La dama de hierro

Meryl Streep is "The Iron Lady," Margaret Thatcher, in her Oscar-winning performance from 2011.

I'm a little bit at a loss here. I'm not British, so as far as what Mrs. Thatcher did and did not do during her tenure, there's no way I can comment on the way it was portrayed. It does seem from reading other reviews that dramatic license was used.

I really can only write about the film and the acting. Directed by Phyllida Lloyd, "The Iron Lady" uses flashbacks of an elderly, widowed, demented Mrs. Thatcher to tell her story. It's on the choppy side. That Thatcher was a strong, determined, ambitious woman, there is no doubt, but there were smoother ways to tell her story.

As far as Meryl Streep, as someone who was an actress myself and as someone who has been watching Meryl Streep since she was in the film "Julia," I can say that initially, there was criticism of her because you could, as actors say, "see her working." When she made a "choice" as an actress, it was transparently just that, a choice, not part of the character. I heard someone speak of her once, and she said, "I watch her and I think oh, what an interesting choice." Well, as the years have gone by, a lot of that is less evident, and many of her performances have been nothing short of magnificent. I must say that I am very, very sensitive to "acting," where someone puts on a character like they would a coat. In a biopic, this becomes an impersonation.

I won't say there were no moments of "impersonation" here, maybe there were a few, but Streep did an absolutely fabulous job inhabiting Margaret Thatcher. I can't imagine how many hours of footage she watched, and when she was elderly, Streep was elderly in her walk and in every other way possible. Having had a mother with dementia, the look in Streep's eyes when Thatcher zoned out was perfection, right on.

One reviewer said "impersonation" is easy to do. Maybe, but this wasn't impersonation. I felt it was organic, and I lost awareness that I was watching Meryl Streep.

The real star of the film was her performance, not the script. I can't comment on the strong resemblance actors had to other politicians. If they did, there's nothing wrong with that.

All in all, worth seeing for Streep's performance.

Iron Lady, The (2011)

* 1/2 (out of 4)

Incredibly disappointing film about the life of Margaret Thatcher (Meryl Streep) from her early days to her rise to power. I'll start off with the obvious and that's the fact that Streep has once again delivered a remarkable performance. I'm really not sure how she does it but even under tons of make-up to make herself look like the elderly Thatcher, Streep still manages to get across various emotions and just look into those beautiful eyes and you can see everything you need to know. The actress has become legendary for many reasons but one of them is due to her uncanny accents and the one here is among the greatest you're ever going to hear. I should also mention that the previously mentioned make-up effects are wonderful and the people behind J. EDGAR should have asked for some advice on making people looking older. With all of that said, take away Streeps wonderful performance and you're left with one of the worst movies of the year and something so boring and lifeless that it's doubtful it would find its way onto the made-for-TV level. I wasn't sure what to expect going into the movie but I must say that I was blown away at how lifeless, silly and incredibly boring the entire thing was. I'm not an expert on the history covered in this film nor do I know a lot about Thatcher but if they couldn't come up with more interesting parts of her life than what's on display here then perhaps no film should have been made. For the life of me I can't understand why the screenwriter, producers and director decided to tell the movie in the fashion that they did. We start off with the elderly Thatcher having hallucinations of herself carrying on conversations with her dead husband. We then get flashback to various parts of her life. However, I was shocked to see that the majority of the running time deals with Thatcher and these fake conversations with her dead husband. I mean, could they not have focused on something other that these conversations? Was there a point of showing her in this fashion? Did they think this was going to add some sort of drama? The only thing it adds is the viewer constantly looking at their watch to see how much longer they have until the film is over. By the time the movie was over I really couldn't say I learned too much about Thatcher and worst of all is the fact that I didn't care about anything I was seeing. The only bit of a lifeline to be found is when we see Thatcher starting to take off in the political world but this is mainly due to Streep's fiery performance. THE IRON LADY will be remembered for one reason but even the greatness of Streep isn't enough to save the picture.

When the film begins, it's a little confusing. Since Margaret Thatcher has been suffering in real life from dementia is recent years, her muddled thoughts are mirrored in the film. For example, some of the scenes with her husband take place AFTER his death--as she didn't always realize he was not there. It's all quite sad and is probably NOT the way many want to remember this great lady. However, there is nothing evil about aging and memory problems--and I applaud the film for its unflinching view of a severely debilitated woman--but why spend so much of the film on this? It was THE theme of the movie--more so than her political life. It also made the film VERY confusing and difficult to follow--and the sequence is quite jarring. In hindsight, I would have preferred a more traditional narrative and I assume most others would agree--especially since too much of the film is about her jumbled mind today and not her many achievements. It also might have been best that such a pathetic sort of persona had come out well after Thatcher's death--it seemed rather sad to do a film like this now. I would have simply ended the film after she stepped down as Prime Minister.

Despite this well deserved criticism, it's still a film I recommend. Although the writing could have been better, the acting and makeup couldn't. Meryl Streep rightfully earned the Oscar for Best Actress for this one--perhaps her best performance to date. To put it succinctly, she WAS Margaret Thatcher! And, to make this illusion even more real, the makeup was perfect--aging her in a manner that made you truly believe what you were seeing.

There's no doubt about it: Meryl Streep will be nominated for her 17th Academy Award for her portrayal of Britain's most controversial Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, in this otherwise underwhelming biopic. Streep is mesmerizing as usual, but the mode of storytelling employed by screenwriter Abi Morgan and director Phyllida Lloyd – sporadic flashbacks among elongated stretches of following the elderly and mentally fragile Maggie – is a huge misfire. The scenes which recount her path from young adulthood through to local politics and then to her 11 years of turbulent leadership are intriguing, however they are too far and few between to really grip. Sure, it checks off the list as far as famous moments go, but a more in depth insight into how she ran the country would've been nice.

This is largely a negative picture of Thatcher, which may be fair, but I would have preferred a picture of her that showed both sides - why people despised her and why those who loved her did. It spends a lot of time focusing on her mental decline in her later years, which was kind of slow and boring. I thought this missed a chance to be a deeper character exploration.