watched this last night. the performances, the cinematography, the rhythm of the film–all these things are very well done and the film comes together really well. what is less subtle, or adroit, is the film’s handling of class. there are basically three kinds of people in this film: hardcore working class, working class on the move, and upper class. everyone in the first category is a saint, everyone in the second category is a traitor, and everybody in the third category is either vicious or vaccuous. while the film presents itself as quiet social realism what it really is is quiet agit-prop. nothing wrong with agit-prop of course, but here it is mostly condescending to the people on whose behalf it is agitating.
I understand everything you are saying and don’t really disagree with you, though I really liked this film a lot (and did not find it condescending). I wonder if you are not giving the character of Vera Drake her due. Sure, on the surface she appears to be a saint, but there seems to be a lot more going on beneath that facade of saintliness. I found her to be a troubling, morally ambiguous character who was in great denial and was actually doing more harm than good (that scene with the Caribbean woman was devastating). She is completely in denial as to what traumas she has experienced in the past as well as any trauma she may have caused the girls she wishes so much to help. And your argument on the film’s representation of class strikes me as bit simplistic and doesn’t take into consideration the policemen and policewoman who handle Vera’s case as well as numerous other characters who do not fall so easily into your categories (the mother of the young woman who goes to the hospital, Vera’s son, the abortion broker–unless you see her as one of the working class on the rise).
i typed a response to jeff and then inexplicably closed my browser instead of posting it. clearly i knew i was wrong. but here is an attempt to say it again:
yes, my description is too sweeping but for illustrative purposes. leigh isn’t as formulaic about class as i make him out to seem but still painting with a very broad brush. by the way, i don’t see the son or the policemen/woman as troubling my schema. the son is very much on the move and the policemen are just doing their jobs (a good working people thing to do). similarly the mother of the girl who almost dies is not unsympathetic either–she is bullied into class-betrayal.
the most caricaturish thing however is the portrayal of the drake family at home, which seems to come from a hallmark adaptation of dickens. and this is where the condescension really comes in: leigh seems to be setting the family up both as authentic because working class, and also funny for the same reason (see in particular the portrayal of ethel drake and her suitor reg).
but sunhee would mostly agree with your take on it–she might even post about the movie one of these days.
Hi Jeff, I don’t know you but it’s quite shocking how I have made almost the same points to Arnab during one of our dinner conversations–he will attest to the truth of this.
Perhaps the film’s stratification of class is a bit simplistic; it didn’t bother me so much because one of its main messages was that the question of abortion is varied on strict class lines. Perhaps in its attempt to draw these lines, it may have gone the route of drawing them too well.
But I do think, as Jeff does, that Vera Drake complicates everything even class categories. For one, she is ambivant; just to add to Jeff’s points, she is reponsible for the girl’s near dath–the film doesn’t simply forgive for this. Furthermore, she is completely voiceless, unable to explain herself even to her husband (the conversation that we don’t get to hear) but even more so during the trial. It appears that she has repressed her past (we never know why she had to be “helped” as well) but more devastatingly present reality. This compicates her class status as well. As part of the working class that knows the value of money, it’s surprising that she does not think that what she’s doing could be implicated in the economic system. Arnab says that this is another way in which she seems virtuous–perhaps true but the nobleness attributed this way to Vera as a member of the lower class comes through distorting the very logic of that class.
Having said all this, I didn’t “enjoy” this movie, especially toward the end when Vera just can’t speak for herself. I was frustrated watching her, but that could itself have been the point–it fights our desire to identify with her.
Sun Hee
Hi Sun Hee! It is not an easy film to “enjoy” but there is enough there to wrestle with (I too was frustrated that Leigh did not provide us with easy answers and that the potentially obvious baddies–the “system” as played out by those in positions of authority–turned our to be more empathic than some members of Vera’s family). I didn’t think Vera’s son to be moving up the class ladder so much as I thought he was performing as if he were on the move–a performance required for someone who is helping others to step up the ladder to success . I thought comely Reg was a heroic figure. If he starts out as caricature, he certainly isn’t by the end of the film (he surprised me actually). Sure, its a touch sentimental but not cloyingly so. And I thought the shot of Ethel at the light bulb factory was enough to provide a few shades of grey in her character as well. The only character I had problems with (and this certainly fits into your reading Arnab) was the brother-in-law’s status-conscious wife (she was far too boorish and certainly throws the film out of balance even if she is a classic Leigh character). Leigh definitely sets up categories of class, but I didn’t find them as rigid as you did and agree with Sun Hee that Vera’s actions complicates her subject position (at least within your schema).