A film of Female empowerment in Victorian London, Hysteria sets up like a modern tale of comic angst and resolves into a warm-and-fuzzy love story that never plays out. I really didn't expect the film to delight me so much with its light application of humor to what one might term as "women's problems", and I was happily won over and wanted to stay with the characters after the finale.I am reminded of Carson McCullers' "…love is a joint experience between two persons — there are the lover and the beloved, but these two come from different countries." The film seems to have laid this down as foundation for the screwball events that spin before.We know from the moment Hugh Dancy's enlightened doctor Mortimer Granville crosses paths with Maggie Gyllenhaal's equally enlightened Charlotte Dalrymple that these two are made for each other, and it's too bad that the script doesn't take care to carve out their arc more clearly. We are given one good scene when Mortimer is drawn to Charlotte's free clinic to aid one of her adopted strays, (les miserable), and we understand how the particular Victorian male honor is really compatible with the female desire for identity.There are scenes of merriment that occur to divert our attention from the lack of real substance in the picture. A dinner table scene that further affirms that Charlotte and Mortimer are made for each other, a party scene in which Charlotte and Mortimer are mistaken for betrothed, and others solidify the underlying theme that kindred spirits are destined to come together. One particularly humorous scene pits three men dressed in protective mechanical gear with an electrical massager applying relaxation technique to a woman to relieve her hysteria.As directed by Tanya Wexler, the script by Stephen Dyer, Jonah Lisa Dyer and Howard Gensler moves along at a stimulating pace, highlighting character-driven moments that give the film a very organic feeling. Wexler manages this very well by having individual motivations made apparent when characters are first introduced in the film. We first meet Dancy's doctor Mortimer as he is getting fired for preventing germs in a hospital, and Gyllenhaal's headstrong feminist Charlotte is introduced storming out of a doctor's office seeming to be another patient.The movie delivers a satisfactory payoff, albeit somewhat non-Hollywood, but will still satisfy most of the true feminists and latent romantics in the viewing audience. Wexler only takes time to show that Mortimer and Charlotte come together and this is enough to cure all that ails them and the world.

This movie is about the true (so they say) story of the invention in 1880 of an instrument to satisfy women's sexual needs that they couldn't satisfy otherwise. But in fact at those Victorian times this wasn't the declared purpose of it. It was supposed to treat clinically a psychic trouble called hysteria without mentioning any kind of pleasure that could result from such treatment. That instrument nowadays is called a vibrator. It portrays the task of an old gynecologist and his assistant, a young doctor trying to get himself a career through some scenes and sequences that make it a light comedy. Curiously and despite the fact that this theme is somewhat delicate, the movie keeps a great decency (almost puritanism) in the dialogues and scenes everything going on in a medical atmosphere except for a few minor scenes with minor characters. It doesn't show the least part of a woman's body even during the therapies. Notwithstanding that, the movie keeps a reasonable amount of humour (not particularly related to sex) that maintains the viewer rather amused almost all the time. The performers do a good job. This movie is not a masterpiece (the theme doesn't allow that) but it's amusing and somewhat related to reality though in a relatively superficial form.

In 1880's London an ambitious doctor called Mortimer Granville gets a job with Dr Dalrymple, who has the unique skill of relieving his female patients' frustrations with pelvic massaging. Building on this concept, Granville turns a feather duster into an instrument of pleasure, essentially creating the world's first vibrator.It's pretty unusual that a film is based entirely around the creation of the vibrator, but we are talking about quite possibly THE most popular sex-toy in the world. The story is actually quite an interesting one, albeit an amusing one. How director Tanya Wexler chose to tell the story would determine the success of the movie.Maybe it's because she's a woman, but Wexler has ended up telling the story exactly as it needed to be told – with tongue firmly in cheek. Using Stephen and Jonah Lisa Dyer's solid script, Wexler has crafted a light-hearted and amusing piece of cinema that understands the joke and doesn't try to shy away from it.It's because the film has such a tongue-in-cheek nature that the inclusion of a love triangle irks me a little bit. Perhaps the tale of the two sisters vying for Granville's (Hugh Dancy) heart is a part of the true story, but it feels very forced, as if put in there to make it more cinematic. It takes away from the main story as a result, lessening it's appeal.The silver lining of the love triangle, though, is that it allows us to get some very good performances from Felicity Jones and Maggie Gyllenhaal. Jones and Dancy are good in their roles, there's no argument there, but Gyllenhaal is the MVP of the film. Doing an incredibly realistic London accent, she steals the show as the rebellious and impulsive Charlotte Dalrymple, more interested in womens' rights than the honour and respect of her family. This is in contrast to sister Emily (Jones), who is the perfect English rose, but a tad boring. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out who Granville chooses in the end, but at least we get some good acting out of it.'Hysteria' pretty much stayed under the radar on it's release, and it's easy to see why. It doesn't break any major boundaries, and doesn't boast any fantastic performances or memorable moments. It's just a very sweet, albeit slightly cheeky, film that could be better and could be worse. A film you could watch on a quiet night in, if you get bored of the dildo.

A friend brought Hysteria to one of our regular Movie Nights and, as no one had seen it and most hadn't even heard of it, we decided to watch it. Well, we haven't laughed so much in the last 20 movie nights! We all needed paper napkins to dry the tears!If you read all the reviews then you will have seen those with spoilers and know what Hysteria is all about. But for those of you who skip the ones marked with spoilers, I will not discuss the story here because I want to urge anyone who enjoys a good laugh to see this movie. I couldn't help wondering how accurate the portrayal of the "clinical" procedures was but wouldn't be at all surprised if it was pretty realistic - little curtains and all!Hugh Dancey, Johnathan Pryce and Rupert Everett were brilliant as were the many lady patients of Dr Dalrymple's practice. I must admit that I wondered how an American actress in Maggie Gyllenhaal was chosen to play Charlotte Dalrymple when there are so many English actresses who would have done the job but, to give Maggie her due, she carried it off excellently.I can't put a finger on it (pardon the pun!) but there's something about English period comedies that American counterparts just don't have. After Hysteria, our group watched another comedy (we didn't think we could cope with anything too serious after this!) which was all-American and, to be honest, it was more frustrating than funny. Wish I could figure it out. I think it has something to do with British humour being a lot more subtle that American which is a lot more "in-your-face."Anyway, if you need a wonderful tonic and a damn good laugh, don't just watch Hysteria - buy it!