North Country

I hate to give North Country a relatively low vote because this is such an important issue, and I appreciate the good intentions of director Niki Caro, and the A-list actors who no doubt took a big pay cut when agreeing to take a role.

On the other hand, I feel disappointed, a little angry, as well as insulted as a woman that this hugely important story was made into a melodrama that flattens out what really happened, and somehow manages to diminish the political nature of sexual harassment, even while seeming to highlight it.

At least 90 percent of the problem had to do with Michael Seitzman's script.

In the interview with Seitzman on the DVD, he makes clear that he didn't think the sexual harassment story was the real story. The real story, he said, was the traumatic experience Josie had in high school, and her relationship with her son.

Therefore he should have written a script for Lifetime focusing on what he felt was the "real story". He should not have used one of the most important cases for sexual harassment in legal history as the vehicle for telling this other story.

The producers should have demanded a script that more closely resembled Susannah Grant's Erin Brockovich. The sequence of victimization after victimization depicted in North Country didn't let us get to know Josie's character in any depth. We saw her slammed against the wall again and again, from beginning to end. We see that she stands up against the oppression, but we aren't taken into her sensibility, her choices, her process, her blind spots, character change, etc, etc, like in EB. Likewise, the lack of complexity in the male "macho" characters also flattens the story, and takes away from the real difficulties in challenging sexism and sexual harassment. In real life, character complexity of those who oppress or who defend oppressors is part of what makes the problem of sexual harassment difficult to fight.

I read an interview with Niki Caro, and though I think she's a very talented director, I got the sense that she didn't really get the politics or history behind sexual harassment. It seems things aren't as bad in New Zealand as they are here in the U.S. This is a foreign culture to her, and Northern Minnesota is certainly a foreign culture. I wish she would have spent more time fully understanding the issues and cultural dynamics (including the accent and mannerisms of the area, etc, which were sprinkled into the movie, but not rigorously replicated) before undertaking the project. If she had gone the extra mile to immerse herself in the issue and the region, perhaps she would have demanded a total rewrite of the script.

In the iron mines of Northern Minnesota circa 1989, a single mother of two with a shady-lady past goes to work as a miner and encounters personally degrading harassment from the mostly male crew. A compassionate and sensitive rewriting of a true incident--one that took some 10 years to resolve in the courts--but possibly overcrowded with too much melodramatic content. Supporting characters (like Frances McDormand's dump truck driver and Sissy Spacek's salt-of-the-earth mama) do not get enough quality screen-time to completely validate the time which they do have. The overripe finale is also questionable (were these filmmakers ever in a courtroom before?), though it does provide the audience with the emotional release it needs. In the lead, Charlize Theron gives a finely-wrought, gripping performance; she shows her guts, fear and bravery, but I'm not sure how convincing she is as mother to an older teenage boy (it seems a little soon for Theron). Does the film show all sides and give both the men and the women a fair shake? Probably not, but it's surprisingly not a man-haters movie, either. Told from the female protagonist's point of view, the emphasis is on her endurance against a certain group of men, taking a stand and speaking up for herself. It's inspiring, if a little corny. **1/2 from ****

This film addresses the first case of success in which a group of female workers won the firm in court in a class action of harassment and sexual discrimination. Everything happens in the mines of Minnesota but, over a real case, director Niki Caro and screenwriter Michael Seitzman decided to create a deeply melodramatic story centered on the figure of a young woman, mother of two children from different parents and with a past marred by rape and a bad marriage. She becomes the main target of the jokes, obscene gestures and provocations of the miners, who feel that women are stealing jobs from men. The story is very emotional but works well anyway. An interesting point is that, even when things are tense, the two sides are not defined by their sex, that is, even in those moments there are women who are not in favor of complaining, just as there are men who don't approve of the rude and coarse attitudes of their fellows. This allows the public to understand that the issue is not men vs. women, goes far beyond mere sexism.

Charlize Theron is a good actress but seems visually too young for the character sometimes. Anyway, she managed to shine. Richard Jenkins has been OK but acts in a predictable way. Frances McDormand did very well, especially in the final half of the movie, where she really shows talent. Jeremy Renner manages to be truly despicable as the villain. Technically regular, it's a good movie and it deserves to be watched.

Dramatic license is certainly forgivable but this film would have been much more effective if not for the beyond-Perry-Mason touches in the courtroom where the plaintiff's case is rescued at the 11th hour and 59th minute by antics that wouldn't pass muster in any courtroom in America, unless the defendant's attorney (Linda Emond) was utterly incompetent and the judge was a blithering idiot. Surely it should have been possible for a competent script writer to bring the drama to its conclusion in a more believable way. The manifest absurdity of the last 15 minutes of the movie undermined (for me) what was otherwise another excellent performance by Charlize Theron and the usual outstanding work of Frances McDormand. For those who haven't seen her on the stage, this may have been the first time most movie goers will have encountered Linda Emond, who plays the defense attorney. She is a gifted actress who deserves better than being asked to stand by like a cigar store Indian while the plaintiff's attorney (Woody Harrelson) commits every procedural violation that could possibly be conceived. Don't blame Harrelson, however. The one-time goofy bartender of "Cheers" actually does very well in the scenes outside the courtroom. Frankly, I wish this film had stuck more closely to the facts and avoided the phony fireworks at the end.

This is an important film about more than just Sexual harassment. It is more than a movie about Women. This movie deals with true courage. About the possibility just one person can accomplish!!! It's about taking a stand, and knowing right from wrong!!

This movie was very tastefully done. It features a A list cast. With A list acting. It tackles a very important and very necessary message.

I'm rather puzzled with some of the reviews. However, to each their own.

I found the movie was well acted and well done.

I also found the ending to be perfect!!!