Philomena

When Philomena hit theaters in 2013, it was easily identified for what it was another attempt by The Weinstein Company to plate an emotional drama for that year’s Academy Awards. It was a drama about a sensitive topic, cast with top-tier actors, and based on real-life events— all things that the Academy loves. It also happened to be a darn good and compelling film that manipulated audiences into some strong emotions that, when looking into the actual history of events, were not entirely justified. The film was a financial success and secured four Academy Award nominations, although it didn’t win any of them. For the Weinsteins, that made it a failure, and there has been very little interest in keeping this film in the public interest since. But it is a film that needs to be seen and remembered as, even with all the poetic license, it highlights the very real heartaches many women, especially during the mid-1900s, faced because of the stigma of being unmarried mothers.

This is the story of Philomena Lee (Judi Dench), who, as of this writing, is still alive at the age of 91. The film dramatizes her attempt to find her lost child, born out of wedlock. When she discovered she was pregnant, her father sent her to Sean Ross Abbey in Roscrea, Ireland. After the child is born, she was forced to work in the convent laundry for four years with little contact with her child. At some point, her son is given up for adoption by the nuns, without her consent, and she never has contact with him again. For years, she tried to find out what happened to him but has met nothing but roadblocks when dealing with the nuns who claim that the records of the adoptions were destroyed in a fire and therefore they cannot help her. 

Fifty years go by with no answers and no progress. Philomena has married and had more children over the years but has not given up on her quest for closure with her long lost son. Her daughter approaches London-based journalist, Martin Sixsmith (Steve Coogan), who has recently lost his job as a government adviser, about writing a story about Philomena’s search. At first, Martin is uninterested as these kinds of human interest stories are not his bailiwick. But something about the story changes his mind, and he agrees to take on the story, presuming he can get further in the search for the boy than she did, ideally to a resolution one way or the other. 

History can be subjective, especially when finger-pointing is involved. The convent has been outspoken about this film not telling the whole story and presenting their side of the ordeal in a misleading way. Martin Sixsmith wrote a different story. Principal players have been verbal on both sides of the coin about the accuracy of the book, of course, and there is no doubt that everyone involved has their own opinion on who ultimately is to blame for all of this. We will never know all the behind-the-scenes machinations that occurred at the time, which makes such a telling as this film all the more fascinating. The film tries to portray things as 100% factual when the realities are that we just don’t know all the details. 

Director Stephen Frears had the unenviable task of taking what is at its heart a dour film and making it something that can be both enjoyable and thought-provoking. The pre-existing ending could not be altered without being disrespectful to the real and traumatic events in Philomena’s life; therefore, other means were needed to make this story something the average moviegoer would want to see. Screenwriters Jeff Pope and Steve Coogan, pulling triple duty along with starring in and producing the film, interjected quite a bit of humor into the script to help keep the tone from getting too downbeat. Some of this is in the dialogue,and some of it is simply by the script anticipating our reactions and subverting them. A prime example of this is when Philomena is first informed that her son was gay. She has been presented as being very religious despite her treatment by the nuns of the Catholic Church. The expectation is that she would be appalled by the news that her long-lost son was gay. Instead, she is perfectly fine with that and even admits that she thought he was all the way back when she knew him as a toddler because he was “always so sensitive.” 

We get a sense that she uses humor to cope with her sadness. She also uses her faith, too, utilizing the teachings of the Bible to respond to things in a way that Martin Sixsmith cannot understand, being an atheist himself. When all is out in the open and the two revisit the convent to confront the last surviving nun from when Philomena was staying there, the sister, Sister Hildegarde McNulty, is unrepentant of her actions and of the intentional subterfuge that kept Philomena and her son from finding each other in this life. Martin is visibly upset, especially because of the smugness coming from the sister, and he voices his opinions to her and the others. Philomena, on the other hand, stops his rant and tells Sister McNulty that she forgives her. We get the sense that this forgiveness didn’t come easy to her as in an earlier scene Philomena visits a chapel with the intent to confess but is so overcome with emotion that she cannot verbalize what she is feeling and leaves without even dipping her fingers in the holy water on her way out. Martin, as determined as he is to make his point clear, lets Sister McNulty know that he does not forgive her. 

This film brings to light a very real issue that is ongoing in Ireland to this day. There are still thousands of women who were forcibly separated from their children during the 1950s that have still never gotten closure on their great loss. Whether it is true that the convents deliberately destroyed records to continue punishing these women for their sins we do not know for certain. This act, however, has made it virtually impossible for these women to find their children and reconnect with them. It’s a sad example of putting self-righteousness ahead of human kindness and true Christianity. 

While a fair amount of this story is entirely fabricated, including Martin and Philomena’s trip to America, the basics of the story are true. It is a harrowing story that sheds some light on a bit of recent history that most people were probably not aware of. Judi Dench is as good as always in this film, showing us why she is such a decorated and celebrated actress. Steve Coogan, whom I’m mostly familiar with as a comedic actor, although I am aware he does a lot of dramatic work, too, pulls off the snobbish reporter very well. But he also succeeds in convincing us that there is more to him than just a reporter looking for a good human interest piece. We see that change in him over the course of the film as he gets to know Philomena and empathizes with her story. By the time he has pieced all of it together and confronts Sister McNulty in the climax, his outrage is completely justified. By this point, we have watched this change in his character expertly performed by Coogan. 

I was moved greatly by this picture, more so than I probably would have been before I had children of my own. That newer perspective helped me empathize with Philomena as I reflected on just how much of a hole there would be in my soul should one of my own children have been taken from me. I can appreciate Philomena’s response to forgive, coming strictly from the commandment to do so in the New Testament, but I would probably be more like Martin and be unable to forgive so quickly. In that way, she is a better person than I am. That forgiveness couldn’t have come easily, and Judi Dench makes sure we can tell just how hard that was for her to do it.

Academy Award Nominations:

Best Picture: Gabrielle Tana, Steve Coogan, and Tracey Seaward

Best Actress: Judi Dench

Best Adapted Screenplay: Steve Coogan and Jeff Pope

Best Original Score: Alexandre Desplat

____________________________________________________

Release Date: November 22, 2013 

Running Time: 98 Minutes

Rated PG-13

Starring: Judi Dench and Steve Coogan

Directed By: Stephen Frears