Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email Niamh on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
New AMA with a US police officer (he's back!). You can ask your questions here

Little Women (2019)

  • 28-12-2019 12:06am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 9,233 ✭✭✭ S.M.B.


    Apologies if there was a thread, I'm pretty surprised not to find one but I had a good look. Feel free to merge if there is one.

    Looking at a list of all the movies I've seen this year earlier in the week and I came to the realisation that I hadn't seen a single great movie.

    Luckily I managed to squeeze this in today and it easily tops any other 2019 movie for me.

    I've been impressed with everything Greta Gerwig has written/directed so I had pretty high expectations going in to begin with.


«13

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 9,697 ✭✭✭ Slydice


    It's not a film I immediately think I need to see but I recognise that Saoirse Ronan is talented after seeing Lady Bird, which feels like a film like this, on TV last Christmas. She was great in Hanna.

    The rest of the cast has a lot of big and recognisable names too.
    Plus, yeah Greta Gerwig writing/directing just like she did for Lady Bird.

    Trailer is here:



    8.2/10 on imdb:
    https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3281548/

    95% (critics) / 92% (audience) on RT:
    https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/little_women_2019

    Also saw Grace give it fifth in her top ten list as well..




    So.. still doesn't feel like a film I'd jump to see but I wouldn't be averse to giving it a watch if it came up.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 27,235 CMod ✭✭✭✭ johnny_ultimate


    Greta Gerwig just makes it look so goddamn easy. Both this and Lady Bird flow like a dream, so bursting with life and emotion but never showy or insistent about it. She’s probably become one of the very best directors of actors around at the moment - Ronan, Pugh, Dern, Cooper etc... are all so wonderful in it. I mean they’re always wonderful, but the way the cast play off each here is so dynamic and committed.

    Love how the shift in colours is used to clearly differentiate between the two different timelines in the film - given that the scenes often almost overlap, it’s a clear detail that grounds us while underscoring the different emotional registers of the two different sections.

    Actually don’t have much more to say about it. Just an all-round lovely, smart and moving piece of filmmaking that comes across as so effortless you almost forget the sheer volume of care that’s gone into it. Only two films in and Gerwig is comfortably establishing herself as a master. Bring on film three.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,164 ✭✭✭ santana75


    I went to see this on Stephen's day and It was a baffling experience: To me it was a film about absolutely nothing, yet the cinema was full of women crying???? I sat there for over 2 hours waiting for the plot to kick in.......it never did.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,233 ✭✭✭ S.M.B.


    Only two films in and Gerwig is comfortably establishing herself as a master. Bring on film three.
    The Barbie Movie apparently. Baumbach helping with the screenplay. It's now become my most anticipated movie on the horizon.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,253 ✭✭✭✭ branie2


    I saw it yesterday, and I really enjoyed it


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,253 ✭✭✭✭ branie2


    S.M.B. wrote: »
    The Barbie Movie apparently. Baumbach helping with the screenplay. It's now become my most anticipated movie on the horizon.

    Saoirse Ronan as Barbie


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,695 ✭✭✭ Dakota Dan


    santana75 wrote: »
    I went to see this on Stephen's day and It was a baffling experience: To me it was a film about absolutely nothing, yet the cinema was full of women crying???? I sat there for over 2 hours waiting for the plot to kick in.......it never did.

    That Ronan one is way over rated, they probably want to pretend it’s good because she’s in it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,303 ✭✭✭ EagererBeaver


    Saw it yesterday as the wife is a massive fan of the book and both the 40s and Winona Ryder movies.

    Thought it was good. Two massive takeaways for me:

    1) I really need to stop being so surprised at how terrific an actress Saoirse Ronan is.

    2) I really need to stop being so surprised at how terrible an actress Emma Watson is.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 27,235 CMod ✭✭✭✭ johnny_ultimate


    Dakota Dan wrote: »
    That Ronan one is way over rated, they probably want to pretend it’s good because she’s in it.

    No pretending necessary: it’s fantastic as far as I’m concerned, and Saoirse Ronan is absolutely fantastic in it. Indeed, Gerwig / Ronan might be among the most exciting director / actor collaborations going at the moment - both completely tuned into each others’ wavelengths in a way that’s a pleasure to watch.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,056 ✭✭✭ Tipsy McSwagger


    Dakota Dan wrote: »
    That Ronan one is way over rated, they probably want to pretend it’s good because she’s in it.

    Typical Irish begrudgery


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 9,233 ✭✭✭ S.M.B.


    branie2 wrote: »
    Saoirse Ronan as Barbie
    Margot Robbie apparently.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,233 ✭✭✭ S.M.B.


    I thought Ronan was fantastic. Very impressed with Pugh too who I'm unfamiliar with. Can also understand the surprise in Gerwig not getting a golden globe nomination now.

    I have not seen the 94 movie since I was an indifferent teenager so I am tempted to give it a rewatch out of curiosity.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 27,235 CMod ✭✭✭✭ johnny_ultimate


    Florence Pugh is remarkable in everything I’ve seen her in. Lady Macbeth, Midsommar, and now this sees her offer up some of the strongest performances of any young actor in recent years. Wasn’t as hot on Fighting With My Family as a film compared to the others, but she is predictably great in that as well.


  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 27,803 Mod ✭✭✭✭ pixelburp


    Dakota Dan wrote: »
    That Ronan one is way over rated, they probably want to pretend it’s good because she’s in it.

    Or maybe people just liked the movie; crazy I know but it does happen.

    Little Women is a seminal work in the history of female fiction that still resonates today. I don't pretend to understand the emotional impact the work still has, but then the exact same could be said for any IP, franchise or work of art-entertainment. See Star Wars, Star Trek, Harry Potter, Twilight and so on.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,957 ✭✭✭✭ The Princess Bride


    I loved it. I think Saoirse is getting better and better with every film.
    I can't understand how anyone can dislike her.
    Also, Timothee Chamalet is brilliant, loved him in Ladybird and Call Me By My Name.
    I'd expect to see awards for both before the end of the 20s.

    Alas some idiots had their toddlers in the cinema.
    I didn't report them as it was packed and I didn't want to leave. So annoying.
    And the toddlers started a funny commotion when
    Beth was dying,
    so we wanted to laugh when we should have been sad. Ruined it but c'est la vie.

    Would recommend it.

    (Apologies to Monsieur Chamalet, boards.ie won't let me add the accent to the first e.)


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,695 ✭✭✭ Dakota Dan


    Typical Irish begrudgery

    That didn’t take long, sorry to burst your bubble I don’t begrudge her.


  • Registered Users Posts: 75,453 ✭✭✭✭ JP Liz V1


    Timothée Chalamet and Saoirse Ronan have great chemistry, again they work well together

    I think Ronan is on the way to another Oscar nomination


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,141 ✭✭✭✭ is_that_so


    I loved it. I think Saoirse is getting better and better with every film.
    I can't understand how anyone can dislike her.
    Also, Timothee Chamalet is brilliant, loved him in Ladybird and Call Me By My Name.
    I'd expect to see awards for both before the end of the 20s.

    Alas some idiots had their toddlers in the cinema.
    I didn't report them as it was packed and I didn't want to leave. So annoying.
    And the toddlers started a funny commotion when
    Beth was dying,
    so we wanted to laugh when we should have been sad. Ruined it but c'est la vie.

    Would recommend it.

    (Apologies to Monsieur Chamalet, boards.ie won't let me add the accent to the first e.)
    It's not so much that people dislike her as it is that some Irish people gush every time she shows up in a film. Critics are the worst. Would she even be noticed as an actress if she weren't Irish? I must admit I see pretty much the same type of performance in every film :- solid, pretty good at times but never at the heights of the real greats. That said, she's young and learning her craft but she's not there yet.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,233 ✭✭✭ S.M.B.


    is_that_so wrote: »
    It's not so much that people dislike her as it is that some Irish people gush every time she shows up in a film. Critics are the worst. Would she even be noticed as an actress if she weren't Irish? I must admit I see pretty much the same type of performance in every film :- solid, pretty good at times but never at the heights of the real greats. That said, she's young and learning her craft but she's not there yet.
    I am not based in Ireland so I may be outside the bubble but I thought most of her acclaim comes from outside of the country.

    An Oscar nomination for Little Women (which is highly possible given her golden globe nom) would mean herself and Jennifer Lawrence would be the only actors to have 4 nominations at the age of 25. Say what you want of the Oscars but they're certainly not an establishment who's sole goal is awarding people for being Irish.


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,141 ✭✭✭✭ is_that_so


    S.M.B. wrote: »
    I am not based in Ireland so I may be outside the bubble but I thought most of her acclaim comes from outside of the country.

    An Oscar nomination for Little Women (which is highly possible given her golden globe nom) would mean herself and Jennifer Lawrence would be the only actors to have 4 nominations at the age of 25. Say what you want of the Oscars but they're certainly not an establishment who's sole goal is awarding people for being Irish.
    Meryl Streep has 32 of them, 21 Oscar nominations and 3 actual wins so she's a way to go. I'd also suggest that Saoirse picks stuff that is more likely to be nominated (not really a fan of period award fodder material personally) and that's fine as it's in her range and she is good at it. To me she is a good actress, not a latter day Streep. Could not see her doing a Silkwood, Fargo, Blue Jasmine or Tootsie, never mind La La Land.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,347 ✭✭✭✭ MJohnston


    Saoirse is just mind-boggingly confident an actor at such an early age. She absolutely dominates the screen, even when she’s sharing it with legends like Tracey Letts or Meryl Streep. I thought she was a touch more interesting in Ladybird than this, but still absolutely excellent here, and I think its more to do with how Jo is more of a conventional character than Lady Bird - still shares a lot of her live-wire anxieties though.

    This was a beautiful movie, so refined and well put together for a second feature. The Dundrum screen was terribly badly lit, but it was Kaminski-esque natural lighting and a pop of colour in the ‘memory’ scenes.

    Speaking of which, the choice to tell the story with a split chronology was a very good idea, there’s a lot of lovely contrasts highlighted by this, and it really makes the story feel more modern. I have never read the book or seen other adaptations but I suspect they could feel a lot more rote if they stick with a linear story. From what I’ve read the school ending is how the book ends, and the publisher ending is newly created, which is another excellent addition. It really recontextualises what you’ve watched, almost in a very meta way, and smooths put any issues you might have had with the swing from naturalistic behaviour to more romanticised feel good stuff (I was thinking it was going to be a weak ending, too perfect, so I really loved that “twist”).

    Florence Pugh is a real revelation here, best of the ensemble outside of Ronan. Emma Watson was the least impressive, but her over-rehearsed feeling kind of jived with the character, who was clearly the type to desire her life to follow the script she’d dreamed of all her life. My MVP though, and would be my pick for Best Supporting Actor, is Chris Cooper. His moment when Beth plays the piano had me crying with nary a word spoken. I wish they had not underlined this moment later on in the film, but it was still a heartbreaking piece of acting.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,233 ✭✭✭ S.M.B.


    There is a lot about the movie that feels less period drama and more modern meta drama which is why I'm so fond of it. I think the ending is pretty perfect and resonates even more when you hear about how the books ending came to be all these years ago.

    I also think it's a great example of how a Hollywood's remake can be a very worthwhile exercise when an auteur gets their hands on it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,239 ✭✭✭✭ Arghus


    Saw it earlier today. In many ways I liked it a lot. But...

    The performances are really good. Whenever I see her interviewed in real life Saoirse Ronan gets on my wick, but there's no denying that she's a serious actress.

    Florence Pugh is great, in fact everyone is great in it, but I felt every character except Jo, even Amy to an extent, gets given short shrift by the script. She is the only character fully fleshed out into three dimensions.

    I don't want to be too hard on the film. It was funny, engaging, delightful in parts and the one absolutely devastating segment is appropriately devastating and brilliantly done. But I felt the film lacked something to bring it to that next level of brilliance, which was a bit dissapointing, considering that so much of what is there is very good.

    It just lacked an edge or some sort of weight. Despite all the travails and even matters of life and death, I think the movie flirts with knotty subjects - what's a happy life, how to deal with tragedy and how women make a place for themselves - without really saying a whole pile about anything. It is fundamentally a fantasy. A well made, well cast and entertaining fantasy. Which is okay, of course, but I felt like there was more there to be chewed on and still be entertaining in all the ways it already is.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,697 ✭✭✭ Slydice


    I've never seen a version of Little Women .. but it would seem this is THE version to watch if I'm ever gonna watch one. One of the most praised films I've seen all year.

    IMDB: 8.3/10 from 11,330
    https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3281548/

    RT 95% Critics from 291 reviews
    92% Audience Score from Verified Ratings: 7,654
    https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/little_women_2019

    CinemaScore of A- (a good cinemascore)
    https://www.cinemascore.com/

    Kermode giving it a good review


    Think all the other youtubers I check giving it similar or higher praise.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,493 ✭✭✭ Goodshape


    is_that_so wrote: »
    Meryl Streep has 32 of them, 21 Oscar nominations and 3 actual wins so she's a way to go.

    Meryl's a couple of years past 25 though, last I checked.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,493 ✭✭✭ Goodshape


    I'm not too familiar with Little Women at all.

    Would it be suitable viwing for a nine and ten year old? Or would they be sitting there bored as it all flies over their heads?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭ Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Greta Gerwig just makes it look so goddamn easy. Both this and Lady Bird flow like a dream, so bursting with life and emotion but never showy or insistent about it. She’s probably become one of the very best directors of actors around at the moment - Ronan, Pugh, Dern, Cooper etc... are all so wonderful in it. I mean they’re always wonderful, but the way the cast play off each here is so dynamic and committed.

    Love how the shift in colours is used to clearly differentiate between the two different timelines in the film - given that the scenes often almost overlap, it’s a clear detail that grounds us while underscoring the different emotional registers of the two different sections.

    Actually don’t have much more to say about it. Just an all-round lovely, smart and moving piece of filmmaking that comes across as so effortless you almost forget the sheer volume of care that’s gone into it. Only two films in and Gerwig is comfortably establishing herself as a master. Bring on film three.

    Jaysus, relax. Ladybird had some nicely observed moments but was very overpraised.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,347 ✭✭✭✭ MJohnston


    The praise was deserved imo - I only saw it about a week ago, after years of hype and praise, and still thought it was better than I expected it to be. I agree with johnny_ultimate, Gerwig has a very exciting future ahead.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭ Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    MJohnston wrote: »
    The praise was deserved imo - I only saw it about a week ago, after years of hype and praise, and still thought it was better than I expected it to be. I agree with johnny_ultimate, Gerwig has a very exciting future ahead.

    I didn’t watch it at the time either, I watched it about two years later and then again recently to give it another chance and was just as disappointed the second time as the first. Like I said, a few nicely observed moments that resonated but that was it. I was hoping for better dialogue which I think a low-key film like that really needs.

    The standout scene was
    Ladybird comforting Danny out the back of the cafe.
    It was beautiful and heartfelt and unexpected. But sadly it wasn’t enough to save the film for me.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 9,233 ✭✭✭ S.M.B.


    Goodshape wrote: »
    I'm not too familiar with Little Women at all.

    Would it be suitable viwing for a nine and ten year old? Or would they be sitting there bored as it all flies over their heads?
    My viewing was full of families spanning 3 generations, it was quite a pleasant site. I saw it with my mother and wife over the Xmas.


Advertisement