Women Talking - Il diritto di scegliere

It's an ensemble drama set within 24 hours in 2010 in an unknown location. It follows the conversation of three generations of women discussing how to respond to the sexual abuse and rape experienced by many women in the colony over the previous years.

The conversation occurs while the colony's men are away in the city, raising bail for colony men arrested for sexual crimes. Eight women participate in most of the discussion. Two grandmother matriarchs are Agata (Judith Ivey) and Greta (Sheila McCarthy). The next generation includes Ona (Rooney Mara), an unmarried woman pregnant with a child resulting from rape. Mariche (Jessie Buckley) is married to a very abusive husband. Salome (Clare Foy) is Ona's younger married sister who is very angry over the abuse of her young daughter. Some girls from the next generation provide comments and some narration to the film. Scarface Janz (Frances McDormand), another matriarch, leaves the discussion early. Since the women are illiterate (only boys go to school), they ask the schoolteacher, August (Ben Whishaw), to record their discussion. August, who had left the colony with his mother, was university-educated but was allowed to return to teach school.

The film shows no sexual violence but does show some results of the violence. The only adult male face seen throughout is that of August. The women discuss three options: staying and forgiving the perpetrators, staying and fighting the perpetrators, or leaving with all the children under a certain age. They must make a quick decision because one of the men is returning from the city in the evening. The decision taken by the group is a very "Mennonite" one.

I had a lot of ambivalence going into the film. I didn't like the novel when I read it several years ago. The author closely tied the story to accounts of crimes in one of Bolivia's very conservative Mennonite groups. However, the novel's nuanced dialogue was far beyond illiterate Mennonite women without education who could not even read a map. And a university-educated August would never be allowed back to teach in such a conservative colony.

Sarah Polley extracts the story from Mennonite specificity (the film never mentions the word and doesn't mention "Mennonite" last names). Polley uses very subdued colors in the filming, reinforcing the conservative impression. Although the movie's setting still looks Mennonite, its greater abstraction allowed me to focus on the issues being discussed--rage, forced ignorance, the necessity of faith and how to reconcile this faith with what happened, how best to embody their pacifist ethic, etc. The discussion is wide-ranging and doesn't provide easy and ready solutions. Rooney Mara, Claire Foy, and Jessie Buckley are excellent as they express contrasting and shifting perspectives.

"Women Talking" probably needs to be seen multiple times to get all the layers. The Mennonite context sells the movie, but for me, it only made sense to push that representation to the rear. I wish critics would focus on it less. The film's ending unfolds a little too slowly once their decision has been made.

You go to bed then wake up bruised, bloody, quite groggy and confused; you know instantly, that your body's been abused, your mind cannot conceive, all the torment and the grief, but you're not the only one, that's being used. So the women of the colony convene, to discuss the implications of what's been, carry on like there's no wrong, stay and fight which might prolong, or leave this place, put barriers between. The conversations, confrontations ebb and flow, the picture of what's taken place is shown, anguish, misery and despair, amongst a culture built on prayer, where the men have their own rules, their manifesto.

It's a wonderful piece of filmmaking that engages from the outset with great dialogue, a disturbing story, and an empowering conclusion - with outstanding performances throughout.

I'll admit up front that this is likely going to be an unpopular review and a decidedly minority opinion, but I have to be honest about my feelings. Writer-director Sarah Polley's adaptation of Miriam Toews's novel of the same name may come from a place of noble intent, and it may feature one of the year's finest acting ensembles, but its overall treatment is a major misfire. This fact-based story about a group of women from a conservative religious colony who meet to discuss how to respond to a series of sexual assaults in their community unfolds in a circular, wooden, stagey fashion that plays more like a university discussion group than a work of dramatic cinema. The ideas raised in these dialogues - ranging from activism to passivity to intergender relations to forgiveness to faith and salvation - are certainly lofty topics for consideration and deliberation, especially in terms of how they might be addressed in the forging of a new and better world. But their handling here is so forced and inauthentic that the entire exercise lacks believability and does little to foster a sense of concerted viewer engagement. And, as the narrative drones on and on, it becomes tediously dull, with one of the characters herself astutely observing that "This is very, very boring" (well said, if a bit ironic). What's more, a number of incidents and themes seemingly arise out of nowhere and aren't always fully resolved, making one wonder why they were included in the first place. Even more disappointing is the fact that the film features so many fine portrayals by performers who are given such stilted material to work with, including Jessie Buckley, Claire Foy, Judith Ivey, Sheila McCarthy, Ben Whishaw and Frances McDormand (whose appearance is more of an afterthought than anything else). Director Polley has certainly made a name for herself with such excellent past works as "Away From Her" (2006), but her reach has certainly exceeded her grasp with this undertaking, one that has much to say but ultimately says so little.

Sarah Polley's 'Women Talking' did not work for me. This story of a group of women - all of whom belong to a U. S. religious sect in the 1960's - who are physically and emotionally abused by their menfolk / husbands, seems more like a dispassionate, politically correct lecture, than a dialogue between real people. Real people in pain. And it should not have had that effect. Particularly in these times when the news is filled with detailed descriptions of what real men do to real women.

Rooney Mara, Claire Foy, and. Jesse Buckley play three young women who had been drugged and sexually accosted, and who are now part of a 'commission' asked to decide what the community's women's next steps should be. Should they remain in the community and say / do nothing, remain and fight back, or pack up and leave? In making their decision, each of the three young women describes their lives and their reasons for voting as they do. Rooney Mara's character seems the most undecided, willing to see all sides of the argument and taking different positions over the course of the film. Claire Foy is angry and outspoken but I found it difficult to ascribe a preferred next-step to her. Jesse Buckley is the angriest and, at first, the most unwilling to leave her abusive husband, and it is that - her failure to realize how abused she is - that made me care less about her than I should.

Two senior women participate in the commission and one, played by Judith Ivey - made the strongest impression on me. She has the wisdom that comes with age and the ability to put it into words. Ben Whishaw as the one man invited to the commission brings a startling honesty to the proceedings; he more than anyone knows the evil men can do.

But for me, the film's 'failure' involves the three young women. There is a cold and distanced quality to their recitals. It is as though they are relating a film they saw, a book they read, rather than expressing the anger, the anxiety, the fear they all know very well.

I should have been moved. I should have been angered. I should have been relieved. But I was not.

The fact that the movie is set in 2010 and is based on a true story is not easy to believe. The way things unfold, one would think it is at least in the 50s at the latest for the most part. But the way some cults work, and how people fall for them and spend generations in them is a sad truth of our world. Even though it can be technically called a chamber piece, it doesn't feel like one. There's so much in writing and directing that adds novelty to the story which is not exactly something groundbreaking. There are little moments throughout the film that makes the situation more weird and real at the same time that most films don't do.