movies

"Damn, Timothée Chalamet..." Just 7 important thoughts I had during Little Women.

If you’re still deciding whether to see Little Women at the movies then let me help convince you.

YES it is absolutely worth the price of the ticket and you should definitely go.

Take your friend. Take your mum. Take your significant other. Go alone. Just please actually go.

The latest big-screen adaptation of Louisa May Alcott’s coming-of-age classic was, quite simply, one of the most beautiful films I have ever seen (all credit to Greta Gerwig, who was shamelessly robbed of an Oscar nod for Best Director. You can see our explanation for that garbage oversight here.)

Watch the trailer for Little Women below. Post continues after video.

I knew it had to end, but I didn’t want it to. I was so absorbed in the exquisite cinematography; scenes that looked like paintings; costumes so gorgeous I almost wish bustles were still in fashion; dialogue so clever it felt modern while being completely of its time; an ensemble so perfectly cast they felt like family.

Little Women
Pls adopt me. Image: Supplied.

When my mum and I left the cinema, we looked at each other and sighed - that kind of contented, warm and fuzzy sigh when you're really happy and a little bit giddy.

It was life-affirming. The kind of escape we all need right now.

But I also had a lot of thoughts during the film that I need to process, so, here goes...

ADVERTISEMENT

Is it ok to be this attracted to Laurie?

Timothée Chalamet, who plays wealthy, lovelorn orphan Laurie, is the Leonardo DiCaprio of his time. When I was 13, I remember getting tiny heart flutters when I first saw Leo on TV in Romeo & Juliet. I plastered my school diary and bedroom walls with his face.

Timothée, the native New Yorker who earned his first Oscar nomination for 2017's Call Me By Your Name, has that same aura. And it's not just the floppy hair, though that is important.

laurie
Sorry but your hair. Image: Supplied.

In Little Women, he is so charming and silly and handsome it's impossible not to fall in love with him, as the March sisters did. For a man of the time, he has swag.

According to the movie's costume designer, Jacqueline Durran, she allowed Chalamet to self-style his character, and he did so based on his own research of the time. His dishevelled, louche approach just makes him all the more attractive.

And he's 24 in real life, so at least my crush is... legal.

Are we all just going to let Emma Watson get away with that American accent or...

Emma fits into the film perfectly as Meg, the eldest March sister, with her thousand-yard stare and a face that looks like an 1800s portrait come to life. You can immediately see why Gerwig cast her. But I have to say it because no one else seems to want to: girlfriend can not hold down a US accent. The vowels are all wrong. She slips up multiple times. It can't be ignored. Why are we all ignoring it?

Did Jo March really pen her novel by candlelight and then lay out all the pages on the floor WITH CANDLES EVERYWHERE?

This gave me mild anxiety. That's all.

The March sisters keep lamenting how poor they are, but why do they live in a glorious mansion in the countryside?

And why do they have a full-time maid and overflowing catered Christmas breakfasts? And why do they live next door to a rich guy and get to hang out at HIS mansion? And why are they invited to fancy balls and such? This all seems kind of contrary but okay.

Should I get a fringe?

From Emma Watson's curtain bangs to Florence Pugh's full fringe, I left wondering whether a quick trim will make me look like a Victorian babe, too.

Fringes
1800s hair goals. Image: Supplied.
ADVERTISEMENT

Wait, are we in the present or the past?

The film goes back and forth between Jo's past and present, and I spent most of it trying to discern which era we were in. Even though there was a warmer sepia tone signalling her childhood, sh*t got confusing.

But that was just a small thing, don't let it put you off a trip to the pictures.

Who played *that* character in the '90s version?

There have been several adaptations of Little Women dating back to 1949, but for anyone who grew up in the nineties, the 1994 version is the one that comes to mind. The first thing I Googled when I got out was a comparison of the cast - who were every bit as cool in their heyday as the new guard are now.

90s-film-poster
The film featured the It-girls of the time.

Winona Ryder played Jo, Claire Danes was Beth,  Kirsten Dunst was Amy, Christian Bale (!!) stepped into Laurie's shoes, and someone called Trini Alvarado was Meg.

Have you seen Little Women yet? Let us know your thoughts in the comments.

Feature Image: Supplied/Sony Pictures.

00:00 / ???