La dama de hierro

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.

Before viewing, "The Iron Lady", I didn't really know much about Margaret Thatcher. Other than she was the prime minister of England for 11 years, she was a very controversial figure and still is to this day. So I was really interested to see the film and I decided to visit the WGA screening.

Now let me begin by saying, Meryl Streep embodies Margaret Thatcher. She doesn't just look like her, but she talks like her, her facial expressions are spot on. Meryl Streep becomes Margaret Thatcher. I would be shocked if she doesn't win an Oscar for this performance. The supporting cast is good too, Jim Broadbent gives an excellent performance, everyone is just great.

However aside from the top notch acting, the movie had a few flaws. The story was uninteresting at times, the flashback scenes were a bit muddled and a little confusing. The movie felt a little too safe, it tried too hard, not to be controversial. Although I don't entirely blame the film itself for that. Margaret Thatcher was such a decisive person, that whichever side the film picked, it would be criticized by a lot of people. I guess the film ultimately achieved the goal.

I also liked the movie didn't dwell too much on the politics, but on the character of Margaret Thatcher. We see the human side of The Iron Lady herself, beyond all the partisan politics and rumors, we get to see a very personal and sad side of her. The subplot focusing on Thacther's grief over her husband's death, as the older version battles with hallucinations and an unwillingness to let go of her dear Denis are heartbreaking.

Overall the movie was really well done, but just shy of greatness. Meryl Streep's performance and the supporting cast, truly elevates the film into a great biopic. Although I wished a little more time was spent on focusing on her political life, the movie successfully showed a deep and moving side of the prime minister. Which a lot of biopics fail to do. Whatever your opinions might be on Margaret Thatcher, don't fault the movie because of the opinion. And I highly respect Phyllida LLoyd, Meryl Streep, Abi Morgan and others for trying to portray such a decisive and highly controversial figure.

Biopics are always a problem. That's why the long form, HBO style is infinitely more suitable and altogether more satisfying. Okay, now, once that aside, let me talk about Meryl Streep. A miracle! She does the impossible, not only manages to inhabit Thatcher, she also reveals her under a slightly different light. The human light. No matter how much at odds I've been with her politics, I saw that human side through Meryl Streep's eyes and realized that I had forgotten to remember, Thatcher was a human being, a woman breaking ground. She loved her husband but put her career first, as most men in her position do. Her drive is a mystery as much a mystery as Meryl Streep's art. After seeing the film, me, a life long anti-Thatcher, I have to say that it's a fair portrait of the woman. The ones who never heard of Margaret Thatcher, and there are, two of them were sitting next to me in theater, I think they thought "The Iron Lady" was the female version of "Iron Man" but even them surrendered to the character trough the glories of this other giant of our generation, Meryl Streep.

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.

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.