I enjoyed the film. I didn't enjoy fictionalising a real person. Having a pop at yesterday's moral's and how they still impinge on us today is something that could have been done without hijacking a real person. A real person who deserves her story telling properly. Even the BBC article I read said this film wasn't a gender issue film, it was a class issue film, with many men and women suffering what she suffered. If anything gender was a side issue. The gender issue would have been an issue within it's own class, not across classes. But they want to lose that because it doesn't fit the modern tick box exercise and all us working class thickies wouldn't be capable of putting two things together. In fact the same insult is levelled at us still!
Maybe I'm being a little harsh. That said, I really enjoyed it as a film. The pace reflected the situation, the acting was brilliant, Kate Winslet expression was a brick wall, but when she eventually succumbed to smile it was beautiful. The story was gorgeous.
My criticism lies with the writer/director for picking Mary Anning name to write fiction against. If you are writing a film about her, actually focus on her life, yes you can embellish, but embellish the truth, not that it would need that.
Maybe I'm being a little harsh. That said, I really enjoyed it as a film. The pace reflected the situation, the acting was brilliant, Kate Winslet expression was a brick wall, but when she eventually succumbed to smile it was beautiful. The story was gorgeous.
My criticism lies with the writer/director for picking Mary Anning name to write fiction against. If you are writing a film about her, actually focus on her life, yes you can embellish, but embellish the truth, not that it would need that.