User reviews

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.

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.

An ageing Margaret Thatcher struggles to deal with the passing of her husband Dennis, and looks back at her rise to Britain's top job.

I looked at the relatively low score, and wondered how much of it was to do with the film, and how much was to do with the level of dislike that still exists for the former Prime Minister.

There's something missing, and I think it's the direction and the actual storytelling, it's so clunky, if someone were to re-edit this film, I think they could do something with it.

It's a fascinating story, Britain's first woman Prime Minister, a story that deserved to be told. For me, the good outweighs the bad, but the elements were here for this to have been a superb film, sadly it just isn't.

I liked the way the original news footage is mixed in, it's well fused. If only they'd have shown her Spitting Image character.

Meryl Streep delivers an outstanding performance, she is sensational, the voice, the poise, the body language, she is fantastic. Jim Broadbent is wonderful as Dennis, the pair combined so well.

6/10.

This film's strength lies in the acting by Meryl Streep. She breathes life into the persona of Margaret Thatcher and makes her feel like an authentic person rather than a caricature (whether positive or negative). However, the film has no other strengths. The story is completely unfocused and there is no overall point or theme to the random events.

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.

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.

While Meryl's physical impression of the British PM in her blue-bloused prime is bang on the money, it is the way in which she captures Thatcher's unshakeable inner certainty that really pays off in the film's favour.

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.

First of all; no, this absolutely is not a horrible movie but it still is one that makes some very odd choices with its story and approach, making this a very bland and ultimately forgettable movie.

I just really don't understand what the point was of having a seemingly from dementia suffering- and elderly Margaret Thatcher so prominently present in this movie. Seriously, what does it add to its story that the movie is for most part is focusing on this side of Thatcher, rather than on her political and personal life. Because of this the movie is also hardly telling you anything at all about who Margaret Thatcher was and what she was all about and stood for, during her still active life.

Her youth, personal life and political career are sporadicly being told in (some at times very short) flashbacks, or snippets, if you will, that at times aren't even being told in chronological order. This also means that the movie often allows itself to make some very big leaps in time, leaving a lot of blanks in the story. Things happen and are being told, often without a real good buildup to it. Because of this you also really don't learn all that much about Margaret Thatcher, or why she was called the iron lady or even as to why she was loved and yet also hated by so many at the very same time.

It sounds strange but this really is not a political movie. It instead seems to go more for some cheap drama, without hardly ever going deep into anything or anyone at all. It makes this a mostly very bland movie to watch.

Another thing with its story was that it could had been a real inspiration to women all over the world, showing this very common woman rising to the top and eventually becoming one of the most powerful woman in the world, for over 10 years, during a time that this was not considered to be normal at all. However this movie makes it seem like it was all very easy and normal for her to do. There is hardly anyone trying to hold her back or prevent her from getting any power. A real missed opportunity and besides odd, since the movie is actually being directed by a female.

But clearly this is not a horrible movie. There simply isn't enough to hate about it and it's still a pretty maintaining movie for what it is. It's not a movie that ever becomes boring or too sentimental or anything. Like I said, it's a very bland movie and this probably at the same time prevents it from becoming a horrible one in any way.

And it is also true that Meryl Streep is simply fantastic and really becomes her character, also thanks to some very convincing looking makeup. Her performance definitely deserved a better movie. I also really liked Jim Broadbent in his role as Thatcher's husband. Their relationship was perhaps still the most interesting and heartfelt thing about this entire movie.

An ultimately very forgettable movie, that won't teach you anything about who Thatcher was, its time period and all of the historically important events she was involved in.

6/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

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.

THE IRON LADY boasts a wonderful central performance by Meryl Streep as Baroness Thatcher; she is wholly convincing at capturing the politician's peculiar vocal inflections. The most interesting aspect of Phyllida Lloyd's film is the way it portrays Mrs. Thatcher as driven by hubris - despite her humble origins, she remained convinced of the rightness of her cause, even when she was manifestly wrong. This was especially the case in 1990, when she was forced to resign as leader of the Conservative Party over her support for the Poll Tax. The film shows how she rode roughshod over any objections raised by her Cabinet, even when they were probably right to object. With this knowledge in mind, we do not feel much sympathy for her when she is shown as a lonely elderly lady, without the support of her husband Denis (Jim Broadbent), and trying and failing to fend for herself. The supporting performances in this film are colorless, sometimes veering towards the grotesque (Richard E. Grant's Michael Heseltine is particularly guilty in this respect). But the film belongs to Streep and her towering central characterization.

not good or bad. only strange because the courage to present the lead character more than a puzzle, to create more than a sketch of an admirable maker of history is absent. and only good point of The Iron Lady remains the presence of Meryl Streep in the lead role. the error is temptation to present the career of Prime Minister as flashes of memory. the last years of life are only a dark room far by the flashes of media. her sense of life remains the fight for the wise administration of the United Kingdom's interests. not the illness. not the fall. a part, far to be significant, becomes more important than entire life. Margaret Thacher's memory deserves more than an essay . or a sketch.because the film remains touching and seductive in a special form but not convincing.

"The Iron Lady" suffers from a number of factors, mostly pertaining to a messy plot structure. The life of Margaret Thatcher is indeed interesting subject matter, but condensing it all into a frame narrative conversing with her late husband doesn't really work. The moments that do focus on Thatcher's real life tend to work well, even though they seem a bit few and far between. Meryl Streep is obviously the big draw here, with a believable performance as both an unconventional political leader and an elderly woman, but there are plenty of others who do a great job, in particular Alexandra Roach as the younger, dizzy Thatcher (a role that seems to have been quite looked over by many). Bad plot structure or not, though, "The Iron Lady" is definitely worth a look into.

Meryl Streep is one of those actresses who literally incorporate the character she is playing - in The Iron Lady there is no exception. Sometimes in the film we even forget that what we are seeing is Meryl – she acts for real with strong feelings while portraying Margareth Thatcher on her late days when suffering Alzheimer and remembering her days as British prime minister. Actually, the proposal of this flick is to show that those important leaders are not machines because they have a human side like we have.

However, that is where the filmmakers committed a mistake as the story fails to tell more accurate details about Thatcher's days as prime minister. The whole film goes forwards and backwards all the time, so we feel that there is too much information trying to be told in a short time. Consequently, the story becomes lost and details missed. Also, the film always focus on Thatcher's point of view – an error that could have being avoided if the plot focused also on other points of view to make it more critical.

If you see it as a film about the human side of an important and influential leader, you may enjoy it - I heard about some people who felt touched by it. But, if you try to see it as a political or biopic film, you will probably leave the movie theater disappointed.

Only one thing is a hundred percent perfect: Meryl Streep's memorable performance in a film that could have been much better.

Greetings again from the darkness. So many are up in arms about what this movie isn't, that they have lost sight of what it is. If you are expecting a political drama and biography detailing the finer points of one of the most impactful and controversial world leaders in history, you will undoubtedly be disappointed. If instead, you accept this as a creative way to tell a story and glimpse at a once powerful person struggling with her place in history, while simultaneously fighting the daily battle against Alzheimer's, then you too will be satisfied with more than the towering performance of Mery Streep as Margaret Thatcher.

Lady Thatcher is one of most controversial political figures in modern history. Pundits fall to pro or con in regards to her 3 terms (11 years) as Prime Minister. Writer Abi Morgan (Shame) and director Phyllida Lloyd (Mamma Mia) don't take a side in the argument. Instead they offer us the viewpoint of an elderly Lady Thatcher struggling to avoid "going mad". Her daily battle includes numerous flashbacks to specific moments and events. Through these episodes, we take a quick trip through history ... almost a Cliff's Notes version. Additionally, we see how she regularly "sees" and speaks with her husband Denis (Jim Broadbent). Yes, he died years ago. It seems she realizes this, but enjoys the comfort of having him nearby.

During the flashbacks, we get a feel for her early onset ambition, which evidently came from her dad the grocer (and small town politician). He encouraged her to work hard, be different and think for herself, while never backing down from her beliefs. This seems hard-wired into her personality through the years as she fights the male establishment and climbs the "greasy pole" of British parliament.

The brief segments on the Falkland Islands, Parliamentary debates, and tough Labor Union stance will probably leave you wanting more details on how she negotiated her way through some very unpopular decisions. The best suggestion is probably to read some of the endless stream of documentation in print regarding her time in office. But don't let that distract you from an unusual and interesting film. Plus, you certainly want to catch another world-class performance from, whom I consider, the greatest actress in film history.

Is it really surprising? Is it really news? Yes Meryl Streep is a good actress, and she turns in a great performance.

She plays the former Prime Minister as she recalls her life from the depths of deterioration. It goes back to the beginning. Although many may be distressed at her decline. Some may even say it's unseemly.

Although a lot of it has to do with her husband Denis (Jim Broadbent), I did wish to see more personal life especially with the kids. Jim Broadbent also puts in a good performance. I expected nothing less from the master. Overall it is good, but it's nothing unexpected. With great actors, the expected is a good thing.

Meryl Streep's performance in this movie was phenomenal. Unfortunately the movie (if you can call it that) was not. If you want to go see a movie about the life and career of Margaret Thatcher do not waste your time. If you want to see an elderly woman struggling with dementia for 2 hours then this is your movie. The movie barely goes over Thatcher's rise to prime minister or her personal life. Instead 80% of the movie focuses on Thatcher's current health state, only showing her confused and disoriented. The movie does a few 5 minute flashes to her past but it probably only amounts to about 25 minutes. Finally I find it despicable that instead of highlighting Thatcher's achievements, Hollywood choose to exploit her dementia a condition she has kept from the public and tried to be extremely private about.

One spent so much time detesting Margaret Thatcher's policies and its consequences that one forgets she was a human being. Silly isn't it? Yes, but true. Now Meryl Streep, with all her powers, reminds us. Mrs Thatcher was a real person, a real woman and no matter how much we disagree with her, we cannot dismiss her. Meryl Streep makes sure of that. Her performance is an extraordinary piece of art and I have the feeling that it will grow in meaning and scope as time goes on. The humanity of the actress at the service of a political icon that thought that it didn't matter what people felt but what they thought as if the two were mutually exclusive. Thank you Meryl Streep, you've done something that my grandchilden's grandchildren will benefit from.

It's difficult to know what to make of a film that has proved nearly as divisive as its protagonist, even among those who haven't even seen it. Viewing the life of former PM and now Baroness Margaret Thatcher from the present day via a series of flashbacks, The Iron Lady has stoked ire from both the Right (who decry the decision to show Thatcher's mental faculties in decline) and the Left (who are howling because, well, it's a film about Margaret Thatcher). Such is the level of opprobrium being heaped upon the film from both sides that it requires Herculean efforts to judge its merits as a film.

Setting aside party politics, The Iron Lady is after all, the story of one of the most powerful and prominent women in recent history, a grocer's daughter who rose to the very top at a time (first elected to parliament in 1959) when women were still largely tied to the domestic sphere. In a century where women in politics are still judged based on their membership of one of the two rival harems camps known as Blair's Babes or Cameron's Cuties (pauses to weep quietly for a moment), a biopic about the UK's longest serving PM who was also the first - and to date, the only - woman to occupy the role, is surely worth celebrating?

Sadly, therein lies the rub. Margaret Thatcher is both a legend in her own time, and the proverbial boogie man - it's virtually impossible to separate the woman from the politics. It's equally implausible to attempt to cover eight decades of remarkable private and notorious public events in barely two hours. Like its obstinate protagonist, The Iron Lady is felled by its own ambition. Thatcher's private life and personal relationships are tantalisingly glimpsed, but never explored. Based on their fleeting treatment, her early life in Grantham, relationship with her parents, courtship with Denis Thatcher, and later family life (particularly with her children) would all make for fascinating films in their own right. By the same token, the Falklands conflict, the riots, the strikes and any number of other nationally significant events during Thatcher's premiership would all form the basis of compelling movies.

Instead, Iron Lady is the cinematic equivalent of a scrapbook, a story told in bits and pieces, but never in depth. It's too brief to do more than gloss over every significant event in her life, not least the assassination of Airey Neave, and often requires a more than passing knowledge of contemporary political figures and events in order to understand the narrative. The result is a film that fails to portray with any depth or conviction either the personal or political history of - love her or loathe her - one of the most significant individuals in British history. The film has prompted complaints that it glosses over the upheaval of the miners' strikes, but one could easily argue that Thatcher's liberal stances on homosexuality and abortion are equally absent, if not more so. Jim Broadbent's Denis Thatcher is relegated to a slightly clownish figment of MT's imagination in the present, and virtually written out of her past.

In fact the film's saving grace is, unsurprisingly, Meryl Streep. Despite the confused and ambivalent material, Streep has crafted a riveting performance (amply supported by Alexandra Roach as Maggie the Younger), somehow managing to believably inhabit the shoes of someone whose story is till being written.

Suffice to say a definitive biopic, if such a thing is possible, will almost certainly have to post date the lady herself, and while I rarely argue in favour of overtly biased film-making, will probably require at least two passes by both her detractors and lionisers. For now, The Iron Lady is a tantalisingly prologue, and abridged version of an engrossing life. It's definitely a celebration of a talented, powerful woman occupying the upper echelons of her profession - but that woman is Streep, not Thatcher.