I am interested to know, unless it will lead to a discussion that tramples all over the TOS, (in that case PM me), what is it that you, assuming you did, so dislike about this movie? Also, I guess I a looking for a British perspective.
I watched it and was a little put off by some of the weirdness but as far as Margaret she seemed like a really strong woman and good leader, unless of course your sympathies lie with the labor party. I assume we are all aware of the trouble caused to Great Britain when the Sterling lost it's status as the World Standard Currency.
The movie made it look like she really gained popularity with the victory in the Falkland Islands. She stood with Reagan against the USSR and was instrumental in the fall of the USSR and the destruction of the Berlin wall.
 
Now, I relize that I could be wrong about some of these things... but I am really interested in why some people thought the movie was bad. Did you think it portraied her in a bad light or do you just not like her because of poitical differences?
 
I realize, from the movie, that she lost popularity and resigned... then again Britain dumped Churchill as soon as WWII was over.
 
So... I am interested in why you didn't like the movie. Subjective opinions are OK, if you think so. I have no intentions of starting an argument... I am just interested.
 
Thanks,
 
J

Hasn't she rusted yet???

I can't speak for the movie, because I couldn't bear more 10 minutes of it.

As far as Thatcher goes, in my opinion (and I'm not alone), she was single-handedly responsible for the dismantling of the working class in Britain, replacing, for example, matrons and ward sisters in the NHS with 'managers'. With her 'there is no such thing as society' mantra, she created a massively misplaced sense of entitlement in the 1980's, leading to over-stretching of personal finances, home repossession, bankrupty and state dependancy from which, I believe, we have never recovered.

We now have 3rd generation unemployed in the UK.whole families in which no-one has ever worked, and will never work. I blame her.

Personally,  I didn't rate the film but it had little to do with her politics or how they were portrayed.   I just thought it was a fairly routine and superficial trudge through the headline events of her career, with the main message being 'you may have disagreed with her but wasn't she a strong woman in a man's world?'.    For me, Meryl Streep was as good as she usually is but she was a bit wasted.  

For the record, she didn't resign (or at least not until they'd practically unscrewed her nameplate from the door).  Her colleagues at the top level of her own party turfed her out - their dirty work (closing mines, reining in powerful unions, defending a hawkish foreign policy, trying to impose a poll tax) was done and they no longer needed the bad blood she attracted.     She was too divisive - very popular with some but actively hated by others.

We now have 3rd generation unemployed in the UK.whole families in which no-one has ever worked, and will never work. I blame her

 
Thanks, that is what I wanted to know... if it was the movie or the PM. Thanks!
 
J

jamesg1213


I can't speak for the movie, because I couldn't bear more 10 minutes of it.

As far as Thatcher goes, in my opinion (and I'm not alone), she was single-handedly responsible for the dismantling of the working class in Britain, replacing, for example, matrons and ward sisters in the NHS with 'managers'. With her 'there is no such thing as society' mantra, she created a massively misplaced sense of entitlement in the 1980's, leading to over-stretching of personal finances, home repossession, bankrupty and state dependancy from which, I believe, we have never recovered.

We now have 3rd generation unemployed in the UK.whole families in which no-one has ever worked, and will never work. I blame her.

^^^^ This!

I also believe she was personally responsible for the horrendous cover up over the Hillsborough disaster, and hopefully with the new evidence unearthed and a new inquest/inquiry, the truth will come out before she pops her clogs

Just to steer this vaguely back towards the TOS, I can't remember a PM ever inspiring so many 'anti' songs..The Beat's 'Stand Down Margaret', The Specials 'Maggie's Farm', The Crass' 'How Does it Feel to be The Mother of a Thousand Dead?', Elvis Costello/Robert Wyatt's 'Shipbuilding', Billy Bragg's 'Between the wars'..

I can't post the title of the one by The Exploited.

Havent seen the movie but... on a different perspective I believe MT also dragged the UK out of the appalling quagmire of self destruction left over from the 60s/70s Left and into a much more efficient and competitive economy. She brought home the reality that a bloated state sector, hugely innefficient labour practices and dominant, self serving Unions are a recipe for disaster in a global economy.  The 80s were painful, and I still maintain the sell off of some industries (particularly the rail - though that was actually under Major) was not correct.

Billy Bragg? Come on.  I'd maybe give him a little credit if the man could tune his guitar and voice.  At least the Specials were able to whinge and complain in a musically pleasant manner :)

That movie is still on my "to see"-list, mostly due to Maryl Streep. It sort of smells like "in order to get an Oscar"-kind of choice of role, though.
I can imagine that those years were so hard on so many UK citizens that it's difficult for them to keep separate the movie as a movie from their experiences of the era.

I'm not an expert on UK's economical/social history, but I think most of what happened there during MTs regime, happened then, and especially a little later, in many/most West-European countries and globally.
Many huge, old industrial and administrative structures collapsed or had to be downsized quite simply because they'd come to the end of the road. Global competition, environmental questions etc. The only alternative would be making all industry run on state subsidies, and that's a very short road. 

IMO the way competition in all fields has become global is as huge a process of change as the big migrations in Europe some 2000 years ago. World will change dramatically in a way that doesn't favor the ordinary folks in old industrial west. Now the change only takes a generation or two, not hundreds of years, like before, which makes it even harder. The more global business gets, the more it follows the rules of hard capitalism. Homo Sapiens should be capable of more controlled development than fishes or fungus, but it doesn't seem to be so. Hope I didn't violate TOS. I tried to keep this on general level.