GurlyIamBeach Instant Favorite.

Afouotos Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Brennan Camacho Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

Sienna-Rose Mclaughlin The movie really just wants to entertain people.

Syl Meryl Streep played Emmeline Pankhurst in this film for a very short performance. The cast included Carey Mulligan as a suffragette in an unhappy marriage with a son. She is fighting for the right to vote. You would never think that there were rules to prevent women from voting in elections. The film tells the story of how the British suffragette movement and how they fought for equality. Meryl Streep does a very good job. The film cast is first rate with Carey Mulligan and Helena Bonham Carter were terrific onscreen. The entire cast was terrific but the writing could have been better. The film was set in 1912 and the art direction was first rate with the costumes and setting. Anne Marie Duff was great as Violet. Helena Bonham Carter played Edith. The film has some weaknesses in the storyline. The ending was satisfactory but left feeling incomplete overall.

sergelamarche A historical snapshot of history showing the practical slavery englishes submitted themselves to. Real slavery was just one notch worse it seems. Clothes and all the backdrops of past are well depicted. Cute film. Now vote, bitches! haha!

mateszalai I'm sure that the Suffragette could be good, but something went wrong. I found the whole movie extremely boring, however its topic is not only interesting but also very important in the whole world. Abi Morgan has already shown, that she's able to write very great films, like The Iron Lady. But now she couldn't make the story exciting. From the first time I was sure how the film will be ended, I didn't have questions, the only feeling I felt was disappointment. The cast was not bad, but the best part of it was Helena Bonham Carter. She is one of the most talented actresses, but she had a too little role, he couldn't show how talented she is, which is very sad. (She could save the movie) Meryl Streep was also presented on all of the posters of the Suffragette, but she had 2 minutes in the film. I think, Anne-Marie Duff wasn't powerful enough and Carry Mulligan was not properly instructed by the director. (she is a good actor, but without good instructions was she unable to play well) The Suffragette is not bad, but it could be better, if the director would work more on the situations and the script.

satxfan This should have been a gripping and rousing story about the British fight for women's right to vote, but the overly-long and meandering script spoiled the impact. The film came across as a made-for-TV docudrama.Women's rights is such an important issue that it's too bad the film wasn't done well, especially since it was written, produced and directed by women.The problem, as I see it, is that they tried to cram in too many little events and details rather than focusing on the main story of the political struggle. They should have edited the script much more carefully. They could have cut whole scenes and cut out superfluous characters and given the story more impact. For example, they didn't need to show the young girl being molested by the shop owner and later 'saved' by the main character. They could have instead shown that the women were at the mercy of the owner's lechery without bringing in a whole other character. They also could have skipped the force-feeding in the prison and addressed it in dialogue. Same for the hokey adoption scene of the little boy – that could have been done in dialogue, which probably would have been much more devastating. Cutting some of those 'detours' would have kept the focus on the political struggle AND would have cut at least 20 minutes off the running time of the film. Overall, a great opportunity to inspire was wasted.