My review in this week's issue of Tehelka
------------------------------------------------------------------
Phyllida Lloyd’s biopic of a powerful politician is a chronicle of ageing, loneliness, and sheer sadness, says Priyanka Gill
![]() |
The Iron Lady is the herald of the many films, books and writings that will chronicle the life of Lady Thatcher, arguably the most famous British prime minister after Winston Churchill. Thatcher was an extremely polarising figure evoking strong opinions ranging from blind devotion to extreme hatred. As the only female prime minister in British history, she remained in power for 11 years.
However, this is not what the controversial film is about. Even one-time Thatcher rivals such as Michael Heseltine found the release of a film focusing on Lady Thatcher’s dementia whilst she is still alive ‘distasteful’. The Thatcher family has rejected the film. They have publicly refused to see it. David Cameron also came out against the film saying, “I wish they could have made another day.” Lady Thatcher’s detractors have taken the issue with its lack of criticism.
Thatcher’s tale is told through a series of flashbacks, through the disjointed memories of the octogenarian lady suffering from dementia-induced delusions. The film is a love story, an intimate look into her relationship with her husband Denis (played by Jim Broadbent). In the film’s timeline, he passed away several years ago, but she has touching conversations with him about the minutiae of her daily life and her past. Towards the end of the film we see her valiantly trying to banish his ghost from her mind in a tear-jerking bid to remain sane.
It’s a chronicle of ageing, depicting the loneliness, the loss of control and sheer sadness that is the unfortunate by-product of an inevitable process.
However, in doing so, the film reduces the strong leader to a senile woman. Her achievements are merely incidental to the storyline and her ruthlessness is a cautionary tale.
The Iron lady is a personal depiction of the guilt and regrets confronting a powerful leader in her fading years. The rise to power, her transformation into a force to reckon with and the many political storms she faced are just hinted at and tantalisingly dangled before the viewer. There is no perspective or historical context offered.
Meryl Streep, of course, remains the saving grace of the film. She delivers a stunning, maybe even an Oscar-winning performance. Not only is she a potent mimic of Thatcher’s mannerisms, but also manages to delve into the soul of the character created by director Phyllida Lloyd. With brilliant make-up and prosthetic enhancement (the process took two hours apparently), Streep portrays Thatcher to the hilt. Moving effortlessly and convincingly between the young and old periods, it is a master class in both acting and making the best of a rather loose script.
One almost wishes they had made the film like they cut its trailer—with a focus on the woman, her rise to power and her achievements. The dementia she became afflicted with in her latter years is an unfortunate ailment, not the key to decoding the woman behind the legend.
Llyod’s film is worth a watch, if only to inspire further study into the force of nature that Maggie Thatcher once was.
Priyanka Gill is a freelance journalist and an avid art collector.
She blogs at www.estylista.com


A WEAK PLOT, SLAP-DASH SCRIPT AND A WASTED STAR CAST, SAYS PRIYANKA GILL

