Despite her fame as a fearless, Oscar-winning performer, she remains a staunch advocate for women’s rights to age with dignity. The film’s portrayal of a pivotal figure adds depth to a career marked by daring choices and iconic roles. Directed by Guy Nattiv, the movie centers on Golda Meir, the fourth woman to lead Israel and the nation’s prime minister during the Yom Kippur War in October 1973. Meir stands as the only woman to hold that office to date, steering a country through a clash with an Arab coalition that nearly tipped into defeat. When conversations about this period began, the Gaza conflict had not yet erupted.
Why is a cinematic portrait of Golda Meir relevant today?
For years, Golda faced isolation in her homeland and was blamed by some for the heavy casualties of the Yom Kippur War. Later declassified documents showed that other military and political leaders also bore responsibility for not acting decisively. Meir accepted accountability and resigned, a standard some current politicians could learn from. How many would shoulder responsibility in the same way?
Critics argued that Meir should be portrayed by a Jewish actress. What are the thoughts on this topic?
The actor acknowledges that choices about which characters are depicted can spark debate, especially regarding representation of communities, cultures, and religions on screen. The performer has previously portrayed Jewish women without controversy. The stance is against restricting artistic work, provided it is not disrespectful. The goal was to faithfully render Golda, and there is openness to future roles of a similar nature.
Historically, Golda Meir has been criticized for her stance toward Palestinians, a topic the film does not shy away from addressing…
The narrative focuses on a specific moment in her career and avoids endorsing or justifying policy. It presents her rise in the context of a broader historical arc. Meir’s ascent in the 1960s signaled a turning point when a woman could lead a nation as significant as Israel. The portrayal invites reflection on how leadership, bias, and courage intersect, underscoring her lasting relevance alongside figures like Margaret Thatcher and Angela Merkel. This makes the figure resonate across generations.
Having spent time on a kibbutz at age 22, this critic questions how the viewer understands Israeli attitudes. Is the photographer able to relate to Palestine in this context?
A personal connection to Israel is acknowledged, rooted in early exposure to the Holocaust and its lasting impact. The perspective emphasizes not forgetting the past and recognizing that history has no single side. Empathy for human suffering guides the viewpoint, advocating understanding over polarization.
Before her role as Prime Minister, she portrayed empresses, queens, and even a daughter of prophecy. Does the appeal lie in commanding, authoritative figures?
The choice of roles is not driven by title alone. The actor often gravitates toward women who exhibit resolve and confidence, while acknowledging personal uncertainties. This ongoing self-awareness informs the performances and the choices that shape them.
Has the industry ever limited a performer due to gender expectations? What about ageism in cinema?
Early in the career, many found it surprising that a blonde, conventionally attractive performer sought serious, mature roles. This bias was carried, at times, as a burden to be borne and surpassed through dedication. The actor notes that aging should not define capability. The entertainment field still grapples with age-related stereotypes, with calls for more authentic representation and fewer pressures to alter appearance through Botox or cosmetic changes. Feminism has shifted some dynamics, but challenges persist in the portrayal of mature women.