Les Filles du docteur March

Starting at the end is rarely a good idea because it destroys all the emotional payoffs. We open with Jo selling her stories (so now all the earlier stuff where she's struggling to be a writer is diffused of that struggle). We open with Amy already in Paris and painting (so now we understand that Amy does escape to a more glamorous life as desired), and even worse, we open with her running into Laurie and us finding out that Jo turned down his engagement (so ALL romance in their earlier years is now "who cares?" because we know where it leads). Oscar nominated?? Filmmakers wanted to be different? Put their mark on the story by telling it out of order? Makes no narrative sense. So if you already know the story and you won't to see pretty costuming, watch it. If you don't know the story, watch the 1994 version instead.

Writer/director Greta Gerwig tries her hand at Alcott's timeless, semi-autobiographical coming-of-age story by spotlighting two different time periods in the lives of the indefatigable March sisters, with first-rate casting featuring Ronan as the free-spirited, aspiring storyteller Jo, Watson as the fashionable, domestic Meg, Pugh as the economical, attention-seeking Amy, Scanlen as the quiet, musical Beth, and their journey from childhood to young adulthood as they pursue their individual hopes and dreams during the 1860s. Even though it isn't a direct page to screen adaptation, and the overlapping of timelines can be taxing at times, Gerwig is able to stage many powerful scenes that explore the all-important themes of sexism, loneliness, friendship, love, and unbreakable familial bonds thanks to four fabulous leading ladies, and quality work from Chalamet, Cooper, and Streep who are invaluable in key supporting roles. ***

"Little Women " (2019 release; 135 min.) brings the story of the 4 March sisters (Amy, Jo, Meg and Beth) in the 1860s. As the movie opens, Jo is offering a short story to a New York publisher, who to her delight offers to buy it, albeit with serious edits. Meanwhile Amy is in Paris with her aunt, where she runs into her friend Laurie. Back to Jo, who gets a letter that her younger sister Beth is very ill, so Jo returns home. We then go to "Seven Years Earlier, Concord, Massachusetts"... At this point we are 10 minutes into the movie but to tell you more of the plot would spoil your viewing experience, you'll just have to see for yourself how it all plays out. Couple of comments: this is the latest adaptation of the famed 1868 novel by Louise May Alcott. However, it is the first directed by a woman, namely Greta Gerwig. Following her strong 2017 directing debut "Lady Bird", Gerwig returns as director (and script writer). Gerwig confirms that she is a director to reckon with, as the movie is as pleasant as it is timely and contemporary (among others, examining the role of women and marriage). Saoirse Ronan, also the lead in "Lady Bird", is the central figure as (as Jo), and the main glue that holds together the large ensemble cast. The other sisters are played by Emma Watson, Florence Pugh, and Eliza Scanlan. Laura Dern is delightful as the gruels' mom. Timothée Chamelet, typically so solid, looks lost most of the time as his character tries to decide which of the sisters he really likes best. Meryl Streep gets about 10 min. of screen time as the crabby Aunt March. Last but not least, there is a wonderful orchestral score courtesy of Oscar-winnning composer Alexandre Desplat, and I wouldn't be surprised one bit if he gets another Oscar nomination for this. "Little Women" opened wide on Christmas Day and has done very well, both critically (it's currently rated 95% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes) and at the box office against formidable competition (the latest Star Wars). I saw it this past weekend and the Saturday early evening screening was PACKED (just short of a sellout). If you are in the mood for another take on "Little Women", or simply are a fan of Greta Gerwig or Saoirse Ronan, I readily suggest you check this out, be in the theater, on VOD, or eventually on DVD/Blu-ray, and draw your own conclusion.

Greta Gerwig, in my estimation, is one of the most brilliant female scriptwriters/film directors currently making movies. Her version on Alcott's classic novel is spellbinding. She adroitly juxtapositions a several years span between the year composing and publication of her 1868 book and the Civil War years at home when the novel's events took place. I am also appreciative of Yorick Le Saux's plush cinematography. What a duo Gerwig and the French photographer made to produce one of the most gorgeous period pieces in many of a moon. Two minor complaints: The casting of Timothee Chalet, the love interest of two of the sisters. He's portrayed as a young wastrel whose apathy somehow attracts the two into wanting to marry. Another is that Alcott had writing success writing under the nom de plume A.M. Bernard before composing Little Women, a detail totally ignored. Otherwise, an outstanding film that surprised even this guy who went on his wife's insistence.