Skip to main content


We watched this HBO film last week. It was a difficult film and it was a film which delicately managed to give no answer.

Lord Longford was a member of the House of Lords several times over, a devout Christian and converted Catholic who devoted much of his life to prison visits and championing prisoner's rights. In the late 60's he started visiting Myra Hindley.

It's hard to describe for people who haven't studied British History how hated Myra Hindley was and actually still is. Her name is on a par with John Wayne Gasey or Jeffrey Dahmer in America. She and her lover Ian Brady murdered 5 children and buried the bodies on the moors. Three were under 10 and two were adolescents.

Hindley and Brady were considered monsters and it was only because of the abolition of the death penalty, a mere weeks before their trial, that they were not put to death. They were both given life sentences, but life was considered to be 21 years.

Longford was played by Jim Broadbent and Hidley by the amazing Samantha Morton. Brady was played with frightening intensity by Andy Serkis.

The British public was most angered and shocked by the fact that a woman had committed these crimes. It seemed to go against all of nature. Yes, men might do terrible, violent crimes, but there was supposed to be something better in women. The excuse both here and there seems to always be that "she" was led astray by her love/obsession with a man.

Longford did everything in his power to fight for early release for Hindley despite the derision it brought to him and his family only to have it explode in his face when she was forced by Brady to confess to the last two murders. Hindley died in prison in 2002. Brady is still alive and serving his sentence.

As I said, the film was hard and it gave no answer. We don't know if Hindley genuinely reformed in prison or if she was merely using Longford. At the end of the film, near the end of both their lives, she reveals that she did enjoy committing the murders.

I can't say enough about how much I love Jim Broadbent. In interviews he is a desperately shy person, but he can transform completely--from the boisterous Zidler (probably his best known role) to this, the eccentric and dedicated Longford.

IMDB reveals that he put pebbles in his shoe to walk painfully in his last scene as Longford (then 92). My husband asked me if this meant he was method or not--I'd go with not. A method actor eschews artificial trappings. But a method actor also welcomes verisimilitude, so I'm not sure. I know he insisted on a prosthetic nose and chin. Looking him up on IMDB he says he works just like Judi Dench.

Back to the question of Hindley. What do we make of the female serial killer? Is instinct more thwarted by a female than a male? And too, can the death penalty ever be used? Who deserves death--who is purely evil, and beyond redemption? Longford would have said no one.


Popular posts from this blog

Adapting a book--The Prestige

I was completely blown away by the movie of The Prestige, and I thought then about reading the novel, but it seemed too soon. So I carried the author's name around with me for over a year (Christopher Priest) and then, finally remembered to buy it through an odd sequence of events. We watched The Painted Veil based on the novel by Maugham starring Edward Norton, and while I decided I didn't want to read The Painted Veil because of it's differences from the film (which was more romantic and tragic) it reminded me that I had wanted to read Fight Club (the movie version of which starred Edward Norton) and that reminded me that I had wanted to read The Prestige (which did not star Edward Norton, but was up against The Illusionist which did). it's all Edward Norton's fault.

The Prestige is a very good novel, and yet, the movie differs from it considerably. And I am still trying to figure out what exactly that means. The central premise is the same, AND HER…

The end of Cloud Atlas

Feel I must write this--promised it to myself, can I finish before midnight (when I said I would go to bed at 11)?

Where was I?

Oh, yes, section 5, where it gets interesting--because it's the future, at least 25 years, hopefully more. I say hopefully, because I don't want to be living in this future. The section is called "An Orison of Sonmi-451." An Orison (I had to look it up, proving I don't remember my Shakespeare) is a prayer, but in this future world where language has taken as many turns as in Orwell's 1984, it is more a confession or final statement. Sonmi-451 is a clone (as the name might suggest). The section is not entirely original. It owes much to Brave New World and Phillip K. Dick's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (made into the film Bladerunner). I find it interesting that 40 or so years ago--when Dick wrote his book he believed that future slaves would be Androids, replicants. Now we are much more likely to presume they will be clones,…