I'm afraid that's no longer a choice

Continuing my trip up The Guardian's Top 50 Films of 2021 

#30 : Ammonite

Kate Winslet and Saoirse Ronan find love among the fossils in Francis Lee’s sensational biopic of palaeontology pioneer Mary Anning, which reimagines her encounter with a woman trapped in a stifling marriage.

We met Francis Lee previously on Empire's best 100 films of this century list and God's Own Country was definitely one to mark him out as someone to watch out for - and here we are again!  I've heard this is fine, maybe not quite such a triumph as that film - I suspect Kate and Saoirse could make most things pretty watchable, so had some hopes for it but I was concerned it was going to look good but not have an awful lot going on.  Although The Guardian does describe it as "sensational" so lets see...

...ah, within a minute we're seeing lots of things been blown about by the wind whilst people provide minimal dialogue - yup, I've seen that from Francis before.  The film basically follows Mary Anning (Kate Winslet as the aforementioned "palaentology pioneer") who is thrown together with Mrs Charlotte Murchison (Saoirse Ronan) pretty much against her will, but financial reasons prevail.  And wouldn't you know but it turns out they get along after all - nobody expected that, eh?  (yes, they get on very well - so well in fact, that you might prefer not to watch this with either your parents or your children!)  And well, errr, that's pretty much it - with a slightly strange ending tacked on to it.

It's definitely not a glamorous role for Kate, but you do get the impression she's not so much in it for the glamour these days (and perfectly happy about that).  Her and Saoirse very much own the film - as you'd expect, they do a fine job in very different roles which change as they interact throughout the film.  The story is possibly a little slight for the length of the film, but I think the intention is that you watch it for the cinematic experience rather than for the story alone - whether that's enough for you comes down to personal preference, I guess.

I was trying to remember what I'd seen Gemma Jones in before - and yes, it was God's Own Country.  I didn't recognise her here because she's only slightly miserable in this film - as opposed to the full-on miserable cow she was in the previous film (to be fair, happy Gemma Jones is also available, particularly in the Bridget Jones films).  It was also nice to see Alec Secăreanu from that film in this, even if it wasn't entirely clear why there would be an Eastern European doctor in 1840s Lyme Regis (and yes, I know I should see past that).

Francis Lee makes very good use of the camera throughout, particularly with regard to the looks exchanged between characters whether the briefest of glances or a lingering stare.   The shots of the natural landscape which intersperse the film are well done and the scenery makes a fine companion piece to God's Own Country - similarly imposing, but also very different.  Additionally, the sound is surprisingly impressive, even if pretty much all of it is wind or the sea - often at the expense (intentionally) of dialogue (sometimes absent, sometimes barely audible).  One final comment, I wasn't expecting full frontal male nudity so early on in the film, but I really should have known better, shouldn't I?

All in all, the film makes some interesting choices.  It has very well done period details and is based around true characters from the time who had very interesting lives (particularly Mary - check out her Wikipedia page) but the core of the story is just entirely made up.  Mary and Charlotte did meet and were good friends, but there was no evidence of any romance - and additionally, Charlotte was not 10-15 years younger than Mary (as depicted in the film) but 11 years older.  But it's an engaging entirely made up story so I guess I can go along with it - but it just seems an odd thing to do.  

In Francis' defence, he makes the point that there is no evidence of Mary's sexuality at all so giving her a heterosexual relationship would have been equally invalid and there have been plenty of instances where homosexual relationships are written out of people's lives when telling their stories.  The film also tries to say some interesting things about class and the role of women in Victorian society but it feels a bit half-hearted in deciding how much it wants to say.

Overall, I'm pleased I watched this film but it doesn't quite work for me - it has a lot of fine ingredients including the acting, direction and period features, but they don't quite gel together and certainly don't warrant the length of the film, so it feels like a missed opportunity.  At time of writing, the film is available to watch in all the usual locations - not sure I can quite recommend it, but it was certainly interesting in places and looked very beautiful.

#31 - An enjoyingly troubling film - but is it transgressive?
#29 - A complete waste of time