#Meryl Concord

[elfietheespeon]

Narrator 2: Sherman finds himself swarmed, swept up in a massive communal bear hug. Have you ever been hugged by an entire town?

(Midst Season 3 Episode 14; Shindig)

It's CR takeover time, everybody! In celebration of the Moonward trailer (releasing on July 24th), from now until July 23rd, send in your Midst fanart to critrole.com/submit!! It doesn't have to be new, either.

Our goal is to flood this week's fanart gallery with Midst as much as possible, so don't be afraid to submit whatever you've made, regardless of medium.

We ride at Unset, my foldet siblings. To (wholesome) battle!

[saintfu]

That nutcracker really was a shitty gift.

[danikatze]

[ID in alt text]

"Lark does something Tzila has never seen her do before. She smiles."

(Excuse me while I cry a little)

[courseyoulovemeyoudontknowme]

Little Women (2019, Greta Gerwig)

27/09/2024

[wardensantoineandevka]

okay, but how the fuck does Meryl Concord fit into all of this, the fact that she's looking for Atticus and knows Weepe did something to vanish him has gotta be relevant, but HOW

[hoarding-stories]

I love the narrators continuing to give us no clarity whatsoever about Meryl Concord

What do you mean she doesn't like nuts

[illusion-of-death]

Clearly Atticus and Meryl Concord’s last name had to be that specifically because it’s a type of grape jelly

[jestersloverre]

Now that we’re so close to midst s3 e17 I’m once again wondering what the fuck is up with Meryl concord???? And also Atticus concord???? And how this is all going to bite Weepe in the ass???

Are they actually siblings? Were they previously one person and now got split into two people? Is Atticus going to be raised from the dead thru fold magic? Will Barty and Lloyd be okay if he is raised from the dead??? Has Meryl been a red herring this whole time????

I have no idea but god the speculation is so fun, I really don’t know what to expect

[allianceofrenewalchurches]

An Observation - Women's Liberation, Proverbs 31 Style

IRVIN STAPF <istapf@comcast.net>

Jan 6, 2025, 10:12 AM

to IRVIN, Ray, Angie, Ashley, B.G., Meryl, bjgladhill, Doug, bookman9704@comcast.net, brian.gray.vt@gmail.com, Matt, Carilee, carolynashriver, Carrie, Frank, Terry, Curtis, Jennifer, John, Daniel, Dean, Art, dorian.gorevin@gmail.com, drandrewwilliamson@gmail.com, Tom, emily.stapf00@gmail.com, Connie, Helen, Bruce, Roland, Zach, Grace, Al, John, Kris, Jonathan, JOSEPH, Jude, Merv, Brian, Cary, Laura, Matt, Deborah, Debbie, Mimiy, Jennifer, Paul, Bob, Connie, Thiel, Rebekah, sendmenojunkmailok@yahoo.com, Larry, Stephen, stapf2nd@gmail.com, me, Michael, Terry

Let me tell you of some Proverbs 31 women. This chapter in the Book of Proverbs speaks of the virtue, abilities, talents, and beauty that women can possess. The whole issue of men's and women's rolls in scripture is often discussed, and at time railed against by the women's liberation movement. But this advice by the mother of King Lemuel sets things in the right order and truly elevates the image of a Godly woman. 

First, King Lemuel is mentioned nowhere else in scripture. However, Strong's Concordance points our that Lemuel is a Hebrew word that is related to words that mean "belonging to God" and is a symbolic name of Solomon. Further, Jewish legend identifies him as Solomon, taking advise from his mother Bathsheba, though there is no clear evidence for this. Solomon is the author of the book of Proverbs, and it seems to me that both parts of this 31st chapter should be included as one. Verses 1 to 9 are not separated from verses 10 through 31. They all become a description of God's intended rolls for men and women. 

Let me deal with a couple of side issues, though sometimes prominent, that can get in the way. If Lemuel is identified as Solomon, which seems likely to me, Solomon is said to have had many wives and concubines. Also, Solomon's mother was Bathsheba who was a married woman take in adultery by Solomon's father, David after he murdered Bathsheba's husband. Quite a mess, and not one out of which we would expect any good and Godly advice. It is important to understand that these things happened with God continuing to use people involved does not indicate our Lord's approval for their life's choices, They were clearly sinful. David recognized this and repented. This is the context of David's Psalm 51 as he cries out to the Lord for mercy. Further, Solomon's love poem in the book Song of Songs, or Song of Solomon, speaks to one particular woman, the Shulammite, to whom he is devoted. This love poem has also been taken as Christ's love for the Church.

There is great hope for us in this. For all have sinned an fall sort of the Glory of God as St. Paul says in Romans Chapter three ....21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all [f]and on all who believe. For there is no difference; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. (NKJV)  In their repentance God was able to continue using them to do His will, and they ultimately became forbearers of our Lord Jesus.

Ah! But now let me get back to the Proverbs 31 advice. Of this wise and energetic woman it says that "Her husband is known in the gates as he sits among the elders of the land."(vs.23) He seems to be having a good time with his friends while his wife does all the works! But the gates of the city were a place of leadership, protection, and order. This was his task. He was not just sharing a drink with his buddies. This is what the King's mother cautions him about in verses 3 to 5. His heart and all of his strength is given to being sure that his wife and family was properly guided, protected, and free to carry on her duties. His love is always with her. (vs.28) 

Look at all she is doing!  Verse 10 begins with a commendation; "an excellent wife.... her worth is far above jewels. The heart of her husband trust her. She does him good... all the days of her life."(vss.10-12) Then her activities: she seek out materials to work with her hands; she brings her food from afar providing for her household and those under her; she is able to judge  values and purchase property to plant a vineyard; she is wise, strong and generous; and has a sense of security. She is a lovely woman and along with all her attributes strength and dignity are her clothing. Her speech is wise and she oversee all that is involved with her household. This is a tremendous commendation for the abilities of a godly woman. There is no lack of dignity, ability or beauty in this description of a woman. There is nothing lacking that a woman's liberation movement could add. The only distinction is that her life and her joy is established for the good of her husband, her children, her household and the community around her. She isn't seeking to make a name for herself but to honor the Lord in all she does.

In Genesis chapter one God created the man and the woman. He established the monogamous marriage bond, essentiality creating the home and family. That is the natural structure intended for our life and growth on earth. [That doesn't mean that a life of singleness is wrong either for a man or woman, but that is a whole other topic.] The point here that is carried through both Testaments is that of proper order. This gets to the terms the modern world has confused and rejected, headship and submission. But this also is part of the image of God given to man and woman in their creation. There is headship and submission within the Holy Trinity. We confess for example, in the Apostle's Creed that the "Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and Son and with the Father and Son is worshipped and glorified". Further, Jesus is clear about His relationship with the Father explaining to the Jewish leaders in John 5:19 and following that He only does what He sees the Father doing. The Holy Trinity is truly one, co-equal, and co-eternal. The three are one true God, but the principle of headship and submission still function among them. There is no sense of one being more important than the others, or more value or dignity than the others. So it is intended to be reflected in marriage. 

So, while there are far fewer verses about the man's virtues in Proverbs 31 his task is established and important. I wrote earlier that his sitting with the elders in the gates of the city was a place of leadership, protection, and order. I would also include something I consider of utmost importance, as it has always been but is especially in our times. That is of solid Biblical values and understanding. The man is responsible for sharing God's truth and correction with his family. This principle is supported throughout scripture. It is why God first gave the command not to eat of the tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil to Adam who later conveyed it to Eve. What this means is that the Father is responsible for studying scripture, praying for his family, and deepening his own relationship with his Heavenly Father, to whom he is called to submit.

This Biblical order for man, woman, and family is the best and most joy-filled plan for living. It is difficult! Keep in mind the rebellion of our first parents which we inherited and are all by nature sinful and unclean. Too often we act and react out of that nature. We are also ignorant of the full satisfaction that our proper place can bring. Thus, we are called to repent before God, depending on the cleansing blood of our Saviour, Jesus the Christ. We should also, when needed, be willing to humble ourselves before our mate or children asking their forgiveness. It is in this that we can grow more firmly as one in the image of God.

I am old, which allows me the perspective of many years. Also, my share of failures needing to ask forgiveness and to forgive. But I wanted to share what I've seen in my family and church congregation. Particularly about the Proverbs 31 woman.

First, let me mention the names of Mildred who gave me a solid start while providing a portion of the family income and caring for an Alzheimers stricken husband for the last 15 years of his life, and Ruth who gave me my dear wife after raising her three other children, getting her college degrees, and supporting herself and family, all after her husband was killed on duty with the Baltimore City police force.  I will go on to name Audrey, Helen, Janice, Jeane, Carolyn, Jan, Meryl, Carol, Jane, and I apologize if my memory has failed to bring up any others. These are strong capable women who are the back bone of our fellowship. They are spiritually grounded prayer warriors. They have already given a start to the next generation of Proverbs 31 women who have take their place in the fellowship. And they are praying for the third and fourth generations of their offspring. To these could be added dozens upon dozens of other women in our larger church body and the churches we are affiliated with. There is nothing that women's liberation could add to them.

While the scriptural order of headship and submission is essential we never indicate that one is greater or lesser than the other. Nothing is demeaning or of lesser value in God's order. All is of God's perfect plan. It is our part to continually seek and find.

“Many daughters have done well, But you excel them all.” (Prov. 31:29 - NKJV)

[adriannamateo]

Excited to be the violin chair for today's Maestra Music First Takes 🎻✨ There are a few seats left for this free event. RSVP here.

Maestra First Takes: Readings of New Works 2PM-5PM at Boulevard Carroll Rehearsal Studios 639 West 55th Street New York, NY 10019

From Maestra: 𝘔𝘢𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢’𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘮 𝘍𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵 𝘛𝘢𝘬𝘦𝘴, 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘢 𝘱𝘪𝘱𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘸𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯, 𝘯𝘰𝘯𝘣𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘮𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘤 𝘢𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘧𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘴, 𝘪𝘴 𝘦𝘹𝘤𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘋𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳’𝘴 𝘶𝘱𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘮, 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘢 𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳, 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘴 𝘢 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘔𝘢𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢 𝘮𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘣𝘦 𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘦𝘯𝘷𝘪𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵. 𝘗𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘱𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘔𝘢𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘯𝘦𝘹𝘵 𝘍𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵 𝘛𝘢𝘬𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘭𝘶𝘥𝘦: 𝘏𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘌𝘸𝘦𝘳, 𝘙𝘶𝘪𝘳𝘢𝘯 𝘟𝘶𝘯, 𝘌𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘒𝘢𝘯𝘦, 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘬𝘭𝘺𝘯 𝘎𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘦, 𝘈𝘯𝘯 𝘒𝘭𝘦𝘪𝘯, 𝘚𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘦 𝘋𝘪𝘵𝘵𝘮𝘢𝘳, 𝘑𝘦𝘯𝘪𝘢 𝘔𝘢𝘳𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘻, 𝘚𝘰𝘱𝘩𝘪𝘢 𝘏𝘶𝘧, 𝘈𝘣𝘪𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘭 𝘎𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘵𝘢 𝘊𝘢𝘯𝘢𝘧𝘦, 𝘠𝘢𝘦𝘭 𝘒𝘢𝘳𝘰𝘭𝘺, 𝘈𝘯𝘯𝘦 𝘝𝘢𝘯 𝘚𝘵𝘦𝘦𝘯𝘸𝘪𝘯𝘬𝘦𝘭, 𝘐𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘦 𝘞𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘭, 𝘓𝘪𝘴𝘢 𝘋𝘦𝘚𝘱𝘢𝘪𝘯, 𝘚𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘩 𝘉𝘳𝘦𝘵𝘵 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥, 𝘒𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘦 𝘉𝘳𝘦𝘯��𝘢𝘯, 𝘈𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘯𝘢 𝘚𝘰, 𝘖𝘭𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘢 𝘒𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘺, 𝘛𝘪𝘯𝘢 𝘓𝘢𝘮𝘢, Adrianna Mateo, 𝘓𝘢𝘶𝘳𝘢 𝘔𝘢𝘴𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘳, 𝘒𝘢𝘵𝘺 𝘍𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘺, 𝘈𝘯𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘙𝘰𝘥𝘨𝘦𝘳𝘴, 𝘏𝘢𝘯𝘢𝘯 𝘙𝘢𝘩𝘮𝘢𝘯, 𝘈𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘯 𝘈𝘯𝘥𝘳𝘦𝘰𝘭𝘪, 𝘢𝘴 𝘸𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘴 𝘱𝘰𝘦𝘵 𝘊𝘩𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘢 𝘙𝘰𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘪 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘦𝘳 𝘉𝘦𝘤𝘬𝘺 𝘔𝘤𝘎𝘭𝘢𝘥𝘦. 🎻: Some warm memories from Carroll studios include sessions for new musical 𝐀 𝐖𝐚𝐥𝐤 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐨𝐨𝐧¹ (solo violin chair); for National Alliance for Musical Theatre's Winners Weekend at Signature Theatre Company's Irene Diamond Stage² (violin chair); and in Ethan Lipton's 𝐒𝐮𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐫 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐢𝐭𝐲 show at Lincoln Center's Alice Tully Hall³ (1st violin).

___

1. With Pamela Gray, book writer (and screenwriter for "Music of the Heart" starring Meryl Streep 😍) after Sitzprobe.

2. Taking down notes ✏️ For NAMT, National Endowment for the Arts, Concord Theatricals, Disney on Broadway, and National Music Publishers' Association. Photog: Rebecca Michelson

3. Backstage at Lincoln Center, with Ethan Lipton (playwright, songwriter, headliner), Giancarlo Vulcano (arranger, conductor), and Wondersmith Entertainment founder Juliette Jones.

[piapiatoss]

Profil Aktor dan Aktris Terkenal Dunia

Dunia perfilman selalu dipenuhi oleh bintang-bintang berbakat yang mampu menghidupkan karakter-karakter luar biasa di layar lebar. Aktor dan aktris terkenal dunia bukan hanya dikenal karena kemampuan akting mereka, tetapi juga karena pengaruh mereka dalam industri film dan budaya populer. Berikut adalah profil beberapa aktor dan aktris terkenal yang telah meninggalkan jejak tak terlupakan dalam sejarah perfilman.

1. Meryl Streep

Meryl Streep sering dianggap sebagai salah satu aktris terbesar sepanjang masa. Lahir pada 22 Juni 1949 di Summit, New Jersey, Streep telah memenangkan tiga Academy Awards dan dinominasikan sebanyak 21 kali, sebuah rekor yang mencerminkan bakat luar biasanya. Ia dikenal karena kemampuannya dalam memainkan berbagai peran, dari drama berat seperti "Sophie's Choice" hingga komedi musikal seperti "Mamma Mia!". Keahlian akting dan dedikasinya membuatnya menjadi panutan bagi banyak aktor dan aktris muda.

2. Robert De Niro

Robert De Niro, lahir pada 17 Agustus 1943 di New York City, adalah aktor yang dikenal karena dedikasinya dalam memerankan karakter-karakter kompleks. Ia dua kali memenangkan Academy Award untuk penampilannya dalam "The Godfather Part II" dan "Raging Bull". De Niro sering bekerja sama dengan sutradara Martin Scorsese, menciptakan beberapa film ikonik seperti "Taxi Driver" dan "Goodfellas". Kemampuannya dalam membawa karakter ke kehidupan nyata dengan intensitas dan kedalaman membuatnya menjadi salah satu aktor terbaik sepanjang masa.

3. Leonardo DiCaprio

Leonardo DiCaprio, lahir pada 11 November 1974 di Los Angeles, California, telah berkembang dari bintang remaja menjadi salah satu aktor paling dihormati di Hollywood. DiCaprio pertama kali menarik perhatian dunia melalui film "Titanic" pada tahun 1997. Sejak itu, ia telah membintangi banyak film sukses, termasuk "Inception", "The Wolf of Wall Street", dan "The Revenant", yang memberikannya penghargaan Oscar pertama sebagai Aktor Terbaik. Komitmennya terhadap peran dan dedikasinya pada isu-isu lingkungan menambah dimensi lain pada karirnya.

4. Cate Blanchett

Cate Blanchett, lahir pada 14 Mei 1969 di Melbourne, Australia, adalah aktris dengan jangkauan akting yang luar biasa. Ia telah memenangkan dua Academy Awards, satu untuk perannya sebagai Katharine Hepburn dalam "The Aviator" dan satu lagi untuk perannya dalam "Blue Jasmine". Blanchett dikenal karena kemampuannya menghidupkan karakter-karakter yang kuat dan beragam, baik dalam film besar seperti "The Lord of the Rings" maupun drama kecil seperti "Carol". Keanggunan dan keahliannya membuatnya menjadi salah satu aktris paling dihormati dalam industri ini.

5. Denzel Washington

Denzel Washington, lahir pada 28 Desember 1954 di Mount Vernon, New York, adalah salah satu aktor paling berbakat dan berpengaruh di dunia. Ia telah memenangkan dua Academy Awards, satu untuk perannya dalam "Glory" dan satu lagi dalam "Training Day". Washington dikenal karena kemampuannya untuk memerankan karakter-karakter yang kuat dan karismatik. Film-filmnya seperti "Malcolm X", "The Hurricane", dan "Fences" telah menunjukkan kedalamannya sebagai aktor dan komitmennya pada kualitas akting yang tinggi.

6. Audrey Hepburn

Audrey Hepburn, lahir pada 4 Mei 1929 di Brussels, Belgia, adalah ikon film klasik yang dikenal karena kecantikannya yang anggun dan bakat aktingnya yang luar biasa. Hepburn memenangkan Academy Award untuk perannya dalam "Roman Holiday" dan dikenal luas melalui film-film seperti "Breakfast at Tiffany's" dan "My Fair Lady". Selain karir filmnya, Hepburn juga dikenal karena kerja kemanusiaannya sebagai duta UNICEF, menunjukkan dedikasinya pada membantu orang lain di seluruh dunia.

7. Tom Hanks

Tom Hanks, lahir pada 9 Juli 1956 di Concord, California, adalah aktor yang dicintai banyak orang karena peran-perannya yang hangat dan relatable. Hanks telah memenangkan dua Academy Awards berturut-turut untuk perannya dalam "Philadelphia" dan "Forrest Gump". Ia juga dikenal melalui film-film seperti "Saving Private Ryan", "Cast Away", dan "The Terminal". Kemampuannya untuk membawakan karakter yang beragam dengan kejujuran dan kemanusiaan membuatnya menjadi salah satu aktor paling disukai di Hollywood.

Para aktor dan aktris ini telah menunjukkan dedikasi, bakat, dan kerja keras dalam setiap peran yang mereka mainkan. Mereka bukan hanya menghibur, tetapi juga menginspirasi dan menggerakkan penonton di seluruh dunia. Dengan kontribusi mereka yang luar biasa dalam dunia perfilman, mereka telah mengukir nama mereka dalam sejarah sebagai bintang-bintang yang tak terlupakan.

[rialynne]

Little Women Review

I’m feeling incredibly motivated to do this so here we go. To set it up, yes I read little women as a kid and I saw the 1994 version years ago prior to my first viewing. I watched the 1933 and 1949 versions and the 1994 version again before the second viewing. 

TLDR: Go watch this Movie I love it, imma buy this blu ray. To me despite structural changes this is the definitive movie adaptation of Little Women.

So initial personal reasons why I’ve always enjoyed this story is that it takes place in Mass; my cousins live in Concord, I grew up in New England and they definitely filmed in New England cause certain scenes. We still have old style buildings around like they have in the film and the landscape, especially for scenes in the fall were absolutely beautiful. Marmee even name drops my home state at one point so shout out there. 

Greta Gerwig did an absolutely fantastic job with the adapted screenplay of this movie and I am quite the fan of her decision to split up the structure of the novel and create more flash back sequences to emphasize different events that took place and how that impacted characters. I think the decision to film with a yellow warm tone in the past compared with a blue, cool tone in the adulthood scenes was a smart move as a visual way to explicitly indicate which timeline we are in. The fashion of the ladies and the hairstyles definitely did help with the timeline as well. I also love how they designed the girls hair style and clothing when they were younger to have a piece of Marmee’s style with them to signify a piece of Marmee is in each of her daughters. I also really loved the way that scenes played out, how they were shot, how when a bunch of them where showing conversations that could happen in real life. The dynamics of the march sisters remind me of my own family and there are a few scenes where there was like multiple conversations going on at once and I loved that. Also I love the sound track its on par with the 2005 Pride & Prejudice soundtrack.

For the more minor roles:

Meryl Streep did her thing as Aunt March and was quite hilarious, I loved how she was like no kisses plz and her whole you need to marry wealthy and I didn’t get married cause I’m rich bit. Mr. Lawrence has a beautiful character arc especially with Beth. He did so well with that small role and he really made you feel for the loss of his daughter. John Brook was the sweet respectful man for his wife. Friedrich Bhaer was good as well. Not as many scenes of him as I was previously expecting but I bought the connection he and Jo had and he definitely proved to be an intellectual match for him. 

Laura Dern was an excellent Marmee. She really brought the presence that she was the giving, calming presence for all her daughters, especially for Jo. I absolutely love the conversations she had with Jo about her always being angry and for talking to Jo about her not really being in love with Laurie. I felt like that conversation is a really important lesson for everyone to determine if they want to marry someone, to make sure they do marry some one cause they do truly love them and not cause they want to be loved. Mr. Dashwood, the new york city publisher was also a great addition to this story in terms of representing the way publishers were back in the day. 

I loved how connected they made all the March sisters feel. They really did make them all feel like one unit in their younger years, that it hurt much more when they are older when their apart. I really Loved watching Jo especially interact with all her sisters and seeing how the dynamics changed over the years. With Meg she relates to her being the oldest siblings and the scene where they talk about their different goals in life right before Meg gets married. Its a lovely scene indicating not one’s goals in life are better than another persons goals. I Love how she cares so much for Beth and looks out for her. The dynamics of Jo and Amy’s relationship was fascinating to watch cause it reminded me a lot of me and my sister and how we bickered a lot, but still deeply care for one another, and eventually were able to respect one another. 

I knew going into this movie that Saoirse Ronan was going to kill it as Jo, and she flipping delivered. I love her portrayal as Jo where she is not as too much as the 1933 and 1949 portrayals and yet was very ambitious and likable, very similar to the 1994 portrayal from Winona Ryder. I loved her speech with Marmee about how great women are and how she doesn’t have a life goal to get married but how she is very lonely. That hit hard. Her negotiating for her royalties to her book was a great addition to the end of the story. I feel as if she plays a certain type of character in her movies, but she does it sooo well and in a way that no one else can do justice for it. The relationship between Jo and Amy and Jo and Laurie were great to watch. Amy and Jo are so similar besides a few key differences, and those differences help make their tension believable and turns them into remarkable characters.        

I love the take on Beth in this adaptation. They still play her as a sweet and caring individual, one that ultimately leads to her getting sick and dying, but they give her a little more quirky traits and have her say some funny one liners. She has a lot of subtle moments with Jo and Amy especially that makes their reactions to her death feel so real. Emma Watson did a much better job than i expected and gave a surprising amount of depth to Meg. I did really enjoy the sub plot of her buying that fabric for a dress. $50 back then was like close to $1000, and really does show her struggle with wanting to have nice things once in a while. Her speech to Jo about her desires to be a wife and a mother is beautiful. Meg I feel is a difficult role to play due to her calm presence and lack of a super extroverted like personality and Emma made it her own.

Timothee Chalamet is a fantastic Laurie. He did well in balancing Laurie’s immature and lazy side to him while making him endearing. Seeing his love for the March family grow over time was beautiful. His relationship with Jo and Amy were awesome. With Jo, they are a great example of a platonic friendship, especially from when this book was published. I really loved the rejected proposal on the hill. You can see Jo still resisting adulthood still from her sister’s wedding, even when Laurie proposes I think she sees that as the end of childhood for her. Along with that she never had an interest to get married and expresses that she doesn’t love him like that and why they wouldn’t make a good match. The argument doesn’t feel like unrequited love but more like two best friends having a disagreement. His scenes with Amy also highlight his path to adulthood and him learning about love in the process. 

AMY MARCH FINALLY GOT HER DUE! About damn time she did. Amy is my favorite character from this adaptation and is the one that surprised me the most. Lord FLORENCE PUGH needs to get a damn nomination because she was fucking amazing. For me she was able to convincingly play a young and adult Amy so well. Amy is a woman who knows what she wants in life and is very determined to get them and work within the current societal circumstances she is in. She is able to push her ego aside to get what she wants. She is so cheeky and energetic when she is younger but becomes more refined and tactful when older. Her burning Jo’s book did indicate her jealousy of her sister and the immaturity of her emotions that over time she has a grip on more as an adult. Her relationship with Aunt March indicates the idea and pressure she has to take care of the rest of her family. When she has her economic proposition speech, you really see how this is adding so much pressure on her, pressure that does influence her choices and behavior later on. 

But, my absolute favorite part about Amy’s development over the movie was her relationship with Laurie. I’m so happy Greta really took the time to flush out this relationship. I really love these two together. They are both a really great example of love that evolves over time. The little tid bits in the past with the small moments of Amy and her small crush over Laurie: THE FOOT MOLD, the way young Amy looks at Laurie, her drawing of him at the beach while flirting with Fred Vaughn, talking about how hot he is as a half Italian. All of that was perfection. Everything in Paris with these too was also sooo fantastic. I love it that prim and proper 20 year old lady Amy turns into a kid again when she sees Laurie and just jumping and hugging him, and then Laurie is all like you’re beautiful. when she invites him to the ball and he kisses Aunt March. Her being all like “its Laurie!” and looking back at him with that damn smile, the things that make my heart melt. With Amy and Laurie knowing each other for so long, Amy is able to be real with him and call him out throughout their time in Paris, mainly at the ball when his drunken fuckboi ass waltz in. Also The PAINTING ROOM, lawrd. Amy still shitting on Laurie for his behavior, their conversation about love, Amy’s speech on economic proposition, THE UNBUTTONING OF THE PAINTING SMOCK (that absolutely rivals the Pride & Prejudice 2005 hand touch in terms of sexual tension), Amy being able to be her true self around Laurie, Laurie telling Amy “You look beautiful...you are beautiful” (SWOOON). Then when they at the park: Amy scolding him for being lazy and not taking charge and being responsible, Amy drawing him again and showing him the older picture, Laurie telling Amy not to marry Fred “don’t marry him. Why? you know why.”, Amy realizing what hes implying and being all like Naw don’t you dare fam I’ve always been second to Jo “I won’t do it. Not when I have spent my entire life loving you.”. Laurie finally grew a pair and went off to London to make something of himself and Amy turning down Fred’s proposal realizing she wants to marry for love. Them reuniting in Paris after Beth dies, and being alike i wont let you travel alone even if you despise me, which Amy says she doesn’t despise him. And she states she aint marrying Fred and then rambles on and LAURIE KISSES HER GOD BLESS HE DO LOVE HER. and wow. Their love story is one of the most satisfying love story arcs I’ve seen in a long time. 

Any ways that’s my long ass Review of Little Women 2019.  GO watch it in theaters if you can. I will buy it and stream it when it comes out of theaters. This is the definitive adaptation for me and I think it will hold up well as an amazing period drama for years to come. 

[courseyoulovemeyoudontknowme]

Little Women (2019, Greta Gerwig)

06/08/2024

[wardensantoineandevka]

admittedly, I'm hoping that Meryl Concord coming into the narrative results in it coming to light that Weepe killed her brother and used his documentation of the Breach front at the cabaret to gain pretty much everything he has in his account

in other words, catch Weepe in the act of having stolen Valor

[hoarding-stories]

Every time the Narrators mention Meryl Concord I wonder how in the world she is going to play into all of this, because I feel like she will in a very wild-card sort of way

[claudia1829things]

“LITTLE WOMEN” (2019) Review

"LITTLE WOMEN" (2019) Review Ever since its release in movie theaters back December 2019, many moviegoers have been in rapture over "LITTLE WOMEN", filmmaker Greta Gerwig’s adaptation of Louisa May Alcott’s 1868 novel. The movie did acquire several acclaims, including Oscar nominations for two of the film’s actresses, Best Adapted Screenplay and an actual Oscar for costume design. I never got the chance to see it in theaters. I finally managed to see it on the HULU streaming service.

Anyone familiar with Alcott’s novel knows that it conveyed the tale of four sisters from a Massachusetts family and their development from adolescence and childhood to adulthood during the 1860s. The first half of Alcott’s tale covered the March sisters’ experiences during the U.S. Civil War. In fact, Alcott had based the March family on herself and her three sisters. Unlike previous adaptations, Gerwig incorporated a nonlinear timeline for this version of "LITTLE WOMEN". There were aspects of "LITTLE WOMEN" I truly admired. I did enjoy most of the performances. Or some of them. I thought Saoirse Ronan gave an excellent performance as the movie’s leading character Josephine "Jo" March. I thought she did a pretty good job of recapturing Jo’s extroverted personality and artistic ambitions. I do wish that Gerwig had allowed Jo to convey some of the less pleasant sides to her personality. Do I believe she deserved her Oscar nomination? Perhaps. Perhaps not. Although I thought she gave an excellent performance, I do not know if I would have considered her for an acting nomination. But I was more than impressed by Eliza Scanlen, who portrayed third sister Elizabeth "Beth" March. Although her story more or less played out in a series of vignettes that switched back and forth between the period in which she first caught the scarlet fever and her death a few years later; Scanlen did a superb job in recapturing the pathos and barely submerged emotions of Beth’s fate. It seemed a pity that she had failed to acquire any acting nominations. One last performance that really impressed me came from Meryl Streep. I have always regarded the temperamental Aunt March as a difficult role for any actress. And although I do not regard Streep’s interpretation of the aging matriarch as the best I have seen, I must admit that for me, she gave one of the best performances in the film. The movie also featured solid performances from the likes of Emma Watson, Laura Dern, Chris Cooper, Tracy Letts, James Norton, Louis Garrel, Bob Odenkirk and Florence Pugh, who also received an Oscar nomination for her performance as the youngest March sister, Amy. About the latter . . . I really admired her portrayal of the older Amy March. But I found her performance as the younger Amy rather exaggerated. And a part of me cannot help but wonder why she had received an Oscar nomination in the first place. Jacqueline Durran won the film's only Academy Award – namely for Best Costume Design. Did she deserve it? I honestly do not believe she did. I did enjoy some of her designs, especially for the older Amy March, as shown below:

I found the costumes worn by Pugh, Streep and many extras in the Paris sequences very attractive and an elegant expression of fashion from the late 1860s. Otherwise, I found Durran’s costumes for this film rather questionable. I realize both she and Gerwig were attempting to portray the March family as some kind of 19th century version of "hippies". But even non-traditional types like the Marches would not wear their clothing in such a slap-dash manner with petticoat hems hanging below the skirts, along with bloomers showing, cuts and styles in clothing that almost seemed anachronistic, and wearing no corsets. The latter would be the equivalent of not wearing bras underneath one’s clothing in the 20th and 21st centuries. Someone had pointed out that many of today’s costume designers try to put a "modern twist" to their work in period dramas in order to appeal to modern moviegoers and television viewers. I really wish they would not. The attempt tends to come off as lazy costuming in my eyes. And this tactic usually draws a good deal of criticism from fans of period dramas. So . . . how on earth did Durran win an Oscar for her work in the first place? I understand that "LITTLE WOMEN" was filmed in various locations around Massachusetts, including Boston and Cambridge. A part of me felt a sense of satisfaction by this news, considering the story’s setting of Concord, Massachusetts. I was surprised to learn that even the Paris sequences were filmed in Ipswich, Massachusetts. However, I must admit that I was not particularly blown away by Yorick Le Saux's cinematography. Then again, I can say that for just about every adaptation of Alcott’s novel I have ever seen. There were scenes from "LITTLE WOMEN" that I found memorable. Those include Jo March’s initial meeting with her publisher Mr. Dashwood; Amy March’s conflict with Theodore "Laurie" Laurence over his behavior in Paris; Jo’s rejection of Laurie’s marriage proposal, and especially the montage featuring Beth March’s bout with scarlet fever and its consequences. However . . . I had some problems with Gerwig’s screenplay. As I have stated earlier, "LITTLE WOMEN" is not the first movie I have seen that utilized the non-linear plot technique. I have seen at least two adaptations of Charlotte Brontë’s 1847 novel, "Jane Eyre". Two more famous examples of this plot device were the 1995 film, "12 MONKEYS" and two of Christopher Nolan’s movies – 2000’s "MEMENTO" and 2017’s "DUNKIRK". How can I put this? I feel that Greta Gerwig’s use of non-linear writing had failed the film’s narrative. It simply did not work for me. Except for the brilliant montage featuring Beth’s fate, it seemed as if Gerwig’s writing had scattered all over the place without any real semblance of following Alcott’s plot. If I had not been already familiar with Alcott’s story, I would have found “LITTLE WOMEN” totally confusing. I also feel that because of Gerwig’s use of the non-linear technique, she managed to inflict a little damage on Alcott’s plot. Despite the excellent scene featuring Laurie’s marriage proposal, I felt that Gerwig had robbed the development of his relationship with Jo. I also believe that Gerwig had diminished Jo’s relationship with Professor Bhaer. In the film, Bhaer had expressed harsh criticism of Jo’s earlier writing . . . without explaining his opinion. But he never added that Jo had the potential to write better stories than her usual melodrama crap. Why did Gerwig deleted this aspect of Professor Bhaer’s criticism? In order to make him look bad? To set up the idea of Jo ending the story as a single woman, because that was Alcott’s original intent? Did Gerwig consider the original version of this scene a detriment to feminist empowerment? I am also confused as to why Gerwig allowed the March family to push her into considering Professor Bhaer as a potential mate for Jo? This never happened in the novel. Jo had come to her decision to marry the professor on her own prerogative. She did not have to be pushed into this decision. Come to think of it, how exactly did Jo’s fate end in the movie? I am confused. Did she marry Bhaer after rushing to the train station in order to stop him from leaving for California? Or did she remain single? Whatever. And why on earth did she position Amy and Laurie’s first meeting after the former’s hand had been caned by her school teacher? Gerwig had transformed an incident that had taught Amy a lesson about self-respect and generated the Marches’ righteous anger against a schoolteacher’s abuse to one of comic relief and a cute rom.com meet for Amy and Laurie. What the hell? Someone had once complained that Gerwig may have assumed that everyone was familiar with Alcott’s story when she wrote this screenplay. And I agree with that person. Earlier I had questioned the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences’ decision to award the Best Costume Design statuette to Jacqueline Durran and nominate Florence Pugh for Best Supporting Actress. But I also have to question the organization’s decision to nominate Gerwig’s writing for Best Adapted Screenplay. I honestly believe she did not deserve it. There were aspects of "LITTLE WOMEN" that I found admirable. I was certainly impressed by some of the film’s dramatic moments. And there were a handful of performances from the likes of Saoirse Ronan, Eliza Scanlen and Meryl Streep that truly impressed me. But I cannot deny that the other members of the cast gave either first-rate or solid performances. In the end, I did not like the movie. I believe "LITTLE WOMEN" should have never been nominated for Best Picture. Greta Gerwig’s use of the nonlinear technique did not serve Louisa May Alcott’s plot very well. If I had not been familiar with the novel’s plot, I would have found this movie confusing. Aside from Ronan’s Academy Award nomination for Best Actress, I feel that the other nominations and Best Costume Design win were undeserved. And a part of me feels a sense of relief that Gerwig had never received a nomination for Best Director.