|
Post by cheesecake on Jan 17, 2020 22:57:45 GMT
(Also, he's godawful in Beautiful Boy.) I yell "YOU DON'T LIKE WHO I AM NOWWWWW" on a weekly basis.
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Jan 18, 2020 9:13:58 GMT
Chalamet was the only thing about Beautiful Boy that wasn't shit. I'm reporting all the bad takes
|
|
|
Post by Allenism on Jan 18, 2020 16:33:18 GMT
Gillian Armstrong's adaption is the still the definitive one for me, but this is a lovely, ambitiously structured take on the novel. That being said, it did little in the way of boosting my opinion of Ronan as a leading lady ( she services the role and that's pretty much it--I wouldn't say Pugh and Chalamet were "better" per se but they certainly brought more verve to their respective characters), and as much I appreciate how Gerwig's script merry-go-rounds through each sister, the cost of this is that key parts of Jo's story feel rather malnourished. More specifically, the climactic scene between her and Laurie doesn't land nearly as heavily as it should since the stakes of their relationship are never really brought home for the viewer. All this probably makes it sound like I took to the film less than I did, it really is an accomplished piece on the whole (especially the last 15 minutes where the story’s meta aspect unfolds exquisitely) and affirms Gerwig as a director to reckon with regardless of gender. 8-8.5/10 Agreed - of her four nominated performances, I'd rank this one dead-last. I've only seen Scarlett so far (who is indeed better) so I can't speak to how she'd rank overall. Not to say that she's bad here or anything, but she basically plays the same character as she did in Lady Bird just under more ornate costuming. She leans on the same stompy, surface-level angst in most of her recent performances.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 2:07:48 GMT
Agreed - of her four nominated performances, I'd rank this one dead-last. I've only seen Scarlett so far (who is indeed better) so I can't speak to how she'd rank overall. Not to say that she's bad here or anything, but she basically plays the same character as she did in Lady Bird just under more ornate costuming. She leans on the same stompy, surface-level angst in most of her recent performances. I was actually speaking about Ronan's nominated performances - not this year's nominees. For Ronan's nominated work, I'd likely rank them: 1. Brooklyn 2. Lady Bird 3. Atonement 4. Little Women As for this year's nominees, having not seen Erivo, it'd probably be: 1. Johansson (head and shoulders above the rest) 2. Theron 3. Zellweger 4. Ronan
|
|
|
Post by Pittsnogle_Goggins on Jan 19, 2020 2:11:03 GMT
Chalamet was the only thing about Beautiful Boy that wasn't shit. I'm reporting all the bad takes Carell >>>
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Jan 19, 2020 3:22:36 GMT
What did you think of Chalamet 's performance? I think he was miscast. He seemed bored and detached the whole time and had no chemistry with anyone whatsoever. And he always looks like a teenager so I never buy him when he's trying to act more mature. Such a bland performance. I thought he did good here, just not "Next DDL" good. I liked the chemistry with Ronan and Pugh
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Jan 31, 2020 17:15:08 GMT
Adored every moment of this. Each second spent in the world of this film was filled with joy for me and I didn't want it to end. I loved Lady Bird but this is a major step further for Gerwig who not only brings one of the most beloved fictional families to life in a way that is just bursting with feeling, energy and love, but also manages to find a fantastic way to tell the story through a different lens. Lady Bird got a lot of praise for seeming like a movie about memory and Gerwig takes this notion even further in Little Women, splitting the time periods and presenting them in parallel to emphasize the relationship a person has to their memories, how memories shape a person's character and what place they hold in a person's heart. On top of that it's all combined with the role of art in our lives, and the intertwining of all these themes is what makes the film so staggering.
Visually the piece is stunning with the scenes set in the past presented with a golden-like glow which evokes the feeling of warmth and liberty of the childhood years in a magical way, and the pacing of it is popping just like fireworks. The whole cast is incredible with Saoirse Ronan giving perhaps her best performance to date and completely blowing me away. Florence Pugh is supremely delightful in both of her iterations of Amy - absolutely hilarious in her younger years and very moving and powerful as her older self. And if Laura Dern should be winning stuff for a movie this year, it has to be for this one.
|
|
|
Post by jimmalone on Feb 2, 2020 11:34:25 GMT
I had seen the adaptions of 1949 and 1994 (really have to rewatch that one) and liked them both. It's clear to see why Greta Gerwig felt the urge to find a new way to tell this well-known story and while I was just happy, that she wouldn't set it in a modern era, I was still curious if the trick, telling it parallely in two different time-lines would work with that story, that unfolds it's own drama and develops it's touching story so great in a classic way. But while I think it wasn't necessary, it totally worked. This is the best "Little Women" film I've seen so far - and one of the best movies of the year.
For once this was while it just looked gorgeous. It really surprises me that this got not nomination for Production Design, because that part of the film was terrific and cinematographer Yorick Le Saux put it all together in wonderful scenes underlining the main themes of the story and the emotions in the given scenes perfectly. Whether it was the four sisters together with her mother in the limited home, the intimacy of Jo and Beth on the wide beach or the turbulence of dances, streets - or Amy. And of course Alexandre Desplat underlines and strengthens those emotional moments as well with once again a wonderful score, which flys as light-footed as (for the most part) the girls, who are the center of our story, which is very well written as well, a few poor jokes towards the end aside.
This is a story about four individual girls and their love to each other despite being completely different characters, a difference that the film makes clear early randomly, and despite living in difficult conditions. And this spirit is captured within the movie so well. I knew the story pretty good and nonetheless I was close to tears in several scenes. Well, that's maybe not too surprising, but still a statement of how well this movie is made and works.
Another plus-point is Saoirse Ronan, who is easily the best Jo I've seen yet, who takes us deep into her character. The rest of the cast isn't as excellent as you maybe would expect from their names, but good to very good nonetheless. I'm a bit torn on Florence Pugh, who was very good in some scenes and less good in others, not always hitting the right note of Amy's exuberance and some time just overacted a bit. I thought her chemistry with Timothee Chalamet, who as well had better and worse moments, was rather weak. Want to give a shout to Chris Cooper and Eliza Scanlen, who did her best in a rather limited screen time and had the most touching moments and all in all I liked them probably the most behind Ronan.
|
|
Javi
Badass
Posts: 1,532
Likes: 1,620
|
Post by Javi on Feb 11, 2020 22:24:03 GMT
Expected more from this tbh, but I did love the scene of Saoirse Ronan rejecting that bit of literary criticism thrown at her and responding with defiance, insecurity, vulnerability... she's believable as an independent creative spirit (and a bit of a mess). One of the few scenes with an edge. Also liked Dern and Chalamet here.
|
|
Film Socialism
Based
99.9999% of rock is crap
Posts: 2,555
Likes: 1,388
|
Post by Film Socialism on Feb 12, 2020 2:31:58 GMT
this was too long but pretty sweet
|
|
|
Post by Viced on Apr 25, 2020 18:22:49 GMT
|
|
Pasquale
Full Member
Posts: 539
Likes: 227
|
Post by Pasquale on Oct 7, 2020 2:53:46 GMT
I am embarrassed to keep putting this off, because holy hell, wow.
|
|
Pasquale
Full Member
Posts: 539
Likes: 227
|
Post by Pasquale on Oct 7, 2020 3:24:42 GMT
This is funny, because we could never be as cool as him.
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,824
Likes: 2,353
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Oct 7, 2020 19:58:45 GMT
Not really interested in such a YT adaption. Will wait to see what the critics who are POC have to say about this. I'm obviously out of the whole Twitter/Facebook/social media loop, but what the fuck is YT????
|
|
|
Post by Martin Stett on Mar 29, 2021 1:37:35 GMT
So, I liked it. I have *issues* but I like it.
First off, I saw the version with Katharine Hepburn once and that was some godawful miscasting let me tell ya. Haven't read the book, can't remember much of that movie. So I'm coming into it pretty fresh.
What I like: All of the little women getting strong roles and arcs Some of the cuts between the past and present are really heartwrenching and do a great job of showing Jo's feelings of being a child when everyone else is growing up around her Chris Cooper, Laura Dern, Bob Odenkirk Lovely production design (not so big on the costumes or makeup) It's a nice movie about nice people and I'm a sucker for those
What I don't like: Florence Pugh auditioning for the lead in Billy Madison WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too on-the-nose in its whole feminist shebang of marriage being an economic proposition, repeated bluntly at least THREE TIMES in this movie and it never fails to make me roll my eyes at Gerwig spelling out the subtext in BIG BRIGHT NEON LETTERSjust in case you can't follow the natural flow of the movie. I assume that the book was more subtle and demonstrated its points instead of blurting them out, but if I'm wrong please correct me. Saoirse Ronan is just doing Lady Bird again, and it is so shallow Alexandre Desplat has never written such a boring score before The never-ending epilogue
On the whole, I quite like the movie. It's good. Considering how utterly abysmal 2019 was, this is probably top 10 of the year material. But it's not great. I want it to be, because this kind of movie is my bag. It's solid, it made me tear up a few times, and it made me laugh at Florence Pugh playing a twelve year old many, many times. So yeah. Good movie.
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Mar 29, 2021 2:06:28 GMT
have you seen the 90s version Martin Stett ? I *think* you'd like it
|
|
|
Post by Martin Stett on Mar 29, 2021 2:31:22 GMT
have you seen the 90s version Martin Stett ? I *think* you'd like it Nope. Only Armstrong I've seen is My Brilliant Career which I can't remember at all, but I do know that I kind of adored it.
|
|
Nikan
Based
Posts: 3,118
Likes: 1,533
|
Post by Nikan on Sept 3, 2023 14:23:42 GMT
Long and not always working, but better than Lady Bird.
|
|
Nikan
Based
Posts: 3,118
Likes: 1,533
|
Post by Nikan on Sept 3, 2023 17:01:43 GMT
On the whole, I quite like the movie. It's good. Considering how utterly abysmal 2019 was, this is probably top 10 of the year material. But it's not great. I want it to be, because this kind of movie is my bag. It's solid, it made me tear up a few times, and it made me laugh at Florence Pugh playing a twelve year old many, many times. So yeah. Good movie. The scene in which she's freaked out because her hand is bleeding and she doesn't know what to with it was the "oh boy" moment for me.
|
|