ILNews

Hammerle On … 'Belle,' 'Locke'

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

“Belle”

Just like I noted in last year’s “12 Years a Slave,” director Amma Asante’s “Belle” forces all of us to relive a moment in history that we would rather forget.

With “Belle,” we revisit 1783 when England was forced to confront its embrace of slavery. It seems that a British ship stocked with slaves jettisoned them overboard under a fabricated excuse designed to collect insurance money. In the process, England had to look into its own soul, something that its rebellious colonies in North America were going to ignore for the next 80 years.

While the top jurist in England, Lord Mansfield, wrestled with an impending legal decision, he and his wife were also raising two nieces. One was Belle, a mixed-race daughter of a nephew who had died years earlier. In the process, Mansfield not only had to legally analyze the treatmen

hammerle-belle.jpg

t of blacks in the New World, but also the legal restrictions placed on those like his black niece living in England.

Tom Wilkinson and Emily Watson are stunning as Lord and Lady Mansfield. Though both were dedicated to following accepted legal standards, they witnessed firsthand how their niece, Belle, was treated like a second-class citizen in their own home.

The captivating Gugu Mbatha-Raw plays Belle, and she brings the same force to this film that Lupita Nyong’o did in her unforgettable, Oscar-winning performance in the above-referred to “12 Years a Slave.” Mbatha-Raw is as emotionally powerful as she is beautiful, and she tries to honor her adopted parents without abandoning her past.

In the process, she develops a powerful kinship with the Mansfield’s adopted white niece, Elizabeth. Poignantly played by Sarah Gadon, the two young girls reflect a future that England’s power brokers want to keep locked in a dark government basement.

Race issues in England are played out for all to see as the Mansfields interrelate socially with the Ashfords, a powerful family with more influence than they deserved. Miranda Richardson is startling as the hateful Lady Ashford, a woman who wants both a title and wealth for her two sons as long as it does not involve interaction with blacks. Her sons reflect her racism without apologies, and it is impossible to feel the slightest sympathy for any of them.

What stirs the film at its climax is the interrelationship of John Davinier, a committed son of a Vicar who is a budding lawyer, with the Mansfield family. Played with grace and style by Sam Reid, he is fighting to help Lord Mansfield understand the tyranny at the heart of slavery. In the process, he and Belle fall madly in love, and they join the struggle to find equality and themselves.

“Belle” is based on a true story, and I can only ask all of you to imagine if she had a descendent known today as Barack Obama. As I watch the startling amount of vitriol thrown at our president daily by the largely white male leaders of the opposition party, I wonder if Belle would have seen anything different than what existed in her day. While many of those who embrace “family values” condemn a president who is in a wonderful marriage raising two beautiful, intelligent daughters, they simultaneously embrace people like Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh who have been married a combined seven times.

Belle was able to find a passionate man who was committed to her and a joint cause, but not everyone is that lucky. There are millions of young African-Americans like Belle who need assistance today, and it’s time for all of us to play a role.

“Locke”

With “Locke,” director Steven Knight conquers the shortcomings of Robert Redford’s performance in “All Is Lost.” Their similarity ends with the fact that there is but one character in each film.

Ivan Locke is played by the fantastic Tom Hardy, an actor that all of you should be following. An English actor of immense range, start with his performance as the maniacal Bane, the medically challenged villain in “The Dark Knight Rises” (2012).

In “Locke,” Hardy plays a happily married father of two who is the construction manager of the largest building project in England’s history. He leaves without notice to his boss or wife, going on a drive in his car for the entire film. He flirts with disaster as he wrestles with a sense of honor that comes close to devastating those around him.hammerle-locke.jpg
Seeing him only behind the wheel of his car, Locke is constantly receiving phone calls from both his job and home. As he tries to direct one of his employees to supervise the mammoth project he left behind, his immediate boss is progressively angered to the point of being reluctantly forced to fire Locke.

Locke fully understands the condemnable nature of his journey, but simply has to do what he perceives as decent and fair. As he talks intermittently with his horrified wife, he vacillates through a series of emotions that are synonymous with life’s journey. On the other hand, his wife is disgusted for increasingly obvious reasons.

Forced to acknowledge the ramifications of a regrettable mistake, Locke risks all that is dear to him. Condemn him if you will, but imagine if President Bill Clinton had shown the courage to simply admit his weakness concerning the young Monica Lewinsky and refused to deny the encounter and vilify her in the process. Maybe he would have benefitted had he gotten into a car and simply driven for a few hours to talk things over with an angry Hillary and his staff.

Say what you want about Ivan Locke, but he is no Bill Clinton.•

__________

Robert Hammerle practices criminal law in Indianapolis. When he is not in the courtroom or working diligently in his Pennsylvania Street office, Bob can likely be found at one of his favorite movie theaters watching and preparing to review the latest films. To read more of his reviews, visit www.bigmouthbobs.com. The opinions expressed are those of the author.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  2. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

  3. This outbreak illustrates the absurdity of the extreme positions taken by today's liberalism, specifically individualism and the modern cult of endless personal "freedom." Ebola reminds us that at some point the person's own "freedom" to do this and that comes into contact with the needs of the common good and "freedom" must be curtailed. This is not rocket science, except, today there is nonstop propaganda elevating individual preferences over the common good, so some pundits have a hard time fathoming the obvious necessity of quarantine in some situations....or even NATIONAL BORDERS...propagandists have also amazingly used this as another chance to accuse Western nations of "racism" which is preposterous and offensive. So one the one hand the idolatry of individualism has to stop and on the other hand facts people don't like that intersect with race-- remain facts nonetheless. People who respond to facts over propaganda do better in the long run. We call it Truth. Sometimes it seems hard to find.

  4. It would be hard not to feel the Kramers' anguish. But Catholic Charities, by definition, performed due diligence and held to the statutory standard of care. No good can come from punishing them for doing their duty. Should Indiana wish to change its laws regarding adoption agreements and or putative fathers, the place for that is the legislature and can only apply to future cases. We do not apply new laws to past actions, as the Kramers seem intent on doing, to no helpful end.

  5. I am saddened to hear about the loss of Zeff Weiss. He was an outstanding member of the Indianapolis legal community. My thoughts are with his family.

ADVERTISEMENT