Great acting, bad format

By hms6
Written January 31, 2012
We were rather disappointed in this movie. Meryl did an awesome job, however, the format was really distracting. This movie seemed to be about the decline of great public figures (not a story of the first lady Prime Minister). This movie focuses on Margaret when she is in her decline and uses flashbacks to tell the story of her youth and seasons as Prime Minister. Unfortunately the flashbacks get distracting and don't tell a cohesive story. In addition, the historical footage (which should have been so key to the story) are without context. Overall, we were very disappointed. This should have been wonderful.
11 out of 18 found this helpful. Did you?

Schizophrenic Screenplay

By IWantMyMoneysWorth
Written March 02, 2012
An overly meloncony movie that schizophrenically couldn't decide whether to depict the maladies of old age or tell the life story of an important historical figure, so it oddly did both, leaving it all up to Meryl Streep who totally channeled both Thatcher and demensia, and brillantly delivered on each. An important opportunity to explore and celebrate the life story of an amazing woman was lost, but an oscar-worthy performance by another amazing woman was gained. "Must Go" for Meryl, "Oh No!" for the lousy story-telling/screenplay.
10 out of 14 found this helpful. Did you?

Must See...History Repeats

By ronalvarado
Written January 15, 2012
Great acting, but beyond that, what a commentary on the world and US today. We're a mess, without good leadership, and that was England when Thatcher came along. Great parallels. Lots of moving commentary on the sometimes debilating affects of growing old, but likewise, great commendary on a brave and determined woman who lead Britain at a time when decisive leadership and resolve was so important. Just what we need now in the US.
10 out of 20 found this helpful. Did you?

Another top quality performance from, "you know who".

By HoodCritic1
Written October 21, 2014
It wasn't the best movie Meryl Streep starred in, but it was definitely one of her strongest and riveting performances in her collection of remarkable character portrayals. Her performance as the strong-willed, determined, steadfast and resolute female prime-minister Margaret Thatcher proves that she deserves every accolade and award she deserves because she was absolutely masterful in this movie. The supporting cast, especially Jim Broadbent, was also very good but they were in a sense dwarfed by Streep's performance. The technical details, in particular the camera work and the editing, were a little shoddy and it was disconcerting of Phylidda Lloyd to make this movie a portrait of Thatcher instead of focusing on her actually story of how she became prime minister. I think Meryl Streep did carry this movie but it could have been better if the cast and crew around her stepped up. A good movie nonetheless.
10 out of 16 found this helpful. Did you?

Mixed feelings about this movie

By ptaz
Written January 15, 2012
At first I didn't want to see this because I feared that it would be a hatchet job on Ms. Thatcher. The woman was incredible and I didn't want to see anything that didn't do her justice. At my husband's urgings, I decided to go. I hated the flashback method of telling her story and felt it was a little short sided in this wonderful woman whose leadership took Britain out of the worst modern recession and miserable unemployment at the hands of the trade unions. They left out a lot of her relationship with Ronald Reagan which was key to her story and forgot a quote for which she is best known. "The problem with socialsm is that eventually you run out of other people's money." Streep did a good job with the material, but I just felt it painted Mrs. Thatcher in an inaccurage light and was more politically correct than correct. I was getting annoyed with all the dementia cracks and flashbacks. It took away from what a great lady did.
9 out of 14 found this helpful. Did you?