In 1979 (a year before my first visit to Britain), Hilda Margaret Thatcher quoted St Francis of Assisi, telling reporters and the Nation: “Where there is discord, may we bring harmony. Where there is error, may we bring truth. Where there is doubt, may we bring faith. And where there is despair, may we bring hope”. Almost immediately she set off on a course which brought disharmony to many and took hope away from almost anyone who fell below the line of achievement she and her government deemed worth worrying about.
I watched in horror on subsequent visits as the Docklands area was cleared to make way for mammon, sweeping away history and the poor who got in the way of progress. Many years later I actually like that area but the world and history is littered with perfectly pleasant, even spectacular places that are there at the expense of others. Visit Shanghai sometime and you’ll see what I mean.
While I admire the woman’s leadership and determination I despise her politics and the unflinching dedication to crushing so much that was good about the country. To her credit she wasn't of the John Howard school of hanging on to power at all counts and formulating policy with an eye on election results rather than principle and what was actually good for the country.
Her single-mindedness was breathtaking; you only have to reflect on the shocking Falklands War and her determination to produce not just a definitive result but a crushing victory to avenge British deaths. The Belgrano incident was an indictment on anyone who claimed to be a person of peace and who valued human life. In 74 days she ruled and commanded while just over 900 people died (that’s a better kill rate than most wars). The Lady may not have been for turning but her legacy is definitely one for mourning.
I came to 'Iron Lady' with great expectations, there are few people around who come anywhere near Meryl Streep for talent, class and integrity in performance. We are simply blessed to be around at the same time as she is and I would go to see her read the White Pages. As an actor she is extraordinary, as an interpreter of words she is amazing and as an artiste she sets the benchmark for almost everyone else. Not since Katherine Hepburn has someone demonstrated how the magic of filmaking is enhanced by depth of talent.
This film is a mish mash of historical material, shoddy framing and slack directing. There is no creativity about it and I think that's what movies need, otherwise they are documentaries (re-enactments or otherwise). Meryl's performance is NOT one of acting, it is pure impersonation and in that respect it is pure and fantastic, one of the best ever...BUT it is not acting. Acting to me requires creating a situation out of dramatic intent, stirring the imagination, inventing something real out of fantasy. I saw Margaret Thatcher as I could have seen in a collection of newsreels of the events depicted, for the words were as said and even the stance in locations were 'copied' - where's the 'acting' in that? The only times acting came into it were the faintly twee and possibly offensive 'imaginings' about the elderly Thatcher. Sadly, they were so twee they were almost vomit making BUT at least they were acting. If only those moments had a strong script to sustain them (or do I mean justify them).
To make my point consider 'The Queen'; whilst Mirren 'does' Her Maj very well it is all imagined, the historical part is fact but the behind the scenes dialogue and set ups with the 'family' were all made up. This required acting to make it real ('how would they behave in this situation', 'how would she say this, what inflections would she use when talking to Philip' etc)and Mirren nailed it.
So the hype has built the film into something it is not and made this remarkable actor's appearance something it is not.
Go see 'J Edgar' instead - exquisite and inspired (and Leo and Naomi show what it's all about).
No comments:
Post a Comment