Vera Drake (2004)

IMDB

I'm pro-choice. One reason (of many) is that abortion is a class issue. It will always be available to wealthy women, and I believe that until we can create a world--via whatever -ism is less likely to have the few controlling the many (capitalism's winning so far)--where people can be afforded certain rights and basic luxuries without needless struggle, then it should be available to poor women as well. Once more, I'm willing to help pay for it with taxes, donations and voting.

That said, I would despise a movie that preached a pro-choice agenda as much as I would hate a movie that preached a pro-life agenda. But here's a movie that, really, does neither. It doesn't firebrand. I feel that Mike Leigh, while obviously leaning one way, is really more interesting in historical accuracy.

Above any other director I've experienced, Leigh captures a sense of time and place accurately. Topsy Turvey dealt in a period that is overrun with victorian lovers, mourners, and beautiful poseurs conveniently ignoring the squalor, poverty and filth that went along with 19th century England. I mean, a pastural horse ride wearing ridiculously elaborate undergarments and gamely jibbing at handsome suitors is one thing, but having to deal with tuberculosis or your teeth rotting is quite another, and very few director's are willing to break the romance with portion of what the reality of Victorian England would have been like. Unless, of course, a convenient tragedy befalls the maiden.

Leigh has no qualms about that, showing people in, as much as possible, their natural setting. Here is a family in post-war London, still rebuilding and rocked by the devastation of a few years earlier. Where young men speak about where they were and what they did, and where even the older father was expected to pitch in. Where Vera herself keeps extremely busy beyond her work as a maid in wealthy homes by what could only be described as Christian charity. She checks in on families destroyed by war and sickness, invalids and her own difficult mother. She invites young men with nobody in for dinner (although, in this case, with a sweet and sweetly played ulterior motive). She is truly a good person who is caring and concerned for other people in the world. Though they live in horribly depressing post-war housing, she keeps her family running with a modicum of humor. She also, as she puts it later into the movie, helps young girls out. Those girls she treats with a concerned air, but doesn't see herself as their counselor, rather as a visitor with a job to do as kindly and briskly as possible.

The truly inspiring thing about this movie is how few horrible people are in it. There are a few who take advantage, or who are stupidly selfish, but the majority of all of the characters show amazing concern and caring for everybody else. Even when disagreeing, nobody was scolded or put down, or morally judged. It was as if England, still limping from the war, was a hurt dog and to kick it would be inhumane. Let's all pitch in, so went the attitude, and help each other to pull through this horrible time. Let's look forward to better times to come.

Imagine that with the polarizing forces of abortion dogma today. I'm certainly not going to waste my time arguing with somebody pro life. Frankly, a few times I've argued with some pro choice people who take the party line to ridiculous extremes, and they were just as bad. Convictions, as Robert Anton Wilson said, cause convicts. Imagine, though, a place where we could start by agreeing that we're all fallible humans, and (like Hilary recently started saying) we all would like to have a goal of reducing abortions. I just believe that the best way to achieve that is through better sex-education for girls and boys and better access to health services for all women. Research has backed up my opinion, which is one reason I hold it, but people cling to ignorance pretty tight, and argue against it pretty loudly and effectively.

In the movie, the character of the sister-in-law is remarkably like the character of the sister-in-law in Secrets and Lies, fascinated with redecorating and new appliances. Both are trying to bring their husbands and their families up the social ladder from where they started. These women, I'm sure, see this as a way to give a better life to their family, but they tend to be blind, purposefully or not, to the pain and feelings of the extended family they want to leave behind. Also interesting is that Leigh made both of the husbands of the social climbers owners of their own small businesses. Maybe Leigh agrees with me that so far capitalism is winning the race as the most humane -ism when applied in reality.

Finally, it's worth noting that at least two troops of movie makers exist that are doing similar things. They write a framework for the movie and rough plot, and then fill it with actors who improve their lines, creating the movie. In America it's the Christopher Guest players, with Waiting for Guffman, Best in Show and a Mighty Wind. In England, it's Mike Leigh's players. Such different results--comedy and tragedy--from such a similar process. Both groups making great movies that will be with us for years.

Without giving much away, it was said that the actors in this movie were not told everything about the other characters, so when surprising information is shared, the reactions are as close to genuine as possible. It's in this way that the characters seem so real to us, and the moments of celebration and the moments of fear and mourning are equally powerful in bringing us into the rooms projected on the screen and making us believe that this movie we're watching is happening to us as we're watching it.