Vier Schwestern werden nach dem Bürgerkrieg in Amerika erwachsen.Vier Schwestern werden nach dem Bürgerkrieg in Amerika erwachsen.Vier Schwestern werden nach dem Bürgerkrieg in Amerika erwachsen.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
- 1 Oscar gewonnen
- 74 Gewinne & 231 Nominierungen insgesamt
Emily Edström
- Friedrich's Friend
- (as Emily Edstrom)
Empfohlene Bewertungen
I admit, I wasn't too impressed by Greta Gerwig's Ladybird. I found Little Women a whole other level of a movie. It's not just that the source material provided a much more colorful story. It's not just that the March sisters seem to be richer characters than Ladybird's decidedly bland heroine. To me with this film Gerwig emerged as a master storyteller and a true auteur. I loved how instead of following chronological order, she presented the story as more of a memory stream. Even though constant time jumps were confusing at first, especially since the characters didn't change much, I thought it made the movie more engaging and somehow more relatable. It created some incredibly poignant moments, like the two times Jo (Saoirse Ronan) wakes up and doesn't find Beth (Eliza Scanlen) in her bed. And I got that strange and wonderful feeling like I was in the midst of it rather than outside looking in. Even bits like when Mr. Dashwood (Tracy Letts) tells what he wrote to Jo directly to the camera rather than as a voice over, that in a different movie would seem like a gimmick, here felt perfectly organic and gave the film a little extra kick. The entire sequence that moves between Jo negotiating her fate with him and living it is pure brilliance. The cast is great in a way that goes beyond just being able to portray complex emotions. What struck me the most was that by the end I found myself in love with every single character. Not because they are saintly, but because they are human. Alive. Warm. Even Meryl Streep's Aunt March is lovable because it's clear that behind everything she says, she cares deeply about the girls.
There was only one thing that bugged me a little - too little difference in the sisters' appearance between the two time periods. It ultimately worked anyway, except for Amy. Florence Pugh is a fantastic actress and she did a great job making Amy act like a 13 year old. But she just didn't look like a 13 year old, especially next to her older sisters. I kept wondering why she was always left behind, why she needed Jo to take her ice skating, and how it was that she couldn't understand why Jo stayed mad at her after what she'd done. It also made Laurie's (Timothee Chalamet) sudden change of heart about her hard to buy.
There was only one thing that bugged me a little - too little difference in the sisters' appearance between the two time periods. It ultimately worked anyway, except for Amy. Florence Pugh is a fantastic actress and she did a great job making Amy act like a 13 year old. But she just didn't look like a 13 year old, especially next to her older sisters. I kept wondering why she was always left behind, why she needed Jo to take her ice skating, and how it was that she couldn't understand why Jo stayed mad at her after what she'd done. It also made Laurie's (Timothee Chalamet) sudden change of heart about her hard to buy.
Finally saw LITTLE WOMEN 2019. Didn't expected much cause I really liked 94 version by Gillian Armstrong with Winona Ryder , Gabriel Byrne , Trini Alvarado , Christian Bale and Susan Sarandon.
Well, the casting was something that I cannot judge which one is better. Both are so so great. But Christian Bale 94, I liked better than Timothée Chalamet 2019 (Although he was good but didn't overcome THE Christian).
Two things really grabbed me.
1. The camera and light. The camera is keep moving even for the steady shots. They released the tripod and moved a little to adjust each actors even a small movement they make. They also use sunlight so beautifully like Pride and Prejudice. Aldo a couple of slow motions and mintage sequences are beautiful too.
2. The music. It is not like here I am listen like Hans Zimmer or Max Richter or even Cliff Martinez who would say even if the movie suck I am still here. Think that at least you've watched a great Music Video cause of my music. In this movie the music is there clearly and when it comes to really important moments, It really boost up the heart of audience. But it's more like supporting way. I felt it from the very beginning. Ok wow this guy knows OST!! Alexandre is more of a classic composer who made OST like The Danish Girl, The Tree of life, Julie & Julia and Philomena.
I cannot say this movie will win (was nominated for 6 Academy) a lot of awards from all around the world but it has beautiful beautiful acting ensenble and light, camera and music wise. Work of art.
Also the acting sometimes made my heart beat. Even the makeup is so great. Of course the director is also an actress so she knows how to deal with these stuff, right?
Last. The time. It goes back and forth from the past to present a couple of times but it was not confusing or breaking any concentration cause it was so nicely connected by editing and bridge music. (The cast y-oung and old -was the same too which didn't matter as well.) Something that was different with the 94 version.
It is an inspiring movie after all and I won't rest tonight to finish my humble feature writing for my next project.
Two things really grabbed me.
1. The camera and light. The camera is keep moving even for the steady shots. They released the tripod and moved a little to adjust each actors even a small movement they make. They also use sunlight so beautifully like Pride and Prejudice. Aldo a couple of slow motions and mintage sequences are beautiful too.
2. The music. It is not like here I am listen like Hans Zimmer or Max Richter or even Cliff Martinez who would say even if the movie suck I am still here. Think that at least you've watched a great Music Video cause of my music. In this movie the music is there clearly and when it comes to really important moments, It really boost up the heart of audience. But it's more like supporting way. I felt it from the very beginning. Ok wow this guy knows OST!! Alexandre is more of a classic composer who made OST like The Danish Girl, The Tree of life, Julie & Julia and Philomena.
I cannot say this movie will win (was nominated for 6 Academy) a lot of awards from all around the world but it has beautiful beautiful acting ensenble and light, camera and music wise. Work of art.
Also the acting sometimes made my heart beat. Even the makeup is so great. Of course the director is also an actress so she knows how to deal with these stuff, right?
Last. The time. It goes back and forth from the past to present a couple of times but it was not confusing or breaking any concentration cause it was so nicely connected by editing and bridge music. (The cast y-oung and old -was the same too which didn't matter as well.) Something that was different with the 94 version.
It is an inspiring movie after all and I won't rest tonight to finish my humble feature writing for my next project.
This movie is about as far away from 'my type' of movie as possible, or at least that's what I thought, but I have to say I enjoyed it a lot.
It's a story about the upbringing and growth of four girls from the bubbling happiness and hopeful optimism of children, into the hard and scary reality of adulthood. Therefore, the focus of the film is the wonderful characters played by Saoirse Ronan, Emma Watson, Florence Pugh, Eliza Scanlen, Timothee Chalamet and Laura Dern. They are all very well acted and every single character is unique and filled with personality.
Acting and characters aside, it's beautifully captured and the environments really breathes life into the film. The movie is also very touching and I couldn't help but cry, both tears of happiness and of grief.
My only complaint is that the story is rather messy and it often jumps between different time periods and places without giving good enough hints of this. I spent quite a lot of time and energy on trying to understand where and when they were, and that is something that could have been done better.
Overall, I really liked the film and I completely understand why it has received such critical praise.
It's a story about the upbringing and growth of four girls from the bubbling happiness and hopeful optimism of children, into the hard and scary reality of adulthood. Therefore, the focus of the film is the wonderful characters played by Saoirse Ronan, Emma Watson, Florence Pugh, Eliza Scanlen, Timothee Chalamet and Laura Dern. They are all very well acted and every single character is unique and filled with personality.
Acting and characters aside, it's beautifully captured and the environments really breathes life into the film. The movie is also very touching and I couldn't help but cry, both tears of happiness and of grief.
My only complaint is that the story is rather messy and it often jumps between different time periods and places without giving good enough hints of this. I spent quite a lot of time and energy on trying to understand where and when they were, and that is something that could have been done better.
Overall, I really liked the film and I completely understand why it has received such critical praise.
Really well done, didn't expect before going to theatre but the director has been able to mix a great performance from all the actors with a well-done screenplay. Not the normal Little Woman, a personal version of Greta Gerwig.
I read through many of the reviews for this 2019 version of "Little Women" and noticed that most reviewers adored the film. Because of this, I assumed I also would love the movie. Sadly, however, I was left feeling ambivalent about it...and I noticed that my wife and oldest daughter felt pretty much the same way.
I won't talk about the plot...after all, there's a summary on IMDB and lots of reviews talk about this. What I should mention is that the film is much more like the book than previous versions....a plus. But the reasons I still did not love this film are what stop me from recommending the film. First, there simply is too much story to cram into a little over two hours. If you are going to try to stick closer to the book, then perhaps consider making it a mini-series. This is because although the film is more like the book, to do this they also omit a lot of things....making the story seem a bit disjoint and confusing. Second, I really didn't think they did a good job of helping the viewers to actually care about the characters. Some of this was because the little women in the story were poorly chosen--much too old in some cases (the 12 year-old early in the story looked to be about 20). Some was because the choppiness of the story really harmed the film because the characters just seemed one-dimensional. Overall, a decent story but even with its sticking closer to the book, I much preferred the 1990s version...which was much more charming, fun and likable.
I won't talk about the plot...after all, there's a summary on IMDB and lots of reviews talk about this. What I should mention is that the film is much more like the book than previous versions....a plus. But the reasons I still did not love this film are what stop me from recommending the film. First, there simply is too much story to cram into a little over two hours. If you are going to try to stick closer to the book, then perhaps consider making it a mini-series. This is because although the film is more like the book, to do this they also omit a lot of things....making the story seem a bit disjoint and confusing. Second, I really didn't think they did a good job of helping the viewers to actually care about the characters. Some of this was because the little women in the story were poorly chosen--much too old in some cases (the 12 year-old early in the story looked to be about 20). Some was because the choppiness of the story really harmed the film because the characters just seemed one-dimensional. Overall, a decent story but even with its sticking closer to the book, I much preferred the 1990s version...which was much more charming, fun and likable.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesAfter discovering that the adaptation was in the works, Saoirse Ronan reached out to Greta Gerwig and told her she decided she would play Jo March. Gerwig was initially hesitant to cast Ronan after having just worked with her on Lady Bird (2017), but after realizing that casting herself was, more or less, a very Jo thing to do, Gerwig sent Ronan an e-mail that said, "Yes, you're Jo."
- PatzerA plastic water bottle and Hydro Flask appear in the Laurences' study.
- Crazy CreditsThe Columbia Pictures logo is the 1990s version, paying homage to Betty und ihre Schwestern (1994), the previous adaptation of the novel, which the studio had also worked on.
- VerbindungenFeatured in So Far: 'Barbie' (2019)
- SoundtracksNocturne No. 5 in F-sharp major Op. 15 No. 2
Written by Frédéric Chopin
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Offizielle Standorte
- Sprachen
- Auch bekannt als
- Mujercitas
- Drehorte
- Concord, Massachusetts, USA(Orchard and Lawrence Houses)
- Produktionsfirmen
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 40.000.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Bruttoertrag in den USA und Kanada
- 108.101.214 $
- Eröffnungswochenende in den USA und in Kanada
- 16.755.310 $
- 29. Dez. 2019
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 332.103.783 $
- Laufzeit2 Stunden 15 Minuten
- Farbe
- Sound-Mix
- Seitenverhältnis
- 1.85 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen