Typically when films show the history of various forms of inequality in the past, the standard reaction I’ve seen from audiences is shock at how bad things were and some reassurance that at least the issues have  been improved since then.

I don’t think this should be the mindset when seeing movies like this. Sure laws have improved for African ­Americans, women, homosexuals, and other groups, but that doesn’t mean the prejudice is erased.

These films shouldn’t just make the audience feel glad everything’s better now. They can serve as a reminder to society of what they need to improve on, such is the case of Suffragette.

As it is a British historical period drama, the release in the United States was limited in October, which is a shame because it has a solid cast and maintains relevance today despite the film taking place over a century ago.

Back in early 20th century Great Britain, working wife and mother Maud Watts experiences a major change in her life when she is invited to join the U.K.’s secret growing suffragette movement after she gives a testimony to secure the right the vote.

After some personal issues with her husband and the community, she becomes highly active for women’s rights, even when the aggressive police force her and her colleagues underground. She endures hardships alongside Edith Ellyn, Emmeline Pankhurst, Emily Davison, and Violet Miller.

I have to give props to the production design and cinematography. The costume and set designs stand out while fitting  with the time period, and the cinematography adds to the intensity of a number of scenes in the movie that I don’t wish to spoil (even if some of this is historical facts, they’re not quite as well­known).

I’m surprised the release in America was limited when there was an all­-star cast assembled for this that have experienced some great success in the country. Carey Mulligan, Helena Bonham Carter, and Meryl Streep are great actresses that tend to get type casted a lot these days, but their roles and performances feel fresh for each of their respective careers while their emotional journeys are hard to hate.

It’s also a nice touch to have Carter as one of the activists considering her great­grandfather was the prime minister during these suffragettes to show the progress of the activists.

As intriguing as the story is, however, I wish it was constructed a little differently.

No, I’m not saying they should erase or replace history, I’m saying they should have more of it.

Maud Watts serves as a lead character likely to make it easier to experience the events with someone and not have to keep track of so many people. But it felt like there was more that they weren’t telling us with how things went down back then, and it’s not like the movie has too long of a run time to fit everything in.

It’s only an hour and forty­five minutes, and it was an entire movement filled with activists who gave up everything to fight for what they believed in. There wouldn’t be a lack of characters with what happened and who was involved. Maybe those extra minutes of content could have gotten them Oscar recognition, as everything else seems to work great for this.

Suffragette dramatizes a major event in the history of women’s rights and for the most part does it justice with great directing, a solid cast, and a production design well­spent.

However, I wanted more from the plot not just because of the film’s accomplishments, but because I know there’s more to this than what I saw and to better emphasize the work of the women as a group and not just the perspective of one individual.

Regardless, if the goal was to remind viewers of the harsher times of women’s rights and that it remains relevant today, then I’d say it’s a job well done.