Little Women - new film

I enjoyed it too and as someone who is obsessed with textiles (35 years on from getting a degree in textile technology) it really hit the spot. The craftmanship is a joy to behold. And the bookbinding! My 18 year old daughter is probably target audience for this (each generation deserves its reinvention of the story, which is probably why this is the eighth film version) and she loved it. But then anything which involves Greta Gerwig and Timothee Chalamet gets her vote!

I am just back from seeing LITTLE WOMEN this morning. I have to admit that I have never read the novel on which this is based (although that may change now), and therefore I did not know the intricacies of the plot going in, so these are just my thoughts having seen it “cold”. It is GLORIOUS! A film with such beauty and heart. I enjoyed LADY BIRD, but Greta Gerwig’s work on LITTLE WOMEN has gone up another level.

The writing and direction is magnificent. The structure is non-linear, juxtaposing between the characters as adults and then as children, but it is never confusing, and actually added another layer of emotion to the film for me, as Gerwig has clearly chosen scenes carefully from both the adult lives of the characters and their lives as children to compliment one another. She encapsulates the relationship between Jo and Amy for example, first in a few lines from Jo as an adult, and then a scene from childhood where Jo and Amy have an argument over not being allowed to go to the theatre, and Amy burns Jo’s manuscript. We then see the fallout and subsequent making up from this. There is also a heartbreaking sequence that does the same thing with one of the other sisters, and the scenes are essentially mirror images of each other, but the outcome is different as an adult (I do not want to spoil it for people who haven’t seen the film). I was in bits for most of the film it has to be said, particularly the second half, where I don’t think there was a moment where my eyes weren’t moist with tears. That isn’t to say it isn’t also funny, as it is. There were many moments where I laughed out loud. Just when it got on the verge of being sentimental or schmaltzy, Gerwig would use some line or quip that would stop that from happening and make the audience laugh. It does indeed turn very meta at the end also. I couldn’t work out if that was truly how her story ended, or whether it was the story that Jo made up for her book.

The direction, as another reviewer said above, is extremely pacy and the 2 hours 15 minutes flies by. Particularly when all four girls are together, the dialogue is delivered with attack, with them practically talking over one another, which I loved. However, Gerwig also allows for moments of stillness and silence, and on such moments utilises close-up brilliantly, which allows for the emotional moments to land perfectly.

It helps that Gerwig has assembled such a strong group of actors in this film, and it is so well acted. There isn’t a film I have seen her in where I haven’t loved Saoirse Ronan. She is the anchor for the film. Jo March is the character who’s eyes we see most of the film from, and she is stunning. Coming in a very close second, and nearly stealing it for me is Florence Pugh. We really see the progression of her character from child to adult, from girl to woman. She has that amazing child-like quality in the early scenes, and whilst she develops and matures, you can still see that childlike and playful streak in her as an adult. It really was a joy to watch her. It is very clear from watching this, that all the four actresses playing the girls had an amazing chemistry whilst filming. It practically oozes from the screen. Timothee Chalamet, Laura Dern and the other actors also give sterling support.

The film looks gorgeous, and whilst it is clearly a period piece, it feels so unbelievably modern, not just on the themes it is tackling (the independence of women etc), but also in how the characters behave. The dance sequence with Laurie and Jo dancing on the porch early in the film could have been two teenagers now.

I would thoroughly recommend this film to anyone. I know where I barely into 2020, but this may well be my best film of the year. It will take some beating that is for sure. It may even become one of my favourite ever films. A story about the importance of family, helping others (as their mother teaches them) and the need in life for love. What else do we need right now? GO!

I saw it a week ago and liked it far more than I'd feared, based on the trailer, but I felt there was still a lot wrong with it. My chief objection was that the main female characters seemed far too forward, liberated and lacking in modesty for the time, even though one of the themes was their frustration with the limited options for women then and their wish to excape this straitjacket. The words placed in their mouths seemed too knowing and portentous. The actresses playing Jo and Amy also appeared to me to be far too old compared to their characters and as for weedy Timothee Chalamet, he looked like a teenager and no serious contender for Jo's hand. Likewise Professor Baer, who is meant to be older, German and, I believe, a little overweight and not particularly photogenic, was portrayed by an actor too young, slim and insubstantial and with an accent which sounded more French than German to me.

Despite the above I really did enjoy this version but if you're going to throw so much money at it, why not spend some of that on greater historical accuracy and respect for the text?

I think there would have been value in a new version which was truer to the book since, as we've seen from the first post above, amongst the audience for this film are those who haven't read the book. Clearly that's not the film Greta Gerwig wanted to make but there's a difference between drawing out from the novel an aspect which previous adaptations have overlooked or downplayed, and writing the book you think Louisa May Alcott should or could have written. Also, whilst the author may have been obliged by her publisher to show Jo marrying someone, in the book it seems a plausible match as Jo is seen coming to realise that Professor Baer offers wisdom, maturity, steadfastness and a kind heart - qualities which form a far better basis for an enduring and equal relationship than those of a younger, more worldly suitor.

What I liked about the Jo - Bhaer (sorry about my earlier mis-spelling) relationship in the novel was how the author cleverly used it both to adhere to her publisher's exhortation to marry Jo off, but also to subvert the traditional romantic convention: Jo marries, but not the conventional young, good-looking romantic hero; instead she sees beneath the surface and that she and Bhaer are a far better, more equal match.

I don't think that Gerwig assumes that people know the story. In the flashbacks, Amy has a fringe, Jo wears her hair long and down (or at least in the vast majority of them) and the cinematographer has used warm red and orange filters in contrast to the blue ones for present day. There's two timelines but those two timelines are told chronologically alongside each other. We're also told in the first scene with Laurie and Amy that Jo has turned down his proposal. So a bit of concentration is needed, but it's not exactly a Christopher Nolan film.

Florence Pugh should be up for a best actress award for Midsommar too.

Saw this the other week and glad it didn’t get a best director nod - took me 45 mins to realise it was jumping round the timeline! Sent the rest of the film desperately concentrating to make sure I knew what was going on when. Actresses that got nommed where good thou