Movie Review- Little Women (2019)

I debated whether or not to write a review for Little Women as there's already so many out there but part of the reason I began blogging and why I still come back to it is because it's an outlet for me to process my thoughts as well as (hopefully) get feedback. So here are my random, incoherent thoughts.

Synopsis from IMDB: Jo March reflects back and forth on her life, telling the beloved story of the March sisters - four young women each determined to live life on their own terms.

Spoilers ahead.
Going into watching it I knew that the film would jump back and forth between the past and present so I was prepared for that. If you are not familiar with the story I think that could be confusing but even then there were subtle clues to keep you on track. I know some didn't like that method of telling the story but I actually felt like it worked pretty well. My favorite part of how I thought it was better was that I thought it really made the Laurie and Amy romance play out well. I've said it before and I'll say it again. I think Laurie and Amy work well together and I did not want Laurie and Jo to get together... I like Jo and the professor. With that said, I don't think the other film versions before this have given justice to Amy and especially her's and Laurie's romance.
On that note, I loved the casting for Amy. I was not familiar with the actress before this film but she did such a great job with the role. Laurie's casting was perfect too. He was boyish and immature but I felt he matured also. Like Amy, sometime I want to slap him.
Actually, all of the casting was marvelous. Saorise Ronan was absolutely perfect for the role of Jo... born for the role you might say. She captured the essence of Jo that is shown in the book. The casting for Professor Baehr and his portrayal seemed fine but he didn't get nearly enough screen time and in the end their romance seemed rushed, which disappointed me as, as I mentioned above, I love Jo's and his romance.
I was not sure about Hermione Granger.... I mean Emma Watson.... as Meg going into the film but I ended up loving her in the role as well. As I've gotten older, married and had my first child I've really come to resonate with Meg more and this film made me feel even more in touch with her character. The casting for John Brook was great too! I did not like his casting and portrayal in the 1994 version! It did him no justice. Laura Dern as Marmee was a pleasant surprise as well. I just wasn't feeling her portrayal in the trailers and I've had a sour taste in my mouth about her ever since The Last Jedi Admiral Holdo disaster. I was proven wrong though and she is now my favorite film Marmee. Meryl Streep as Aunt Josephine was hilarious. Enough said.
My one qualm with casting/portryal was that of Beth. I've been trying to find words for where I felt they went wrong then I saw on a discussion post someone say that they thought she was made to be overly childish and almost cognitively impaired and that exactly is my disliking with the portrayal. I don't know what else to say. Beth has never been my absolute favorite character as I know she is to many but this movie seemed to do her a deep injustice.
One part I found odd in the film was close to the end after Beth has died Jo is lamenting her life to Marmee and saying maybe she should have married Laurie. Marmee gives her some sound advice but still Jo goes and writes a letter she puts in their little mailbox to Laurie saying she'll marry him. I was racking my brain trying to remember if that was in the book as I was almost positive it was not. I did double check and it was not. I'm lost as to why it was added in then. It made the ending, romance wise, for Jo seem to fall flat. It makes it seem like the Professor was just her second choice since she couldn't marry Laurie. As mentioned above, I didn't like how they rushed the ending with her and the professor.
There's so much more to say about the film but I think I'm out of thoughts for now. I'd love to hear yours... even if you disagree with me! I'm excited to see it again in the future and I'm sure I'll have more musings after a second viewing. Thank you for putting up with my ramblings and happy reading and viewing.

Follow my blog with Bloglovin

Miniseries Review- Doctor Thorne

After reading the book last year, I was excited to find out that a miniseries adaptation was soon to come out. So having now watched it, I'll be reviewing it for the 2016 Period Drama Film Challenge.

Synopsis from IMDB: The life of penniless Mary Thorne, who grows up with her Uncle, Dr Thorne, and her relationship with the family at nearby Greshamsbury Park estate.

The story of Doctor Thorne is no Pride and Prejudice so one can't expect a Pride and Prejudice when they watch the miniseries. However, you can sit down and enjoy a charming period drama. The story is uncomplicated. Humor, love, wealth, social status and a little mystery.
The plot was somewhat simplified from the book and I did feel like the miniseries could have used an extra episode but overall I thought it was laid out well. The casting was lovely and I enjoyed all of the performances. The were only a couple cast members with which I was familiar. One was Tom Hollander who plays Doctor Thorne. I knew him from the 2005 version of Pride and Prejudice where he plays Mr. Collins. The other was Janine Duvitski who plays Lady Scatcherd. I knew her from Little Dorrit where she plays Mrs. Meagles. The costumes were beautiful though the flowers in the hair were a little different then to what I was accustomed. The scenery was gorgeous as well.
Here are a few shots from the film to illustrate its beauty.

I loved Tom Hollander as Doctor Thorne. He put a lot of depth into
the character and showed his thoughtfulness and kindness beautifully 

One of my favorite dresses and while I wasn't
a fan of the bonnet at first I've grown to love it.

Some of the beautiful scenery from the film. 

A sample of the flowers in the hair. I felt so bad for Augusta! 

More flowers in the hair. 

Another favorite dress. 

Overall this was a delightful film and if you love period dramas be sure to add this to your list.

Movie Review- Love and Friendship

For the 2016 Period Drama Film Challenge and because as an avid Jane Austen enthusiast I consider it my duty to, I will be reviewing the film Love and Friendship.

Synopsis from IMDB: Lady Susan Vernon takes up temporary residence at her in-laws' estate and, while there, is determined to be a matchmaker for her daughter Frederica -- and herself too, naturally.

Love and Friendship is based off of Jane Austen's epistolary novella Lady Susan but actually uses the title from a novel she wrote as a juvenile.

The film kept pretty closely to the book with a few minor deviations that I do not think detracted from the story and some of them were rather humorous. Since Austen's actual story was written in the form of letters, most of the dialogue was not hers as she really didn't have any. The screenwriter though did an excellent job, I thought, with dialogue and it had me laughing several times. The main character being less than reputable is quite a contrast to Austen's other works, so one has to reconcile themselves to that. I think though there are plenty of reputable characters in the story to make up for Lady Susan. My mother commented that she felt that Lady Susan was like Becky Sharpe of Vanity Fair, which I would somewhat agree with. Lady Susan is a far more sophisticated Becky Sharpe and I feel that Jane Austen wrote a nicer, as in more polite, novel than Vanity Fair was. It's interesting to contrast though. I did feel like they made Lord Vernon too dense, which annoyed me. Also, in the book, Reginald de Courcy breaks it off himself with Lady Susan as he truly sees through her.  However, in the film she breaks it off with him in the pretense of him accusing her falsely and not wanting to be in a relationship where trust was no paramount. With breaking it off with him though she planned to use that to make herself look innocent and hopefully get back together with him, which in the end she does not do. I just felt like it made Reginald seem more gullible then he really was. That all made me think of Edmund Bertram and Mary Crawford in Mansfield Park and I think there are some parallels to draw there as well, though Mary Crawford with all of her faults was not as immoral as Lady Susan. Besides those couple instances the slight deviation were not irksome, at least to me.

There were a few actors I was familiar with. Kate Beckinsale, who plays Lady Susan herself, is Emma in the 1996 version of Emma. Stephen Fry, who has a minor role as Mr. Johnson, is well known to us as Jeeves from Jeeves and Wooster. Jemma Redgrave, who plays Lady de Courcy, I know from Doctor Who where she plays Kate Stewart.

When it comes to the appropriateness of the film as far as anything shown it was entirely appropriate. However, Lady Susan is basically a loose woman. She's conniving and manipulative. She uses her talents as a flirt and her knowledge of men to get what she wants in life. Therefore there are those themes throughout the film.

The fashion was lovely. I preferred Lady Susan's gowns overall. Here's a few samples. :)

This is my favorite! 

Overall I enjoyed Love and Friendship and thought it was a delightful addition to anyone's collection of Jane Austen films.

Follow my blog with Bloglovin

Movie Review- Testament of Youth

For the 2016 Period Drama Film Challenge I'll be reviewing the 2014 film Testament of Youth.

Synopsis from IMDB: A long, long time ago, back in the spring of 1914, they were so happy together. There was Vera Brittain, an upper class girl with ideas of her own; and her bright brother Edward; and his group of friends among whom Roland Leighton, wonderful, handsome, sensitive Roland Vera had fallen for... Always having great times together talking, laughing, exchanging ideas, walking, eating, swimming together; all of them envisioning the glittering future they deserved: Vera, despite her father's opposition, would study at Oxford, marry Roland and be a famous writer; Roland, as for him, would be acclaimed as a great poet while Edward and his friends would each become a prominent figure in his respective field... But then came that fateful day on 4 August 1914 when Britain declared war on Germany. All those beautiful dreams were to be shattered one after the other. 

I knew little about this film before watching it except that it was based off of a book that was a true story, was a period drama and that a lot of my blogging friends loved it but thought it was heartbreaking. It's true... all of it.

I really enjoyed the film but it was most definitely a depressing though strangely uplifting film. People keep dying! It was like watching a Shakespeare tragedy! It was horribly real though, knowing it was based off of a true story and that what was portrayed in the film was something that happen to many families during World War I. Vera is horribly headstrong and while her parents do frustrate me at times I wish she was more respectful of them. I do love her relationship with her brother Edward though. They were so close and it was really sweet. Both of Edward's friends, Roland and Victor were great and honestly I didn't mind which of those two Vera married. Victor actually might have been my favorite... obviously that was not at all influenced by the fact that he's played by Colin Morgan who also plays Merlin and who is amazing. ;) It was beautiful how all four of them were all such great friends though. As a nurse, I fully supported Vera going and being a nurse and honestly I couldn't imagine being a nurse in that time period and dealing with all of the horrors of the war victims. I was watching it with my sister and she thought it all a little gory but I was loving it. It was horrifically sad though. There was even a scene reminiscent of Gone With the Wind when they showed all of the bodies of the fallen soldiers lined up. Putting into words all of the emotion this story entails is hard. It's not just a love story in the least. It's a war story. It's a story about growing up. It's a story about life. I found it far more compelling than I thought I would and even though it is one of the saddest movies we've ever watched both my sister and I truly enjoyed it.

There are some familiar actors and actresses in this film (familiar at least to me). There's Emily Watson (Rose Huberman in The Book Thief and of course famous for many other roles), Colin Morgan (As previously mentioned he played Merlin in The Adventures of Merlin and also in one episode of Doctor Who) and Miranda Richardson (Rita Skeeter in the Harry Potter films).

There's really no objectionable content. As I mentioned above it can be a little gory and there's definitely blood. At one point Vera washes the blood off of a naked body of a soldier but you only see from the waist up as I recall. I wouldn't watch this with young children as I think they might find the horrors of war portrayed frightening and disturbing.

The costumes were absolutely lovely and the hats were splendiferous! Here's a little taste of the fashion from the film.

Watch or not? Watch!

Follow my blog with Bloglovin

Movie Review- Brooklyn

For the 2016 Period Drama Film Challenge I'm reviewing the 2015 film Brooklyn.

Synopsis from IMDB: In late 1951, Eilis Lacey (Saoirse Ronan), a young Irish girl, emigrates to Brooklyn. Sponsored by Father Flood (Jim Broadbent), a priest from her native town Enniscorthy, she is assured to find a full-time job there. But the early days are tough, seasickness being soon replaced by loneliness and homesickness, two feelings all the more acutely felt by Eilis for having had to leave behind her widowed mother and her dear sister Rose (Fiona Glasscott). She nevertheless little by little manages to find her footing by adapting to her job as a salesgirl, by studying bookkeeping at Brooklyn College as well as with a little help from both Father Flood and Mrs. Kehoe (Julie Walters), the owner of the boarding school she now lives in. And not only does graduation follow but love shows its face in Tony (Emory Cohen), an Italian-American plumber, full of adoration and respect for her. They end up marrying, although keeping the thing secret. It is at that point that tragedy strikes: Rose suddenly dies. Which incites Eilis to return to Enniscorthy, in order to share her sorrow to support her mother morally. And there a strange thing happens : she gradually gets lured by the charms of her native place, going as as to let herself be wooed by Jim Farrell (Domhnall Gleeson), a young local.

This was a really sweet film and I enjoyed it a lot though it certainly had flaws. It had themes of homesickness, family, finding a new home and finding love.

Characters

I loved Eilis and really related to her. Her first days starting out at the shop were just like mine first starting out working at the library. I was painfully shy. Later though she and I both developed to the point where we could easily talk with customers.

I enjoyed the owner of the boarding house, Mrs. Kehoe. She humored me greatly.
The other girls at the boarding house were fairly dreadful though! As the film went on I warmed up to them a little bit but they were just really snooty and horribly silly. Here's a delightful quote from Mrs. Kehoe about those girls. "I'll tell you this much: I am going to ask Father Flood to preach a sermon on the dangers of giddiness. I now see that giddiness is the eighth deadly sin. A giddy girl is every bit as evil as a slothful man, and the noise she makes is a lot worse."
Tony was adorable! His devotion to Eilis and his honesty were so sweet. I was actually re-reading the Little House books at the time I watched this film and I have decided that Almanzo Wilder looks like Tony. That is exactly how I picture him now and you can't shake me out of that opinion. ;)
I loved Tony's family as well. When Eilis first visits his family and he warns her about his little brother I loved it! She asks what her brother is going to do and Tony replied "I don't know! That's the scary thing." That is so my family (especially my little brother)! Wow betide if I ever bring a young man home. Who knows what they'll do! ;)

Objectionable Content

Unfortunately it existed. What most upset me in this film was the fact that Eilis and Tony decide to get married before she goes back to Ireland but then they sleep together that night and the next day get married! Like what's the point? Could you have not waited one day? Not too much is shown in that scene thankfully. Underclothing was quite modest in those days. I still do not appreciate that though!
I'm not sure if this qualifies under objectionable content or not but I was frustrated with Eilis for entertaining Jim Farrell while she was in Ireland. I think it started out innocently enough and I really think that Eilis's momentary falter of being interested in him stemmed mostly from her homesickness. I just felt bad for him because he seemed like a really great guy and she hurt him in the process of it. Thankfully she got it togther and goes back to Tony!
There are a couple bad words in it too.
Overall this film was pretty clean and I was glad of that but what it did have in it annoyed me.

Fashion

The fashion in the film was GORGEOUS! I loved it. Here are just a few pictures.

Can we all say yay for a modest swimsuit? 

Overall I enjoyed this film. Despite my complaints about it, it was still refreshing to watch it considering the many far more immoral romantic films out there.

Follow my blog with Bloglovin

Movie Review- Chocolat

My mom has always talked about how much she enjoys the movie Chocolat so finally we watched it together and then I realized it was basically a period drama film so I thought hey, I'll review it for the Period Drama Film challenge. Cause why not? ;)

Synopsis from IMDB: Vianne Rocher and her young daughter are drifters who are met with skepticism and resistance when they move to a conservative town in rural France and open a chocolate shop during Lent. As Vianne begins to work her magic and help those around her, the townspeople are soon won-over by her exuberance and her delicious chocolates - except for the mayor, who is determined to shut her down. When a group of river drifters visit the town, Vianne teaches the townspeople something about acceptance, and finds love for herself along the way.

This was a fun and sweet little film. It had it's issues but overall it was delightful.
First off it's about chocolate. Yum! And not just any chocolate. Super delicious decadent looking chocolate that I want to pull from the screen and eat! It's an awful movie to watch when there isn't any chocolate around to eat!

Characters:

Vianne Rocher (Juliette Binoche)- Vianne is kind of a complicated character. With her daughter she moves from town to town. As the story develops you discover why she does this.... it is a tradition passed on from her mother to spread the love of chocolate with everyone. As the story goes on though she begins to realize how hard it is on her daughter to keep up with the constant moving and constantly having to make new friends. Vianne is also non-catholic.... non-christian altogether, which condemns her to all of the townspeople, especially the mayor.  Now I'm not a catholic so their arguments about lent that end up happening I really could care less who wins them. However, I'm more disappointed in Vianne's atheism that comes out, which develops some themes I wasn't too big a fan of.

Comte de Reynaud (Alfred Molina)- Another complicated character. Comte de Reynaud is the mayor of the town and very much so rules it with an iron fist, though he does care deeply for it. At the beginning of the story you hear him tell people that this wife is in Rome and has decided to extend her stay there but as the story goes on you realize that while she is in Rome she isn't coming back. This fuels a lot of his anger. 

Josephine Muscat (Lena Olin)- At the beginning Josephine comes off as rather odd. You discover she's somewhat of a kleptomaniac and that her husband is emotionally and pushily abusive to her. With Vianne's support, Josephine leaves her husband and starts a new life. I really loved seeing Josephine's character grow through the film. She becomes a whole new person. 

Roux (Johnny Depp)- Roux is a water gypsy who camps out by the town about halfway through the film. Like Vianne he is considered an outcast by the town. A relationship develops between the two. It was weird to see Johnny Depp in this film not looking weird. I've only ever seen him as Captain Jack in Pirates of the Caribbean. 

Armande Voizin (Judi Dench)- Armande rents the shop to Vianne and soon frequents it as well and you begin to learn about her life. She's estranged from her daughter and therefore her grandson. During the film though Vianne brings her grandson and then eventually her daughter into reconciliation with Armande. 

Music

The music was a lot of fun in this film. Especially the gypsy tunes played.

Costumes

I adored the costumes in this film! Vianne's wardrobe was classic and beautiful. 

Objectionable Content

Vianne's daughter was born out of wedlock and we do not know who the father was. Vianne wear some lower cut clothes. There's two inappropriate scenes, both of which we dimmed the screen for so I'm not sure quite how much they showed. I don't think they showed too much though but still unnecessary.

Overall I enjoyed this film a lot but it definitely had some issues with immorality. The conclusion was somehow not quite satisfying because in the end everyone seemed to abandon their catholic faith. As I said I'm not catholic so some of that was a little ridiculous to me as I don't believe in lent but still the basic morality of Christianity was there and it seemed like it lost. I think maybe more the point of it was that the townspeople, and especially the mayor, needed to loosen up with their legalism. I think they loosened up a little too much though. 

Have you seen Chocolat? What did you think of it? 

Follow my blog with Bloglovin

Movie Review- The Age of Innocence

For the 2016 Period Drama Challenge I'll be reviewing the film The Age of Innocence.
I just reviewed the book recently so you probably have that fresh in your mind.

Synopsis from IMDB: Society scion Newland Archer is engaged to May Welland, but his well-ordered life is upset when he meets May's unconventional cousin, the Countess Olenska. At first, Newland becomes a defender of the Countess, whose separation from her abusive husband makes her a social outcast in the restrictive high society of late-19th Century New York, but he finds in her a companion spirit and they fall in love.

That synopsis doesn't quite catch the whole story but that's the gist of it. For more go look at my review of the book and really for my thoughts on the storyline go look at my review of the book as it seems rather silly to say here what I already said when reviewing the book. Book review is HERE.

Casting

I really enjoyed the casting of the film and I think it was perfectly done.
Daniel Day-Lewis plays Newland Archer. I know he's a famous actor but I've actually never seen him in a film before so it was interesting to experience that for the first time. I also liked that they had Newland narrating the story at portions which I thought worked well as so much of the story is introspective.

Winona Ryder Ryder plays May Welland. I was a little bit familiar with her as she plays Jo in the 1994 Little Women but it's been a long time since I've seen that. She does a spot on job of portraying May who is really a more complicated character then you at first realize. Her look of innocence is wow and I think she adds even a little more depth to May's character.

Michelle Pfeiffer portrays Countess Ellen Olenska. I didn't think I'd seen anything with her in it then I remembered she's in Ladyhawk. I didn't really have a clear idea of how I pictured the Countess Olenska and I still don't but I don't quite feel like Michelle Pfeiffer is quite how I see her. Don't get me wrong. I liked her in it and I thought she did a great job but somehow I felt like there was something not quite right there. Maybe it was just in the writing or maybe I'm just being picky.

Screenplay

This movie is quite accurate to the book and I was really pleasantly surprised. I feel like it made it slightly more sensual than the book but all things considered I'm grateful it was as clean as it was (more on that later). There were some things I felt like were kind of off but I really can't place them... like my problem with Michelle Pfeiffer as Countess Olenska. It must just be a Lois thing. ;)

Costumes

Gorgeous! For the most part I loved all of the dresses. Countess Olenska's I wasn't as crazy about but she had a different fashion obviously indicative of how she was influenced by her time in Europe. Mae tends to wear lots of white whereas the Countess wears a wide variety of colors. 

One of the few times the Countess wears white.

Objectionable Content

As you can tell by the synopsis the story deals with some deeper topics such as fidelity in marriage. While Newland and the Countess never do anything per say, they definitely engage in some rather passionate and sensual kissing and while not having a sexual affair they have an emotional affair. 

Overall I thought it was a good adaptation of the story and if you're a fan of the book you'll probably enjoy it. :) 

Follow my blog with Bloglovin