THE LETTERS
US, 2015, 114 minutes, Colour.
Juliet Stevenson, Max von Sydow, Rutger Hauer and a large Indian cast.
Written and directed by William Riead.
The Letters in the title of this film of those written by Mother Teresa of Calcutta to her spiritual director, the Jesuit Father Celeste van Ekem, over a period of almost 50 years. Mother Teresa died in 1997.
This does not necessarily sound an attractive title for audiences to go to a feature film. It sounds more like a documentary. However, the letters are always in the background of Mother Teresa’s story, sometimes coming to the forefront, so that the action of the film concentrates on her life and her work.
It is significant that the letters concern Mother Teresa’s dark nights of soul and senses, not only difficulties of belief in God but a dread sense of being abandoned by God. This does is addressed right at the beginning of the film where the promoter of Mother Teresa’s cause goes to visit Father Celeste van Ekem in retirement in England to receive and read the letters and evaluate them in the light of Mother Teresa being declared Blessed. There also scenes from the Vatican where meetings are held to discuss the miracles attributed to Mother Teresa – with a glimpse of this miracle at the beginning of the film – and their place in the approval of her beatification. (There are also a number of Vatican scenes from the 1940s, petitions for Mother Teresa to leave Loretto, to establish her congregation – exceedingly formal and stiff, not in the vein of Pope Francis!)
The Letters will be a film of great Catholic interest, Mother Teresa being well-known to so many Christians, Catholics and others like. Because she was such a public figure over such a long time, there will be an audience right around the world for this film. Since the release and the financial success of Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ in 2004, commentators have noted that there is a greater appetite for specifically and explicitly religious films. Again, because of Mother Teresa being a public figure, most admiring her, some critics writing against her, the film offers an opportunity to look at Mother Teresa’s life, her work, her motivations, her achievement and assess them in the context of her committed faith life and her ministry and service.
The film was written and directed by American William Riead, radio journalist, television cameraman, director of “The Making of…) Documentaries in the 1980s and 90s. In terms of some reputable acting power, the promoter for the cause is played by Rutger Hauer and the spiritual director himself by the venerable actor, Max von Sydow. Max von Sydow brings considerable gravitas to his presence and performance.
There have been two television films on Mother Teresa: Mother Teresa: in the Name of God’s Poor, 1997, with Geraldine Chaplin and, in 2003, Mother Teresa with Olivia Hussey. This time the casting is British actress, distinguished for her stage and screen work, Juliet Stevenson.
One of the great advantages of this film is that so much of it was filmed on location in India and with an Indian cast.
While the letters on Mother Teresa’s religious experience pervade the film, it actually tells the story of her work from 1946 to 1952, her discerning whether to leave her community life and her teaching at school in Calcutta and to work amongst the poor. They were long delays in receiving a reply from the Vatican, her moving out of the convent, initial resistance to her presence in work by many of the Indians fearing that she was proselytising amongst the Hindus, her early companions, the support of the Archbishop of Calcutta, the advice of her spiritual director, the final approval – and glimpses of her shrewdness in dealing with authorities, persuading them to give her material and financial support, and the interest of the media in her story.
With Juliet Stevenson’s performance, a broken English accent, the slight stoop that Mother Teresa had, the film offers an opportunity for the audience to reflect on the whole process that led to the establishment of the work of the Missionaries of Charity. The screenplay, which does show the young Loretto sister making her vows in Dublin in the early 1930s as well as her classes in the College, gives audiences enough time for the audience to ponder her motivation, the poverty in the streets at the time of India’s Independence, the practical difficulties of her work, the hostilities, even demonstrations against her when she is given a disused Hindu temple as a hostel for men and women dying in the streets.
The audience also realises that Mother Teresa was not an immediate, overnight success in her new work. She had to move carefully and prudently, adopted local clothing (not a habit, although it has become one) so that she could identify as ordinary amongst people. The permissions were given gradually, not always with the support of the Loretta superiors, and there were discussions, with Mother Teresa and her certainty of her mind and intent, about the establishment of her religious congregation, its rules and canonical status.
Because some American media took some interest in her story in the late 1940s, audiences also realise that she became a media topic almost immediately which continued for the next 40 years or so, leading to greater acknowledgement around the world, including being awarded the Nobel Piece Prize in 1979 – a sequence, with her speech, with which the film ends. No need to show the details of her life and work in the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, most of the 1990s, because it was a continuation of the initial work, service and spirituality. Not everybody agreed with Mother Teresa’s methods, many considering them to limited – but no one can take it away from her that she was actually there in the streets, assisting.
While the screenplay is certainly geared towards a faith audience, it is also written in such a way that people of non-faith who admired Mother Teresa can be interested in and involved in her story.
1. Audience knowledge of, interest in, appreciation of Mother Teresa? A significant 20th-century figure? Beloved by people, by the media? Saint?
2. The range of documentaries on Mother Teresa and her work, the feature films about her? A variety of portraits? the impact of this portrait?
3. The setting of the 1940s, the flashbacks to her profession in 1932, into the 1950s, her receiving the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979? A portrait, character and events sketched?
4. Juliet Stevenson is Mother Teresa, her figure, her accent, stoop, as a Loreto sister, donning the sari, her work of charity in Calcutta?
5. The background of her family in Skopje, making her vows in Dublin in 1932, her family origins, going to India? Her family wanting to visit her from Albania in the 1950s and prevented by the Communist government?
6. The filming in India, Calcutta, the, Loreto convent and school, the wealthy areas, the intervention of the government, the Independence movement, poverty of the people, racial and religious hostilities, the role of the religious orders? The visuals of India? The musical score?
7. Mother Teresa, in herself, her vocation, the call to Loreto, the call to India, her skill in teaching, the conventional life of Loreto? Education, the girls, supervision? The role of the superior? Community life, prayer and obedience?
8. Teresa going out, the consequences, the effect of seeing the poor people, giving them food, the trigger for her response to the poor, the criticism of the government, the dangers, the superior? A new location? Her request, her prayer and discernment, discussions, the role of the Archbishop of Calcutta and his sympathies, the discussions with the superior and her being against the move, the contact with her spiritual director? The long wait, the girls interested in working with her, the move to Independence and partition?
9. The Vatican officials, the formalities of the meetings, the letter from Teresa, the Archbishop and his request? The wait, the superior, Teresa’s patience, finally getting permission, temporary?
10. Teresa going out into the streets, the Loreto reaction? Her putting on the sari, wanting to wear ordinary clothes, the accusations of proselytising and her denial? Walking through the city, her bag? The help, the reaction of the Hindus, suspicions? The girls in the school coming to help? The hostile man and his wife, pregnant, her going to help, the success of the birth, the husband and his support? The various helpers, the effect?
11. Loreto, the letters, the reactions, the girls and the wishes of their parents, not to help Teresa, but their coming?
12. The issue of the Temple, not in use, a refuge, the worker, the practical help? The demonstration against the Temple? The role of the authorities and defending Teresa?
13. The Loreto superior, her reluctance, Teresa finally getting permanent permission, establishing the house, the congregation, the letters of request to Rome, their being granted? The scenes of the nuns making their vows?
14. Journalists in India at the time, Teresa and her work as a news story, the interest in the United States, the journalist sent for interview, her not wanting interviews, her motivations, the work being the story? The publication of the stories, people getting to know of her and her work, the spread throughout the world?
15. The following decades, India and its growth, Teresa working in Calcutta, beyond, the congregation throughout the world? The Nobel Peace Prize and her speech?
16. Her death, the visitor from Rome, the documentation, the miracle shown at the beginning, the possibility for beatification? The Visitor, going to the spiritual director, the character of the director, his contact with Teresa over the decades, helping initially, the letters? The two men and their conversations about Teresa?
17. The importance of the letters, her sense of abandonment by God, the nature of her faith?
18. The meeting in Rome, the approval for the beatification?
