A simple but effective drama, Call Jane narrates the real-life story of the Jane Collective, a remarkable group of women who performed illegal abortions in 1960s Chicago.
★★★✰✰
Elizabeth Banks stars as Joy, a housewife who—following pregnancy-related health issues—is denied an abortion by an all-male medical board. Joy is both an unlikely protagonist and entirely conventional—by being a happily married mother of one who fits the default viewpoint in white feminism as a white, wealthy woman. Having a fifty percent survival rate if she were to go through with the pregnancy, the choice to abort the fetus would be, to a modern audience, an obvious choice. This unchallenging moral dilemma only occupies the first act of the film, and it’s a satisfying introduction to a controversial topic.
Banks’ performance perfectly channels this complexity. Always entertaining, she provides depth to a character that undergoes a drastic yet realistic change throughout the film. Joy radically changes her values, retaining her own personality as a kind woman dedicated to her family. She remains traditional, while also challenging her beliefs and learning to be less judgmental. A notable example is how her attitude changes towards the ‘dizzy’ doctor’s secretary. The first time she meets her, Joy is openly hostile, secure in her moral superiority. By the end, though she is still disapproving of her carelessness, she helps her by performing the abortion. This character arc is simple yet carries the film by being well written and superbly acted, making Call Jane a worthy watch despite some glaring issues.
Cooler tones are used in unsettling situations. Joy’s abortion, made especially stressful by an incredibly callous doctor, is set in a white room similar to the traumatic medical consultations she was previously put through. As the film progresses and abortion is seen as less taboo by the protagonist, warmer lighting takes over. A scene that highlights this technical strength of the film is when Joy performs her first abortion. Her kind composure, aimed at soothing the patient, is perfectly complemented by a warm glow provided by the lighting. Despite the stress of the situation, the larger idea of destigmatization is effectively conveyed: while abortion is neither scary nor sketchy, empathy is essential. This is a beautiful scene, far from the antiquated fear-mongering portrayal.
The main problem with the film is that other moral arguments are not taken far enough, even while Joy’s evolution is fully fleshed out. Call Jane proposes a fairly conservative argument, and while it’s constantly emphasized by Virginia (played by Sigourney Weaver) that the Jane Collective does not judge women, every abortion in the film comes with some sort of explanation. Characters are unmarried, cannot afford it, or are too young. While it could be argued that in the 1960s, those who sought illegal abortions likely did so because of a socially acceptable reason, making the message of the film relatively shallow.
Discussing the morality of a film might seem at odds with criticism, as something doesn’t have to be ‘moral’ to be good. However, when a film attempts performative progressiveness, this hurts the overall message. Any movie discussing core feminist issues must be examined more closely, given the pervasive nature of white feminism. Written by Roshan Sethi and Hayley Schore, the script fails to be intersectional. Gwen (Wunmi Mosaku) points out how the price of abortion predominately prevents Black women from getting the procedure. After the leader negotiates with the doctor to provide more free abortions, the issue isn’t brought up again, leaving the inclusion of this scene closer to a necessary step, rather than a meaningful theme intertwined throughout the film.
While entertaining, it fails to properly challenge its audience on both an artistic and an intellectual level.
Another strange and jarring inclusion is the use of a slur by the doctor performing the abortions to offhandedly refer to the Jane Collective. This is not only unnecessary in terms of the plot and tone but also entirely out of context. It may be dismissed as an old-fashioned way of referring to progressive women, yet the term is still being used harmfully today against gay and bisexual women.
Call Jane’s ending particularly feels confusing yet optimistic, in a way that historical dramas often do. While celebrating the accomplishments of the Jane Collective, the film fails to be grounded in reality. Its legal victory, while revolutionary, did not lead to abortion being legal everywhere in the US. The ending is misleading, particularly for international audiences who might not be aware of the restrictive abortion laws currently existing in many US states. A timely story that feels somewhat outdated in its cheerfulness, this issue is caused by the direction more so than the performances. The characters gleefully discuss the future of white feminism in a brightly lit room, in a way that felt more self-congratulatory than opportune.
Overall, Call Jane is symptomatic of a lack of vision. While entertaining, it fails to properly challenge its audience on both an artistic and an intellectual level. However, the charisma of its lead, as well as the incredible real-life events this is based on, makes the film a worthy watch.
The Verdict
Call Jane is a standard dramatization of a real-life incredible story. In trying to make an unshakable point for abortion, the film sacrifices artistic value and nuance, relying on unnecessary slurs and limited social viewpoints to steer forward the drama.
Words by Elisabetta Pulcini
Support The Indiependent
We’re trying to raise £200 a month to help cover our operational costs. This includes our ‘Writer of the Month’ awards, where we recognise the amazing work produced by our contributor team. If you’ve enjoyed reading our site, we’d really appreciate it if you could donate to The Indiependent. Whether you can give £1 or £10, you’d be making a huge difference to our small team.