Review of Suffragette (2015) by Kurtiss K — 30 Nov 2015

The mother of the British suffragette movement Emmeline Pankhurst died the same year as women were given full voting privileges in 1928, after decades of toil and strife, it seemed destined. But what was not decided was that after much marketing of the name of Oscar winning actress Meryl Streep as Pankhurst herself, the legendary figure only appeared on screen for a rousing 3-minute speech, then said her goodbyes and vanished, to much disappointment. Nevertheless, the group of fact and fictional suffragetteâ??s assembled for this second-tier Oscar winner wannabe are quite a hard-hitting yet fragile bunch, that this examination of a pivotal period in the suffragette movement proves to be quite insightful and rewarding. Set during the early 1910s, Suffragette tells the story of Maud Watts, a working girl married with a little son, who becomes friends with a co-worker who also happens to be a suffragette, and soon finds herself attracted to this militant lifestyle simply because she opens her eyes to her inferior situation, something which costs her her family and defines her persona. Carey Mulligan, the London-born actress gives a resounding performance in the lead role of this coming-of-awareness drama. She transforms from a brittle and submissive nobody into an independent, fully rectified woman with a newfound cause for life with a credibility that sees her thrive during both her emotional and rebellious moods. Through Mulligan, we are allowed access into the position of a woman at that time as a mother, sister, wife, colleague, friend with a common cause and suffragette, making Suffragette truly incisive in its exploration of the female cause that it cannot be a bad film because it does exactly what it needs to. There is however a sense of unfinished business regarding the film as a package that when the end comes its resolution isnâ??t strong enough. We all know the history of the suffragette movement is too great to encompass in one outing, and although Iâ??m not advocating a series of suffragette films, at 106 minutes, it could have taken on more in terms of the widespread history of the story, and used Meryl Streep a lot more. The climax interestingly chooses Emily Davisonâ??s fatal encounter with King George Vâ??s horse Anmer at the Epsom Derby in 1913, much earlier than 1918â??s and 1928â??s legitimate breakthrough in voting rights therefore after Davisonâ??s demise, the film is too quick to end and to be honest suffers because with a longer running time, this event could have been used as a stepping block to success to get a better sense of achievement. Maybe it did want us to feel unfulfilled in order to get the same feeling woman have felt fighting for this cause, and the unsavoury thought that this is still continuing. One thingâ??s for sure, itâ??s embarrassing thinking that this oppression was not that long ago, and utterly bemusing how power could be given to such people when their treatment of the other half of the human race was a degrading, and for the women that treated the suffragette women with contempt and shame should be held in high disgrace. The listing of nations at the end and they year in which they gave women their lawful rights is quite astonishing considering the fact that if we rewind time back to the 19th century, men ran everything and women had to struggle quietly. And the final country on that list will send shockwaves down your spine because as you are watching Suffragette, Saudi Arabia have only started in 2015 to provide females with basic voting rights. It truly is bewildering how disparate relations are in this world, that this oppression could still be going on in a 21st century that makes movies recounting how much it has changed.

The Verdict:

Suffragette gives an insightful look, thanks to Carey Mulligan, into the womenâ??s suffrage movement despite feeling incomplete as history, maybe because it still is sorely relevant.

â??â??â??â??â??â??â??â??â??â?? 8/10.