REVIEW

Movie Review: Charlize Theron in North Country - Over the Waterfall

Written by Alan Dale
Published November 19, 2005
page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

The trial was bifurcated into successive liability and damages phases. The plaintiffs won on liability and then proposed that the damages phase be delegated to a Special Master. Unfortunately, the District Court appointed McNulty, who had once made a pass at a female attorney from the bench, and who permitted Eveleth's "nuts and sluts defense" to go ahead. The defense asked the plaintiffs about personal material revealed by discovery ostensibly to determine if something besides the harassment at work might have caused the emotional injuries they complained of. The more likely purpose, however, was to embarrass, intimidate, and discredit the plaintiffs with matter that was unrelated to the case. (As the Labor Lawyer article notes, one of the Jenson plaintiffs withdrew from the case "rather than disclose that her son had been convicted of murder.")

Special Master McNulty did not, however, allow the plaintiffs to introduce their own psychological experts to counter the implication that they had trouble at the mine because they were crazy whores. Then, in his Report and Recommendation, in which he blamed the plaintiffs for being histrionic and for misinterpreting "reasonably expectable interpersonal conflicts in sexual terms," McNulty discussed Jenson's rape although her testimony relating to it was under seal pursuant to his own discovery order. (As Bingham and Gansler write, "When the subject of rape came up in court, the courtroom was cleared of any extraneous people, and the testimony was marked as confidential in the transcript.")

This bizarre phase of the trial actually set the plaintiffs up for victory in the Eighth Circuit because McNulty made reversible errors of law. The Eighth Circuit's decision vacated the Special Master's Report and Recommendation and ordered the District Court to conduct a new trial on damages. The case was settled in early 1999, when Jenson and Anderson were on medical leave from Eveleth and Kosmach was dead of Lou Gehrig's disease. All told, the litigation had three important consequences, to quote again from The Labor Lawyer: "(1) limiting abusive discovery in sexual harassment litigation; (2) recognizing that sexual harassment can form the basis of a class action; and (3) making corporate America realize the importance of preventing sexual harassment."

North Country takes Jenson's case and transfigures it into the heroic crusade of one Josey Aimes (Charlize Theron), a battered wife who moves back in with her parents to figure out how to take care of herself and her two kids. She's scraping by washing hair at a salon when she recognizes Glory (Frances McDormand), a high school girlfriend who now drives truck at the mine and who recommends Josey get a (better-paying) job there, too. Glory warns Josey that it's rough for women at the mine--the men feel that women take jobs that properly belong to men, especially since the contraction of industrial production in the US is throwing a lot of men out of work. (The movie doesn't mention that Eveleth had begun hiring women in 1974 pursuant to a consent decree with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Department of Labor; Eveleth had agreed to guarantee 20 percent of new jobs to women and minorities.) But nothing could prepare Josey, or us, for what it's like for women at the mines.

page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
Alan Dale earned a Ph.D. in Comparative Literature from Princeton University and a J.D. from Yale Law School. He currently works as a corporate tax attorney in Portland, Oregon. He is the author of What We Do Best: American Movie Comedies of the 1990s and Comedy Is a Man in Trouble: Slapstick in American Movies.
Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
Movie Review: Charlize Theron in North Country - Over the Waterfall
Published: November 19, 2005
Type: Review
Section: Video
Filed Under: Video: Drama
Writer: Alan Dale
Alan Dale's BC Writer page
Alan Dale's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
BC articles by Alan Dale
Video: Drama
All Video Articles
Alan Dale's personal weblog
All Review articles
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — March 14, 2006 @ 03:08AM — Bill Fraser

This is a superb movie review. In fact, the review is more engaging than the movie. It analyzes North Country in the level of detail I'd like to see in every movie review. The disingenuous attitude film makers adopt that they have to alter historical facts drastically to engage the audience's attention in the story is a combination of laziness and contempt for the audience. In fact, in claiming to represent the true interests of the protagonists, by using distortion and outright fiction to bolster the audience's supposed lack of interest in historical storytelling, they actual work *against* the interests of the protagonists - the audience is left with no clear belief in what's real and what's made up. It's like Barry Bonds and steroids - how do we know how many of his accomplishments are legitimate?

We all understand that no one can capture the whole truth, that truth is always a composite of multiple viewpoints, and every director's choice to leave something in or out is a subjective editing decision. But it's a lazy copout to substitute fiction for fact for the majority of a movie's content, as a reaction to the daunting task of presenting a compelling story which is generally true to historical accuracy, though by necessity truncated via subjective editing decisions.

What a shame that Lois Jenson's and a few of the plaintiffs' gritty, persistent heroism has been turned into a sort of Hallmark movie card, which cheapens the immense sacrifices they made. As the reviewer Alan Dale says, "Acquaintance with the facts makes it plain that the behavior the women were subjected to was so scurrilous that moviemakers wouldn't have to make anything up." Throughout the movie I was discussing with my wife (we watched at home) how this character's actions and that situation didn't ring true, while simultaneously expressing admiration and sympathy for the main character's plight and courage. This isn't the way I like to watch a movie. I prefer to be drawn in to a movie's plot and characters because of the ring of truth that resounds in every scene. However, the movie did make me aware of the Jenson vs. Evelyth Mines case and prompt me to do some research, bring me to this excellent movie review, The Kitchen Cabinet, and del.icio.us, where I hope to find more thought-provoking and well-written articles.

#2 — March 14, 2006 @ 19:46PM — Alan Dale [URL]

Thanks for the comment, Bill, and the praise. I was disgusted to read this news report, that a New York Women in Film & Television survey had declared North Country the most-important film for women to see in 2005. To learn from by negative example? I'm afraid the survey respondents must have liked it not despite the movie's evident flaws but because of them--because of the slick way it sells "feminism." If people want candy they're going to have candy, no matter how much more nutritious and subtly flavorful fruit may be.

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/39767)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments