Oranges and Sunshine (2010)

In the years after World War Two, the British government took away children from single mothers considered unsuited for parenthood, told them they were orphans, and sent them to Australia, where they were raised as virtual slave labour by the Catholic church. This shocking but true story is revealed in Jim Loach's workmanlike film 'Oranges and Sunshine', which follows the British social worker who discovered and revealed their plight. The film is interesting because of the awfulness of the tale it reveals; but the story of its protagonist is not so interesting in itself, and indeed, the drama itself makes the point that her story is less interesting than those of the people she helped which, by contrast, are revealed only through retrospection. It's still worth watching as a reminder of the terrible things that are sometimes done supposedly in a good cause.

Fmovies: Oranges and Sunshine – CATCH IT (B+) The film tells the story of Margaret Humphreys, a social worker from Nottingham who uncovered the scandal of "home children", a scheme of forcibly relocating poor children from the UK to Australia and Canada. Margaret reunites estranged families and brings worldwide attention to the cause. Deported children were promised oranges and sunshine but they got hard labor and life of misery and sexual abuse in institutions such as Keaney College in Bindoon, Western Australia. (Wiki) Oranges and Sunshine is a sensitive subject matter which defiantly put Britain in Shame when Margaret Humphreys broke out the story in 80s. Emily Watson's portrayal of Margaret Humphreys' trouble to help the transported kids all the way to Australia is heart wrenching. The emotional turmoil she goes to work for them while managing her family is something really inspiring. Emily Watson is a great actress and no doubt she brings her emotional range to the real life role model. In supporting cast Hugo Weaving & David Wenhem did a fine job. Overall, it's a sensitive movie about a sensitive issue. Keep in mind its tear jerker, so keep a box of tissue.

Here is another example of past British governmental ideas of what was 'good' for disadvantaged or otherwise unprotected children. One recalls the heartless relocation of aboriginal children in Australia so vividly portrayed in "Rabbit-Proof Fence". After watching "Oranges and Sunshine" (and I didn't even see it from the beginning) I couldn't stop thinking of all those thousands upon thousands of helpless little boys and girls, deprived of any human rights whatsoever and doomed to cheerless and loveless childhoods. And then added to the flawed concept of this wholesale export of the underage needy is the fact that there are always predators who will pervert power over the weak into a free hand with abuse of every kind.

Of course the greater part of the 'migrants' were profoundly damaged by the appalling treatment they received in a program officially perceived to be 'beneficial', at least in some quarters. Who was to benefit from the production of scarred adults, one has to wonder? Disposing of unwanted people by transporting them to far-flung colonies or Dominions was business as usual a couple of centuries ago; what's especially shocking is the discovery that this was occurring not in Early Georgian or Dickensian England, but only decades ago-- recently, uncomfortably recently. And this in a supposedly civilized nation! This film should have been made thirty years ago...

Oranges and Sunshine fmovies. Sarah's Key was critically lauded for its reliable method of evoking raw anguish in its audience by depicting the trauma of a savage injustice from a child's perspective. In the same year, Jim Loach's feature drama handles the similar material of an scandal that's just about on par with the Vel d'Hiv roundup, but the film's subjects are all well into adulthood by the time we are meeting them. The fact that the victims are always shown as adults (in physical form at least) has given the achievement of pulling off this excellent film a higher degree of difficulty, seeing as the actors and screenplay writers are required to work extra hard to win the audience's sympathy, rather than having the simple forgivable innocence of an actual child on screen doing the job. However, this is not to say that Sarah's Key was mere emotional pornography: it found excellent ways of challenging itself in other aspects which gave it a greater level of sophistication, but in terms of expressing the heartbreak, the feat of Oranges and Sunshine is much more remarkable.

Among the topics being explored here is the very complicated issue of adoption. The burdensome puzzle of how a child in an unstable family situation or an unhealthy state of living should receive professional help – whether such interference is truly protecting their best interests or inflicting deep psychological harm by depriving them of family – has long been troubling child protection authorities. In mid- twentieth-century England, the popular solution settled on was the organised deportation of these children to Australia. Told that they were orphans, with no living relatives to care for them, they would be sent over in large numbers and, once there, sold into slavery for a respected church organisation commonly refferrred to as "The Brothers".

Several decades later, a determined social worker from Nottingham has begun to single-handedly reunite the victims of the outrage with their family back in England. As they relate to her their heartwrenching stories, each with their own despicable atrocities on top of what has already been mentioned, the irreparable damage of being raised without a proper family becomes apparent, and they are reduced to miserable, vulnerable, homesick little children. Its frequent mentioning of mothers, its claim that the wound of lost parents will never truly heal, and the fact that most of the victims shown are boys creates very distinct allusions to Peter Pan, even before that similarity is actually mentioned by one of the people. An additional noticeable parallel between this film and another classic story is the idea of a child suffering lonesomely at the hands of a cruel organisation under the sneaky pretense that they are an orphan, which is reminiscent of Oliver Twist.

However, it would be grossly unfair to just cynically dissect this film using only comparisons: it displays a very impressive divergence from the typical conspiracy drama. Its most prominent asset is the fully- fledged characterisation of its activist hero and the equal attention spent on showing her suffering as well that of her clients. The delightful Emily Watson obviously does a great deal to bring her to life, playing her so brilliantly that she comes across as both perfectly likable and humanly multi-faceted. Hearing such painful stories is incredibly taxing, and the growing unpopularity she is gaining as she stirs the government and the press results in some truly terrifying personal attacks while she is staying

Oranges and Sunshine is directed by Jim Loach and adapted to screenplay by Rona Munro from the book "Empty Cradles", written by Margaret Humphreys. It stars Emily Watson, Hugo Weaving, David Wenham and Richard Dillane. Music is by Lisa Gerrard and cinematography by Denson Baker. The film tells the true story of Margaret Humphreys (Watson), a Nottingham social worker who in 1986 began uncovering the scandal of forced child migration from the UK to various countries of the Commonwealth. Thousands upon thousands of children who were either from poor families or orphaned, were sent to British colonies under a banner of lies. Where instead of the oranges and sunshine they were expecting, they were put to work as hard labour and suffered terrible conditions to live in as well as abuse at the hands of their carers.

Lost Children Of The Empire.

It's a story ripe for exploitation, for a bit of shock cinema, the kind that assaults you with horrific images, but Oranges and Sunshine is a rare beast, a true life horror tale that accentuates the outrage by remaining understated and steady in sombre tone. This is expert film making from Loach (son of Ken), letting the story unfold with a naturalism that makes it a deeply moving experience. No histrionic characterisations by the actors, no grandstanding speeches or attempts to paint Margaret Humphreys as an armour plated crusader risking death at every turn. It's cold, yet humane, in its telling, the pain of story etched on the faces of the lost children, now adults searching for identity and a family thread to stitch it together. The emotional uplift of the reunion scenes gladdens the heart, but never once does the film proclaim, like its wonderful protagonist, that what has been lost can be replaced. But identity is comforting, the fragmented pieces of childhoods ruined finally piecing themselves together.

Who was crucified huh? You tell me that.

Thankfully the makers resist, rightly, the urge to show flashback scenes of the children suffering. We know just by dialogue exchanges and character reactions, just what pain and misery was bestowed upon these minors. Yet the film is full of powerful scenes that really grip and hold the heart, where quite often they are just quiet conversations, a statement made or a question asked. Or even in silence for one truly potent sequence as Margaret visits Bindoon Boys Town in Western Australia, an imposing, but elegant structure on the outside, but that elegance belies the terrible crimes perpetrated by the cleric elders within. Loach and his team don't need tricks or historical tampering to make their film dramatic and worthy, the story sells itself on both counts.

Oh, baby, baby, it's a wild world.

Picture is propelled by a wonderfully restrained performance by Watson. A perfect bit of casting, Watson never screams for our sympathies, she hits the right emotional notes required, but never strains to get there, she plays Margaret as a bastion of decency. She deftly blends stoicism with vulnerability as Margaret juggles the emotional strains of the search with that of the safe haven of her family home that she is away from for long periods. Watson is surrounded by three damn fine male performances. Weaving and Wenham as the "lost boys" underpin the story, they perfectly embody the crushing of the childhood spirit, a two pronged acting show that says so much for the thousands of children who were cruel victims of the child migration schemes. Dillane scores high as Margaret&#

It is always a jolt when a bit of buried history surfaces and makes us realize that the world is not all that sane as we would like to believe: the Chaos Factor raises its ugly head as in this screen adaptation by Rona Munro of Margaret Humphreys' true story book 'Empty Cradles'. This is a very powerful film, all the more so because of the quality of acting and direction by Jim Loach who never lets the film run out of control despite the unveiling tragedy.

The story is set in the 1980s where Nottingham, social worker Margaret Humphreys (Emily Watson) is a social worker who encounters a middle aged woman who has traveled form Australia to find her birth parents. Margaret at first doesn't want to increase her workload with a wild tale of children having been deported form England by ship to be placed in orphanage work camps in Australia, but with the aid of her supportive husband Merv (Richard Dillane) she begins to investigate the uncovered secret, ultimately traveling to Australia where she meets the 'unwanted children' as adults each longing to return to the UK to meet their families. The children when deported were as young as four to thirteen years old and had been told their parents either were dead or didn't want them and the representatives from the government promised them a safe home with 'oranges and sunshine' in Australia. There are several 'victims' as played by Hugo Weaving, David Wenham, Russell Dykstra and others who help personalize the unspoken crime until Margaret progresses to the point where she can hold the British government accountable for child migration schemes and reunite the children involved -- now adults living mostly in Australia -- with their parents in Britain. Though the deportations occurred from the 1940's through the 1970's it was only after Margaret Humphrey's 1994 book and then much later after when February 2010 Great Britain's Prime Minister Gordon Brown finally issued a full apology to those deported children and their families.

The supporting cast is uniformly excellent but it is the glowing performance by Emily Watson that makes this revelation of a film remain in the mind long after the credits explain how the solution played out in reality. This is a tough film but an important one and deserves a much larger audience than it has found.

Grady Harp