Little Women (2019) (mini-review++)

little-women-photos-ss01(If you’re curious, my review process. It’s also pasted at the end of this post. I don’t believe in Rotten Tomatoes. I just believe in me.)

(***all-purpose SPOILER ALERT*** there may be some in this review)

acting 8

directing 8

effects 8

editing 8

writing 8


4 out of 5 🐙


I expected to dislike this movie. I never saw the trailer. I only watch trailers in the theater. It’s just one of my things. Here’s what I liked:

But I liked it very much. I love being surprised, The tone reminded Finding Neverland: sweet but also serious.

And I know it’s the red hair but Saoirse Ronan seems to be the spiritual heiress apparent to Kate Winslet who I feel is the spiritual heiress apparent to Meryl Streep so it was fun to see spiritual grandma and granddaughter in the same film. I thought she was fine in Lady Bird but not nearly as good as her performance here or in Brooklyn.

It felt a lot like Brooklyn, at least aesthetically. I realize they are set in different eras.

I never really loved Timothee Chalamet before. I’m one of the few people on earth who hated Call Me By Your Name. But he really impressed me here. He played the flighty, entitled rich kid who turns out to be a solid person.

My first exposure to Florence Pugh was excellent. She was rambunctious and funny but also dulcet and devastated. But I’m still too scared to see Midsommar.

Emma Watson played the most normal/traditional of the sisters but she had her crushing moments to show off her skills.

Laura Dern should have been nominated for best actress for this performance – it towers over her turn in Marriage Story.

In general, all of the characters were full people. There were no archetypes here. They were all tested and put through an array of human emotions.

I should have never doubted Greta Gerwig. The shining center of Mistress America was (one of the funniest films of 2015) and besides being a stellar comic talent as an actor, she clearly has the same strength in her directing and writing. I just expected it to be a stuffy period piece. I’m so happy to be wrong.







(1) Shark Wrighter (SW) Score: Based on a sum of 5 sub-scores (acting, directing, writing/story, effects: cinematography &/or animation &/or effects, editing) with 1 being terrible and 10 being terrific.

(2) Octopuses (0-5 🐙, with 5 being fantastic and 0 being feces)

(3) Octopuses are my unquantifiable feeling…not that SW score is scientific…but this one is even less so

(4) ++ This optional section includes any incredibly *brilliant observations that don’t fit into simple quantitative slices like the scores and octopuses *(they are likely NOT brilliant)


Leave a Reply