Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
OF "PHILAMENA" JOINS US.
YOU'RE NOMINATED FOR A GOLDEN
GLOBE FOR BEST SCREEN PLAY.
CONGRATULATIONS.
THE FILM HAS BEEN WIDELY WELL
RECEIVED.
I SAW IT YESTERDAY.
VERY POWERFUL.
YOU DO VM CRITICS.
"THE NEW YORK POST" PERHAPS
CHIEF AMONG THEM.
I WANT TO READ PART OF WHAT HE
SAID.
THE FILM DOESN'T MENTION THAT IN
1952 IRELAND BOTH MOTHER AND
CHILD'S LIFE WOULD HAVE BEEN
RUINED AND THE NUNS ARE GIVING
BOTH A CHANCE AT A FRESH START
THAT BOTH IN REAL LIFE ENJOY.
THIS IS A DIABOLICAL FILM
STRAIGHT UP.
WHAT'S YOUR WRE ACTION TO THAT
KIND OF CRITICISM?
>> WELL, I THINK IF T"THE NEW
YORK POST" HAD GIVEN ME A GOOD
CRITIQUE, I WOULD BE MORE
WORRIED.
I THINK KYLE MAKES TWO MISTAKES.
ONE, HE SAYS THAT SOME OF THOSE
HOMES PROVIDED SOMEWHERE FOR
THESE DESTITUTE SINGLE MOTHERS
BACK IN THE 1950s AND '60s.
BUT THE REASON THEY WERE
OSTRACIZED BY THEIR FAMILIES AND
THEIR COMMUNITIES WAS BECAUSE OF
THE VERY CHURCH THAT HE CLAIMS
TO LOOK AFTER THEM.
SO THE CHURCH MAY HAVE BEEN PART
OF THE SOLUTION, BUT THEY WERE
ALSO PART OF THE PROBLEM.
HE DOESN'T MENTION THAT.
>> BECAUSE OF CATHOLIC DOGMA
SAYING YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE OUT OF
WEDLOCK SEX.
>> BECAUSE OF DISTORTED CATHOLIC
DOGMA AND DISTORTION OF THE
CATHOLIC FAITH THAT LET'S THOSE
SITUATIONS HAPPEN.
AND ALSO TO SAY IT'S AN ATTACK
ON CATHOLICS, I THINK THE
PROBLEM WITH WHEN YOU WRITE FOR
A TABLOID, YOU HAVE A REDUCTIVE
NATURE WHERE IT'S EITHER THIS OR
THAT.
THE FILM IS QUITE NUANCED.
THE END OF THE MOVIE, PHIL
PHILAMENA LEE FORGIVES THE
PERPETRATORS OF THIS MISDEMEANOR
AGAINST HER.
SHE SHOWS HER FAITH HAS DIGNITY.
IN FACT, IF YOU WERE SO
INCLINED, THE BLUE COLLAR
PUTTING THE SMUG LIBERAL
INTELLECTUAL IN HIS PLACE.
HE'S SELECTIVE.
>> THERE'S A CRITICISM ON THE
OTHER SIDE AS WELL, ESPECIALLY
ABROAD WHERE IT'S RAISED A
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OVER WHAT IS
WITHOUT QUESTION A SCANDAL OVER
HOW ADOPTIONS WERE HANDLED IN
IRELAND IN THAT ERA.
MANICS FLYNN, A CITY COUNSELLOR,
SAYS IT LETS THE IRELAND
GOVERNMENT OFF THE HOOK TOO MUCH
AND THE SCANDAL IS PRESENT DAY
BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN NO ONE
PAYING THEIR DUES TO PAYING
THEIR MOTHERS.
HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THAT
CRITICISM?
>> IF YOU'RE GETTING IT FROM
BOTH SIDES, YOU MUST BE DOING
SOMETHING RIGHT.
I THINK THAT'S VALID.
IN THE FILM YOU CAN ONLY TELL SO
MUCH OF THE STORY AND YOU CAN'T
GO INTO ALL THE POLITICAL
DETAILS OF IT.
WE WERE MINDFUL OF THE FACT WE
DIDN'T -- THE FILM IS ABOUT
SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED TO
PHILAMENA HERSELF AND HOW
INDIVIDUALS DEAL WITH THINGS --
ACTIONS AGAINST THEM.
WHAT WE DIDN'T WANT TO DO IS GET
INTO THE IDEA OF FINGER WAGGING
FROM THE PRESENT DAY AGAINST
MISDEEDS OF THE PAST.
THAT'S AN EASY THING TO DO.
WE REALLY DIDN'T WANT TO DO
THAT.
WE SORT OF STEER AWAY FROM THAT.
IT'S MORE ABOUT HOW REALLY IT'S
A DISCUSSION ABOUT FAITH.
IT'S ABOUT HOW YOU CAN BE