Amonita

Kate Winslet plays Mary Anning, a famous fossil hunter / palaeontologist with exhibits in the British Museum, who must now sell ammonites to tourists etc just to keep her and her mother, Gemma Jones, going. Into her life comes convalescing, well off Saoirse Ronan who stays with Winslet until she has recovered. A deepening relationship begins.

Remarkably touching, beautifully acted - especially by Winslet - and nicely lean love story set against the backdrop of a drab, miserable 19th century Lyme Regis. The 2 leads make a completely believable couple and the affection is bought forward slowly and ultimately quite explicitly. It is a quiet gentle film with no obvious romance or great outpourings of emotion or melodrama and all the better for that. I loved the ending.

I just wanna point out that the scenes with no dialogue are the one's that say a lot ... Kate Winslet masters the way she talks only with her eyes.

Ammonite excavates the depths of intense lesbian romance. Strong acting would be an understatement. There are a few twists and turns along the way, some of them even predictable but Winslet's authentic performance as her meticulous, passionate character along with the performance of Ronan, keeps us rapt. The film has a captivating cinematography with stark physical beauty and colour palette of the beaches, sets and constumes. However, despite the plot being quite stretched out, Director doesn't fails to deliver a heartwarming and memorable experience.

I put this film in the genre of Lesbian Twaddle - I can say that as I am one. I'm not sure who these films are aimed at, but that is beside the point. My main problem with this film is the misogyny and it is a big problem. Very rarely does a film make me cross, but this one did. It also makes me cross that I have only found one review that picks up on this issue. It's on a website called Paste if anyone wants to look it up. Many people question, why make up a lesbian romance for Mary Anning when there is no evidence for one, but no-one questions the misogynistic approach. I personally don't have a problem with the lesbian bit -we have been written out of history.

The initial premise of the film and main focus of the first half hour or so, it to highlight the misogyny of the scientific establishment at the time and Mr Murchison's treatment of his wife. The ultimate irony is that, Francis Lee by his portrayal of Charlotte Murchison and Elizabeth Philpot (Fiona Shaw), does both these women a great dis-service. Charlotte is portrayed as vapid and Elizabeth as some old hippy type making herbal remedies, when they were both accomplished scientists in their own right and had interesting lives. The film is misogynistic because it gives less attribution to their paleontology achievements than did the male-dominated natural history circles at the time!

Unless Francis Lee simply wants to maintain his position as prime director of LGBT films (I thought God's Own Country was excellent), I don't know why he felt the need, when Mary Anning had a very eventful life which would have made a much better film, to create a mythical lesbian romance. He would have done just as well to base a film on her brother Joseph. Rich man from London turns up in Lyme Regis with his errant son, leaves him with Joseph because he thinks a bit of sea air and hard work in the upholstery trade will turn his life around. A bit of drudgery with horsehair and cotton wadding, then sex on a pebbly beach - job done!

I gave the film six stars because it was well acted and the cinematography and costumes were excellent. However two last points that I think were huge gaffs. No-one in 1840 and who kept their own chickens would cook an addled egg or one with a chick in (it happened so fast I couldn't quite see) as eggs would be collected every day and you know if a hen has gone broody is sitting on eggs. Gone off eggs float when put in a bowl of water. Also I'm sure men did not tie their scarves in a Hoxton knot in 19th Century England - maybe on the continent but not here!

Ferociously slow and meandering, lacking the passion and emotion of its contemporaries and a little too long for what it bestows, which is a rather bleak and salty tale of two lost and lonely women, one of which has had her flint removed and couldn't catch light if you dosed her in kerosene and dropped her into the sun. There's always, at least, a little optimism and expectation, hope perhaps, even in the most forlorn of our turbulent times, but seemingly not here.