Ok, there is an anomaly there. I'll grant you that in the same way as I believe in UFO's I see something in the air, it is flying. If I see it, it is an object (even if that object is simply an optical anomaly). If I don't know what it is...it is unidentified. Hence UFO. I however do not believe that the UFO's are alien spacecraft.
But back to this anomaly.
1. We're not hiding our face from the camera as some people are prone to do. They usually use their whole hand held flat and not with knuckles bent.
2. It does appear that she is holding an object. Dark Colored, roughly the size and shape of a mobile phone. However that is not conclusive as there are many things shaped like a mobile phone.
3. She is talking to someone (even if that someone is herself)
4. There are devices that are available in the time that would resemble a mobile-phone shaped device. The battery of a hearing aid of the time comes to mind.
5. The wires on said device are too short to really fit into a pocket. And women's clothing of the time rarely had pockets. That was what the purse was for (and I did not see evidence of a purse on that side of her body. So she would have to hold it in her hand.
6. The hearing aid devices of the time were not as well designed as the ones of today. They tended to pick up too much information. They would often amplify the voice of the wearer to an uncomfortable level. She may have been holding her hand over the device to block out some of the surrounding sounds and/or her own voice. Perhaps she was taking to the man who walked in front of her and didn't want to blow out her own eardrums with her own voice. Or as someone said, the elderly often talk to themselves. This would require again the adjustment of the hearing aid to keep the levels to a comfortable level.
From the Randi.org encyclopedia
(The rule was originally stated by Occam as, “Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.”)
In effect, this rule states that if there exists more than one answer to a problem or a question, and if, for one answer to be true, well-established laws of logic and science must be re-written, ignored, or suspended
in order to allow it to be true, and for the other answer to be true no such accommodation need be made, then the simpler——the second——of the answers is much more likely to be correct.
So which is more likely? That someone figured out how to travel back in time and once doing that, figured our how to travel through space roughly 886,973,634,480 miles (based on the Galaxy's speed of approx 552 Km/s and the travel of 82 years and not counting leap year days or current time vs time that the shot was filmed)? And mind you, that's not counting in the orbital speed of the Sun in the Galaxy (220 Km/s) over that time.
That someone of advanced age (and possibly diminished hearing) is wearing and holding onto a hearing assist device of the era?
I know which one I'm putting my money on.