Little Women (2019)

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.

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.

I saw it yesterday, and I really enjoyed it

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.

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 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.)

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

I think Ronan is on the way to another Oscar nomination

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.

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.

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.