film tells the story of a 24-year-old young woman, named Maud Watts (Mulligan). Maud was a wife, mother and laundress; in the UK, during the early 1900's. One day, while trying to deliver a package, she recognizes a co-worker, named Violet (Duff), who's involved in a suffragette riot (destroying windows). Maud is later asked to testify, for the right to vote, in place of Violet; due to the fact that Violet's husband severely beat her. After that, Maud gets extremely caught up in the movement; much to the disappointment of her husband, Sonny (Whishaw), who kicks her out of their house, because of it. Maud continues to sacrifice more and more, for the fight, including losing contact with her young son, George (Adam Michael Dodd).

I really like movies about rebellion; and what's more inspiring than a film about half the population, fighting back against the corrupt system, which oppresses it? In that way, the movie can't miss. It's well directed, decently written and powerfully acted (Mulligan is especially impressive in the lead). Streep is only in one scene of the film; and it's extremely manipulative, for the advertisers to have used her so much to sell the movie (that's not the filmmakers' fault though). I only wish the film would have been a little more emotional; it's very dramatic at times, but it seems like it could have done a little more.

Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at: https://youtu.be/CoUgbXLzKSQ

Grim but interesting

[phd_travel · 6/10 · 4 January 2016]

The suffragette movement isn't that often dramatized so this well intentioned if grim movie makes an interesting watch.

The good points about this movie: it shows that it wasn't just about the right to vote, it was about getting better conditions for exploited women workers and rights for mother's rights. Also with all the terrorism these days it is quite a revelation to see how a hundred years ago these British women were carrying acts of rebellion and terror with their bombs and explosives (the difference is of course damaging property and not aiming to hurt innocent people).

The cast performs well. As the main character, Carey Mulligan is always more than competent at acting sad even though she looks less down turned at the mouth than usual. Her character is a fictional composite and I think it doesn't ring true enough. Giving up her husband and child for the cause just seems too far fetched. Helena Bonham is less irritating than usual as a pharmacist/activist. Ben Whishaw (Q from the latest Bonds) is quite convincing here as a husband of Carey's character. He usually acts quirky roles and it's interesting to see him playing a conventional character for a change. Meryl makes only a brief appearance as a famous suffragette.

Even for such a serious topic and subject matter there is something just too grim and depressing about this movie. The force feeding was quite shocking to see. There isn't an uplifting feel at the end because the progress was just described briefly in post scripts. Why show just the struggle but no progress? Also the suicidal woman Emily at the horse races seemed a bit inconsiderate about the jockey.

It is an interesting if grim movie

Outstanding Ensemble Production

[lavatch · 9/10 · 30 March 2016]

In the bonus features on the DVD of "Suffragette," it was clear that the film was an enterprise filmed almost exclusively with women performers and film artists. Led by director Sarah Gavron, the film successfully told the story of the women's suffrage movement in England in the early twentieth century.

The screenwriters conceived a fictionalized protagonist named Maud Watts (Carey Mulligan), who was a composite of various women fighting in the England for the right to vote. Maud has been exploited in her work in the Glasshouse Laundry in Bethnal Green. She testifies in Parliament about the horrible working conditions for women, then joins the suffragettes led by the iconic figure of Emmeline Pankurst (Meryl Streep).

Maud's family life is explored in the relationship with her husband who controls all aspects of her life. He eventually evicts Maud for her activism, and he places their child up for adoption, to the horror of the mother.

The film relates the how the police used state-of-the art cameras to photograph the women in their meetings, as well as the horrid conditions in prison, including the force-feeding of women who went on a hunger strike. The tragic story of Emily Wilding Davison, who threw herself under the King's horse during the derby in 1913 is reenacted in great detail.

In the production values of the film, the VFX computer technology allowed the film artists to recreate crowd scenes and to convey the architectural style of East London in the early twentieth century. The crew of this film was the first to be allowed to film inside the hallowed walls of Parliament. The only downside of the production values was the extremely dark cinematography throughout the film.

The film's action begins in 1912, and the end crawl informs the viewer that by 1918, a breakthrough in women's suffrage had started in England in the immediate aftermath of World War I. Maud Watts was convincingly portrayed by Carey Mulligan, who brings an earnest and moving interpretation of her character. The film was exceptionally well cast with memorable performances.

As opposed to making an historical film, the director wanted to transcend the period of the suffrage movement to speak to us today about women's right across the world. The film was successful in depicting how the women's suffrage movement knew no class boundaries either in 1912 or today.

Poor Tribute

[dracher · 6/10 · 16 December 2015]

Emmeline Pankhurst was a courageous and principled woman, who suffered unimaginable indignity and scorn, at the hands of many; great and small, male and female.

She fought tirelessly for "universal suffrage" and the rights of women to be treated as equals in society, and under the law. Mrs Pankhurst understood, in the way that only a true warrior does, when to take up the sword and when to lay it down; the very men for whom she fought bravely, and alas some of the women, treated her appallingly, even to the point of stoning her in the street.

Unfortunately, the film Suffragette, has wasted its opportunity to tribute this magnificent woman from the past, and all who strove to assist with, and eventually realise many of her dreams, and those of the WSPU.

For some reason best known to her, the director has taken a clichéd view of the struggle, through modern "feminist" eyes wearing rose tinted lenses. The period setting and the overall view of society in the time is captured reasonably well, but the heart beat and the soul of the magnificent yet ordinary women of the WSPU has been missed almost entirely.

The movement, and its central players, have been lampooned, degraded and exaggerated for years; Emmeline Pankhurst's wonderful auto biography In My Own Words, was both banned and ridiculed.

Suffragette should have been an opportunity to create a clean and truthful view of Mrs Pankhurst, her husband Richard, her daughters, and all the courageous women who stood by her, marched, fought for, and even died for, the great cause. Sadly, it misses the mark, for the want of a beating heart and a soul, so essential to the historical tapestry.

Decidedly grim, sadly it never fully engages.

[Sleepin_Dragon · 5/10 · 7 January 2016]

After watching Suffragette for the second time I had hoped to have formed a different opinion, initially I left the cinema feeling bored and underwhelmed. The problem I'd say I have with it is that I find it strangely vacuous, on no level can I connect with it, or any of its characters. That is not to say that I find the acting bad, indeed far from it, there are some cracking performances, Carey Mulligan, Anne Marie Duff and for the amount she's actually in it, Helena Bonham Carter. Mulligan delivers frustration and despair well, she loses her family, her job, dignity and lashes out on her pig of a boss.

I found it a little like a grim version of Made in Dagenham with hats on. There are much better sources out there detailing the Suffragette movement, I know it's a film, but the core essence of what was being demanded, and exactly who was demanding it seemed to be lacking. Why wasn't there a single sympathetic man in the entire film, surely every single man at the time was the same? Even lovely Ben Whishaw was nasty.

Meryl Streep's speech was the highlight of the film, she had presence and added a realism to the character, in her all to brief appearance.

It's not the easiest film to get through, it leaves you feeling a little flat, with the cast and subject matter it could have been special, I wonder had it been made on the small screen as a series would it have worked better? A few lighter touches would have truly helped. I thought the credits at the end were a nice touch.

Disappointing, 5/10

Fails to engage

[miss-snoozy · 27 December 2015]

I feel the main issue with this movie is the script. It lacks depth, the characters are flat, it just failed to engage me. The actors did a good job but whats not in the script is not in the script. Meaning I feel they did their best but where not able to overcome the dullness of the script and the characters in it. The characters felt very self righteous to me, I did not feel heart. I did not feel they had real passion for the cause.

The subject you'd think is an engaging one and has potential but it did not deliver. I kept waiting for the movie to grab me somehow, it never did.

I also thought the scenery was lacking. I understand it was meant to look depressing but I felt it was more then depressing. It lacked, just like the characters did, a certain depth, a certain soul.

I don't think its a bad movie. I have certainly seen worse. But I do not recommend it.

Close, but no cigar

[nyrobins · 6/10 · 30 January 2016]

I watched this film somewhat guardedly, as I was not looking forward to the inevitably graphic depictions of forced feeding. When they finally arrived they were as expected, fairly grim.

Suffragettes was a little understated for me. A bit like a stew with some vital ingredient missing, but it was hard to say exactly what. I found it difficult to connect with many of the characters, though this was not for want of trying.

The costumes and scenery were wonderful, and I enjoyed much of the camera work. A couple of reviewers on here hint at historical inaccuracies, but they are mistaken. Working class women (and yes, men too!) really were instrumental in gaining women the vote. The clichéd idea that it was all about shouty white middle class females with bricks is just that. Or, at best, it is a partial truth - which is little better than a lie in my estimation

In fact, Asian women, some of whom faced destitution at the time, also took part, involving themselves in a broader union movement. The fact that history is often inaccurately taught in schools, and that some people cannot be bothered to research what actually happened, is probably to blame here.

I tend to agree that this was a worthy, rather than a brilliant, effort. Perhaps one day, a better film will be made about the uphill struggle women faced to enfranchise themselves.

Mulligan Stews

[writers_reign · 7/10 · 17 October 2015]

It's undeniable that the struggle for women's suffrage in England has been woefully neglected and would certainly support a good half dozen films without exhausting its importance and fascination. It's equally undeniable that screenwriter Abi Morgan has failed to deliver the standard of screenplay the subject demands; it's as if someone had indicated to Morgan that a given area of land was sitting on top of a rich seam of coal and Morgan was free to mine it to the full but instead of penetrating sufficiently deep to mine the coal she has been content to bring up the anthracite located at a shallower level. On the other hand there are some fine performances to savour, none more so than the lead - a fictional character - played by Carey Mulligan and the equally fine Ann-Marie Duff, who is responsible for raising the consciousness of Mulligan, who begins the film as a wife and mother content to work long hours in a laundry for thirteen shillings a week and winds up sans husband and child and with a prison record. THE film of the Suffragette movement is still to be made but this is a half-decent pilot fish.

A great reminder of what we still face.

[simnmr · 7/10 · 7 January 2016]

I will be honest with you, Suffragette is not a great movie, not funny like made in Dagenham, probably not a good one as well and the accent of these ladies is pretty tough, but it is still a great testimony of a really important part of our History! We should keep that in our minds when we watch our mothers, our sisters, our friends and our lovers. We should keep in mind that this fight is not over yet, that there are many things to come and we should work together to create and maintain a fair society for everybody. However, let's be truly honest with ourselves! Where are the feminists nowadays? Who has the courage to declare her/himself a feminist? And for what? Do we really need that? Just for few countries in the world that you probably never visit in your life? If you ever thought these questions without catching what is wrong now in our global society, I will give you just one reason, because you ought to yourself as a human being. Enlightening is the end of the movie with the precise dates when women gain the right to vote in each country.

A revolution that fought within a nation, within a race, within a family.

[Reno-Rangan · 8/10 · 4 April 2016]

Biographical movies are always fascinating. If it is not something worthy, the movie would have not taken up the shape. It was a very good movie, and a very important historical subject. It has been 100 years since and now the world we live-in is much different and better. I think after thousands of years, now the women got their freedom.

I thought I knew this story very well, but it was 'Made in Dagenham' which is quite similar to this which is also based on the real. Both the stories take place 50 years apart, but this one was the beginning of a new era for women, not without sacrifices and sufferings.

Great actors, great actings, awesome storytelling, cinematography at its best, direction was amazing and the music was so pleasant, but the method of dealing was a bit gruesome, and sometimes brutal. I thought the terrorism is a new word, but this movie gives a different perspective and meaning to that.

You would definitely love this film if you respect women. All women cast movie, including the director, but for everyone. It might have begun in the UK, but the entire planet saw a drastic change and still taking place in some places. I don't see any reason why I should not recommend it to you.

8/10

A lukewarm drama that doesn't live up to the incredible true story

[themadmovieman · 7/10 · 12 October 2015]

The story of the Suffragette movement in Britain is a legendary one, and one of such historical importance about the brutality of traditional oppression even in developed countries, and the innovative aggression taken up by the women to have their voices heard.

However, this film unfortunately fails to live up to that legacy. This should have been a powerfully emotionally and politically charged drama, with a dark, brutal atmosphere to highlight the terrible oppression these women faced, but all it actually is is a disappointingly dry history lesson that lacks the passion of the story it's trying to tell.

For starters, this isn't an awful film. The plot in itself is interesting, in a historical manner, and some of the performances are decent, but nothing spectacular, and definitely not Oscar- worthy, so if you're not really into the history of the Suffragettes, this isn't the film to learn from, because there's nothing truly outstanding to grab you and give you a convincing lesson about the incredible true story.

On occasion, the film does manage to give some emotional angst to Carey Mulligan's main character and her relationship with her son, and in those few scenes, it is quite something, but on the whole, there's next to no powerful emotion throughout here, and you just don't really feel the brutal oppression that would make you care for these women.

Yes, the oppression and the brutality is clearly presented on screen, but the reason that you don't feel it is because this film as a whole really lacks the passion to give a convincing representation of the history. If you think about the Suffragette movement, it's one of the most aggressive and powerful movements of all time, fuelled by the incredible passion that the people behind it felt as they sought to break free from their oppressed lifestyles.

So you would think that the film telling that story would try to evoke that in some way, and although you can see the odd spirited attempt by lead actresses Carey Mulligan, Helena Bonham Carter and Anne-Marie Duff to do so, you get next to no real feeling of that political passion at any point in the film, which is a real disappointment.

Overall, Suffragette was not a particularly impressive film, because despite telling what is a historically interesting story, it fails to deliver the passionate and captivating details of what is a genuinely incredible true story.

http://madmovieman.com/1117-suffragette-2015/

oppression and rebellion

[SnoopyStyle · 8/10 · 13 April 2016]

It's 1912. Peaceful demonstrations have achieved little for suffrage in Britain. Suffragettes are resorting to vandalism. Maud Watts (Carey Mulligan) is a young mother working in a laundry for most of her life. She suffered under her lascivious boss Mr. Taylor. Co-worker Violet Miller recruits her into the movement. After testifying to Minister Lloyd George, the government still refuses to give the vote. Maud is beaten and arrested along with MP wife Alice Haughton (Romola Garai), Violet and Edith Ellyn (Helena Bonham Carter). Police inspector Steed (Brendan Gleeson) leads the effort to suppress the rebels. Suffragette leader Emmeline Pankhurst (Meryl Streep) urges the women to fight. After another arrest, Maud is thrown out by her husband Sonny Watts (Ben Whishaw) and by law, loses her rights to her own son.

One would expect an uplifting feel-good inspirational movie from the subject matter. The fact is that this is a dour, depressed telling of the struggle that is not simply marching and sit-ins. The violence is brutal but it's the overwhelming oppression that is even more brutal. The downtrodden acting by Carey Mulligan is superb. It is a movie of suffering and women with no choice but to rebel.

An intense and moving drama that tracks the story of the foot soldiers of the early feminist movement

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 15 March 2023]

This is the stirring story inspired by the women who inspired the world concerning a brave woman , dealing with her fight for dignity , it is as gripping and visceral as any thriller, it is also heartbreaking and inspirational .In 1912 London, a young working mother called Maud Watts (Carey Mulligan) , married to lower-class worker Sonny Watts (Ben Whishaw), is galvanized into radical political activism supporting the right for women to vote, and is willing to meet violence with violence to achieve this end. Never give up !. The time is now !. Women unite !. Deeds not words !. Change starts now! Mothers. Daughters. Rebels. Do something. Change something. Find your voice

The Historical drama, set in London follows the early members of the Women's Social and Political Union and the story of their radicalisation from peaceful protesters to law breakers. Women who were forced underground to pursue a dangerous game of cat-and-mouse with an increasingly brutal State. These women were not primarily from the genteel educated classes, they were working women who had seen peaceful protest achieve nothing. Radicalized and turning to violence as the only route to change, they were willing to lose everything in their fight for equality--their jobs, their homes, their children, and their lives. Stars Carey Mulligan giving a fine acting as Maud Watts who was one such foot soldier to get the female vote . Being well accompanied by a splendid cast , such as : Ben Whishaw, Romola Garai, Brendan Gleeson , Nathalie Press , Helena Bonham Carter, Ann Marie Duff , Sarah Finigan , Samuel West , Clive Wood, among others. Suffragette (2015) is a Directoral collaboration between Sarah Gavron (Brick Lane) who carries out a nice filming and writer Abi Morgan (Iron Lady), funded by the British Film Institute.

Based on historical events and providing some biographic remarks about Emmeline Pankhurst -very well played by Meryl Streep- , she was a British political activist who organised the UK suffragette movement and helped women win the right to vote In 1903. Pankhurst founded the Women's Social and Political Union (WSPU), an all-women suffrage advocacy organisation dedicated to "deeds, not words". The group identified as independent from - and often in opposition to - political parties. It became known for physical confrontations: its members smashed windows and assaulted police officers. Pankhurst, her daughters, and other WSPU activists received repeated prison sentences, where they staged hunger strikes to secure better conditions, and were often force-fed. As Pankhurst's eldest daughter Christabel took leadership of the WSPU, antagonism between the group and the government grew. Eventually, the group adopted arson as a tactic, and more moderate organisations spoke out against the Pankhurst family. In 1913, several prominent individuals left the WSPU, among them Pankhurst's younger daughters, Adela and Sylvia. Emmeline was so furious that she "gave a ticket, £20, and a letter of introduction to a suffragette in Australia, and firmly insisted that she emigrate". Adela complied and the family rift was never healed. Sylvia became a socialist. With the advent of the First World War, Emmeline and Christabel called an immediate halt to the militant terrorism in support of the British government's stand against the "German Peril". Emmeline organised and led a massive procession called the Women's Right to Serve demonstration to illustrate women's contribution to the war effort. Emmeline and Christabel urged women to aid industrial production and encouraged young men to fight, becoming prominent figures in the white feather movement. In 1918, the Representation of the People Act granted votes to all men over the age of 21 and women over the age of 30. This discrepancy was intended to ensure that men did not become minority voters as a consequence of the huge number of deaths suffered during the First World War. She transformed the WSPU machinery into the Women's Party, which was dedicated to promoting women's equality in public life. While working as a Poor Law Guardian, she was shocked at the harsh conditions she encountered in Manchester's workhouses. In her later years, she became concerned with what she perceived as the menace posed by Bolshevism and joined the Conservative Party. She was selected as the Conservative candidate for Whitechapel and St Georges in 192. She died on 14 June 1928, only weeks before the Conservative government's Representation of the People Act 1928 extended the vote to all women over 21 years of age on 2 July 1928.

Suffragette

[abouhelier-r · 9/10 · 22 November 2015]

The foot soldiers of the early feminist movement, women who were forced underground to pursue a dangerous game of cat and mouse with an increasingly brutal State.

The period drama is a rarity for major studios because it is often directed, written and produced by women. Though, this combo gained importance these years; due to renewed scrutinizing of the industry's gender imbalance. Director Sarah Gavron said it has taken 100 years for the story to reach the screen and she'd been wanting to do it for over a decade now. And she created a somehow formally conservative account of a revolutionary moment in history. Intertwined socioeconomic details with domestic melodrama. Nowadays, calling a woman a "militant feminist" is an insult in order to belittle a woman's anger, Suffragette does serve as an eye-opening reminder of what the term itself actually means. This movie isn't just about one woman's awakening to the cause, it's so much more.

This film has two major assets in its awards push: Carey Mulligan and plenty of goodwill. In fact, Carey Mulligan gives a nuanced central performance supported by strong performances from both Helena Bonham Carter and Anne-Marie Duff. The choice to focus on a fictional character who never feels like more than a symbol for a whole generation is pretty clever. That's what Maud Watts feels like: a shorthand for an idea that Suffragette offers up but doesn't really engage. Indeed the working class women who joined the movement had more to lose, fewer protections and were sometimes cannon fodder. Nonetheless, Mulligan holds the film together. She is in nearly every scene, clearly conveying the character's growing convictions. However, Meryl Streep provides a fleetingly aloof cameo, rallying the troops from a balcony before disappearing into the night. Here, the real firebrand is Helena Bonham Carter's character; who provides the movement's combustible spark.

This film has other strengths, including the production design by Alice Normington, costume design by Jane Petrie and score by Alexandre Desplat. This is a genuinely important story and Suffragette tells it without stylistic fuss. In fact, this altogether more polemical work provides a solidly researched and at time surprisingly grim film. Finally, exiting the screening, I thought every woman - and men - needed to see this movie.

Overall some people will love this film but even those who won't, couldn't help rooting for it; given the subject matter and the filmmaking team.

A movie that is very important historically and inspiring to any one that is involved in any type of ideological fight.

[cosmo_tiger · 7/10 · 30 January 2016]

"You want me to respect the law? Then make the law respectable." Maud (Mulligan) is a woman living in England in the early 1900's. She is living her life peacefully and trying not to make waves. Little by little she gets caught up in the suffrage movement and becomes a major player in trying to get women the vote. The movement she is in decides that peace is not the way to get things done, but this violence leads to even more hardship. This is a movie that is very good and important, but hard to watch in some parts. It may be because I was born after women had the right to vote but I found no real reason why they shouldn't in this movie and it really led to me feeling angry. The resolve of these women in the face of total opposition from nearly the entire country only serves to show how important getting the vote really was. A movie that is very important historically and inspiring to any one that is involved in any type of ideological fight. Overall, I really enjoyed this but it is very emotional and one you have to be in the mood for. I give this a B.

Worthy But Disappointing

[JackCerf · 5/10 · 15 November 2015]

Solid performances, great period design, and a historical event worth telling. Unfortunately, the script is clichéd, giving us two stock characters -- the Radicalized Innocent and the Worldly Wise Secret Policeman -- who go through their expected paces. You could probably tell the same story today with a European Muslim in the Carey Mulligan role.

Getting involved in Suffragette activism upends the life of Mulligan's character, Maud. It cuts her off from her work, her husband, her child and her community, but it introduces her to a wider world of ideas and of people of a higher social class who she would never otherwise have known. It would have been fascinating to learn what became of Maud in her new milieu, what kind of job she found, and what kind of new life she built with her old one in ruins. In particular, it would have been interesting to see how she dealt with the new opportunities for English women created by World War I. That would have been an empowerment story to get involved in. But the movie just drops Maud with a historical footnote about when women got the vote in the UK and various other countries.