Ladybird Ladybird

source: Ladybird Ladybird

Crissy Rock gives it her all in this. She plays Maggie. A single mother with 4 kids to 4 different blokes, each of them taken away by social services. She has clear behavioural problems and lives a life of poor choices and bad decisions on repeat. A woman that "smells trouble and goes to bed with it", as her neighbour describes her. Im conflicted because the film encourages us to be more sympathetic towards the protagonist and her plight but I have no sympathy whatsoever for Maggie, and while I detest the social workers they were 100% necessary here. Maggie is an unfit mother incapable of supporting her litter, let alone herself. She is just as volatile as the men in her life, and her choice of nasty and abusive men that she chooses to subject her own children to was my main reason for thinking her a terrible mother. Clearly her own worst enemy yet the blame always lies on someone or something else and it always will because of that "poor me" mentality. Another thing that annoyed me and it's something you see all the time sadly. Maggie tells the social worker to stop giving her child condiments with their meals because she can't afford to buy them. Fair enough right? Then you see her lighting a fag, then another, and another. If you can't afford table sauce for your children but you have money to smoke you need to recheck your goddamn priorities. We've all seen and met people like Maggie. I've lived next to a Maggie or two in my time. The type of person that can't support or even handle the kids they have already yet they keep having them and getting them taken away. Zero aspirations in life other than getting pregnant and living off of benefits. The kind of neighbours that scream constantly and have police at their door routinely but never seem to learn or want to help themselves. A good Ken Loach flick but far from his best. Still worth a watch but before the film starts you might want to take an aspirin for that inevitable headache.

Wow. Very powerful film based on a true story about how the social services and the courts can, on occasion, get it all so wrong. Chrissy Rock is brilliantly believable as a mother of four kids who have been taken into care; a result of an abusive relationship with the ever so slightly typecast Ray Winstone. She meets gentle Gorge, a Paraguayan migrant, and they embark on a new abusiveless life together. However, Maggie's past soon comes back to haunt them. Social realism is by far my favourite film genre, and this is one of the best. Ken Loach, you're a (inter)national treasure. 8 out of ten.

Even though the scenario does simplify the mishaps of child protection system, even though I like to think the (French) child protection system in which I work strives to avoid such tragedies, I cannot help but feel a deep unease, and even a pang of guilt each time I watch this gem of a movie. The strength of this movie is, in my opinion, to explore the limits of social welfare in such a deep and balanced way. Yes, some families generate toxic environment for children, regardless of the individual qualities of their members. Yes, when in doubt, social workers do sometimes choose to suggest foster care to the court as the lesser of two potential evils (even though alternative solutions do exist in France, and no doubt in the UK too). Yes, motherly love is not enough in itself to insure child wellbeing. Yes, misunderstanding and fear of social workers can lead to disastrous results. Yes, social workers and courts wield the power to shatter families and lives and do make mistakes, out of lack of empathy, excessive workload, burn-out or plain incompetence. All this and more is shown and put to the test in this movie, and no definite answers are given. That is the mark of an outstanding writer and director. Besides, I can only join in the general praise for the superb performance of the two main actors and Loach's artful camera-work. Certainly the example shown here is extreme, but it echoes the very real pain I face in my daily work as a witness to family disorders and participant in inevitable (but hopefully only occasional) social services catastrophic blunders. My thanks go to Ken Loach for this hearth wrenching and thought provoking movie. A movie every social worker should care to think of from time to time. I see Ladybird, Ladybird as a kind of personal safeguard. To resist the temptation to call it a day and send a quick and dirty court report to the judges. To take the time to think twice before adding this sweeping little comment that could cast a child away. And for that I am deeply grateful to you, Mister Loach.

Ladybird, Ladybird is one of Ken Loach's most dramatic working class drama's. The use of melodrama to put across political points about the oppression of middle-class systems on the working-classes is subtly brilliant. After watching the film I was very depressed for quite a while. Although I was obviously traumatised by social services taking not just one but two of Maggie and Jorge's children shortly and immediately after birth, I couldn't decide if it was somehow her own fault. If you leave your four children alone in a hostel and one of them nearly dies in a fire can you really expect to be deemed capable of providing a 'safe' environment for children? Her rage about this judgement of self it seems is immense. She cannot as Jorge suggests 'talk nicely' to anyone. The frustration of her being trapped by her circumstance of class is evident. That said, I think it was very harsh of social services to condemn the women to be without children for the rest of her life, people can change and with Jorge it seems that she does find a more stable centre but the pain of the loss will never fade. I hope that the real Maggie and Jorge find peace and are one day reunited with their 'lost' children. The fact that this film has been based on real life makes it even more heartbreaking. Not the cheeriest of films but one that you should watch at some point in your lifetime and form your own views. It's very thought provoking which is what Loach intends his films to be.

This is a realistic situation. While Ken Loach partially takes Maggie's side, the film presents almost all aspects of such occurrences. Should an incompetent mother be allowed to have their children just because she loves them? A difficult question to pose. So, it's a courageous film, but a film is judged mainly on how and not on what and the obvious examples are some American fluff about similar subjects. Without using impressive camera and directing tricks, Loach manages to make us sympathize the main characters and get into the core of the problem. Impressive through its simplicity and a very good social study.

This is not a movie to entertain! It is a movie one should watch if they want to see a brilliant performance by an actor performing one of the most difficult performances to be seen on screen. Crissy Rock portrays a welfare mother who loves her children but cannot keep them primarily because she can't shut up when confronted by the welfare system. If ever someone deserved an Acadmy Award, this performance deserved it.

This is a story about a British woman who struggles to keep her children. Ken Loach's movies are always good and they always deal with sad and gritty subjects. The thing that struck me most about this movie was that although I initially felt sympathy for the main character, Maggie, I quickly lost it. She's so upset she is completely uncooperative with the social services people, who are often judgmental and unlikeable, but who are only trying to do their jobs. When Maggie finds a lover who does not abuse her as her earlier partners did, she refuses to appreciate his steadfastness, his decency and his loyalty to her, and she tries to drive him away. I was surprised to find myself so unsympathetic to Maggie. My frustration with her grew, and I found myself saying, aloud, "God, she's impossible!" Even though I didn't like the character, the movie is so good, I could not tear my eyes away from it. Ken Loach is a genius. I think the hardest works are those with unsympathetic main characters. If you still find yourself fascinated, even though you find yourself detesting the protagonist in a movie, it makes the viewing even more memorable. I sometimes feel sad that I have no children; yet, when I see this story, I feel better about it. I also wonder why I cannot muster much sympathy for Maggie, even though I have things in common with the character. Society is especially unforgiving when dealing with parents. In its well-meaning interest in the welfare of the children, it often fails to reach out to the parents who are sometimes quite good people, but who are struggling to cope. Almost everyone could benefit from seeing this movie. It's highly instructive. It makes you think about the roles we, as adults, play in society, and what our responsibilities are. None of the questions and issues raised by this movie are easy to deal with. There are no easy answers. I think both great objectivity and subjectivity are necessary toward finding solutions, and both are seldom possible at the same time; hence, mistakes are made, all around. The character of the good man she finally finds is beautifully played by an unknown actor. I wondered how he could continue to be so good, and yet I felt myself completely frustrated with him and annoyed with him when he tried to explain his reasons for being a political exile from his country of origin in a court hearing. He was so upset that for once, he couldn't think clearly and couldn't express himself adequately. This showed me that despite his "good" qualities, under extreme pressure, he could be as hard to understand and to help as Maggie is. This movie is based on a true story, which is, sadly, not hard to believe. This same type of situation is played out again and again. What to do? Leave children in questionable households, or take them away? Try to see this movie and to share it with someone who is troubled, who has been abused, and who has had problems dealing with administrations of almost any kind. It's very instructive, even though, as I've said, no answers are given.

I have seen several Ken Loach films in the past like BREAD AND ROSES and MY NAME IS JOE and I really think that Loach is one of the most talented directors around.His social films are very intense and miles away from your regular Hollywood or Pinewood movie. I thought that MY NAME IS JOE was an intense drama(and it is very much so)but LADYBIRD LADYBIRD is the absolute powerhouse of drama and despare.The acting performances of Crissy Rock and Vladimir Vega are so intense that it seems to be really happening.Loach uses a lot of unexperienced actors to play in his films and this time around it's no different.Both Rock and Vega make their cinema debut here.The fact that Loach uses these unfamiliar people enhances the reality of his films. The verbal fights between Rock and the social workers are almost unwatchable as are the fights she has with her former boyfriend. The way that Loach uses flashbacks to tell the story is very well done. Still there are some points of criticism.I know that the film is based on a true story but some things are not very realistic.For instance why should a political refugee of Paraguay start an affair with a sad and unbalanced woman from Mersy Side.Also the parts with the social workers are slightly overdone,but maybe it's the truth.If it is,then I'm afraid to say that these folks are absolutely cold hearted. LADYBIRD LADYBIRD is the most intense film I've ever seen.It's very hard to watch but even harder not to. 9/10

This film defies description and cannot be put into a category. It's one-of-a-kind in every positive sense ot the label. Performances are all sensational, with a breakout debut by the female lead. When I learned this was based on a true story, I was even more astounded by this remarkable gem of a film. SEE IT! You won't forget it; you definitely won't regret it. I guarantee!