‘‘Little Women’’: Historical setting with up-to-date messages

Redaktion — Mon, 02 Mar 2020 15:17:29 +0000

REVIEW. A book, beloved by generations. Several film adaptations, the last one from late 2019. Four girls turning into women and taking you with them.

In 1868 and 1869 American author Louisa May Alcott published two separate volumes that are now collectively known as ‘‘Little Women’’. The story of four sisters has touched generations – and has therefore been adapted to TV as well as the big screen several times. Sure, there is the historical background, set in New England during the American Civil War. And yet, the real focus of the story is as relevant today as it was then: the different dreams and personalities the sisters – Meg (Emma Watson), Jo (Saoirse Ronan), Beth (Eliza Scanlen), and Amy (Florence Pugh) – have and the different ways their lives turn out.
As it has always been, it is exactly this focus that makes the film as endearing and heart-warming as it is.

‘‘Just because my dreams are different than yours, it doesn’t mean they’re unimportant’’, Meg tells her sister Jo on the day of her wedding. While being married and having children is the life Meg wants to lead, it is exactly the opposite of what Jo wants.
This example perfectly demonstrates why the film still resonates with modern audiences: it represents different things girls and women may wish for in life, without any judgement or creating a hierarchy. Meg’s dreams to marry and have children are illustrated as equal to Jo’s desire to move away and become a writer. And it is just the same with their personalities: While definitely not flawless, the sisters are loveably diverse in their characters – and yet, Amy’s lively and passionate personality is not shown as more or less valuable than Beth’s shy and quiet character. In a perfect world, this should not be a surprising quality; however, many films do not achieve this sort of non-judgemental representation – so ‘‘Little Women’’ should be applauded for it.

‘‘I suppose marriage has always been an economic proposition, even in fiction’’, Jo March, who is the closest thing the film has to a protagonist, huffs at some point. And indeed, ‘‘Little Women’’ does not lack a good love story (featuring the ever-charming potential crush Timothée Chalamet) – with a more or less unpredictable twist, at least for people who do not know the story.
At the beginning of the film, Jo’s publisher tells her that any female character she writes about should either be dead or married at the end of her stories. Towards the ending – ATTENTION, SPOILERS FOR AN ALMOST 150 YEARS OLD BOOK – this is the fate of all the sisters. Looking from a feminist perspective, does this make the story less valuable? Or does it even destroy the whole message? ‘‘Little Women’’ does not just implicitly comment on this but rather openly discusses the idea that a woman’s story is neither less significant nor less feminist because she ends up in a happy relationship with a man. Using the example of Jo March, ‘‘Little Woman’’ shows that a woman does not become less tough because she falls in love – and that she can indeed pursue both her dreams of writing as well as having a happy relationship. As ‘‘Little Women’’ does with all of its important messages, it also conveys this one with humour.

Friendship and love, art and travelling, pretty dresses, a nice scenery, heartfelt emotions – both sad and happy ones: ‘‘Little Women’’ has it all. Above all, there is always the idea that nothing is more important than family; and yet, not just family as a traditional term for the sisters and their parents but also everyone close to them. ‘‘Little Women’’ has the potential to make you smile through your tears and leave the cinema with a warm heart and a feeling of empowerment.

:Charleena Schweda

“The King”: Shakespeare in a new light?

Redaktion — Mon, 04 Nov 2019 16:43:49 +0000

Review. Netflix releases a new movie that covers the plot of three Shakespeare plays — with a new interpretation of the works?

„We few, we happy few, we band of brothers” is one of the most famous quotes from William Shakespeare’s history play “Henry V”. Over the span of three plays — “Henry IV, Part I“, “Henry IV, Part 2” and “Henry V” — the playwright fictionalised the life of the British King Henry V, predominantly showing him as a hero of war. Shakespeare paints an image of a king that influenced how people would look at the actual historical figure Henry V for centuries. However, today the plays are often interpreted in a more critical light, questioning the mainly glorifying depiction of war.

Netflix’ new movie “The King” is an US-American historical drama that builds up on Shakespeare’s plays, interpreting them in its own way. The film follows Henry V (Timothée Chalamet) – ‘Hal’ as he was called by Shakespeare, a name that is still used to describe the king. Although the movie focusses on Hal even more than the original plays do, it also keeps the importance of the entirely fictional character Sir Falstaff. The latter is played by Joel Edgerton, who also wrote the script and produced the movie.
Throughout the movie, the viewers follow Hal and Falstaff as well as some other characters during a change in monarchs and a war with France: more or less the typical story of a film on British history. Hal starts of as a young prince who prefers drinking over caring for his royal duties, but has to take over after the death of his father.
While the movie clearly uses Shakespeare’s plays instead of the historical background as its inspiration, calling Henry V Hal, including Falstaff and following the general storyline of the plays, it does not simply portray but rather adapt Shakespeare‘s plays in its own way.
The first and most obvious change is the language: while still sounding historically accurate, Shakespeare’s verses — and thereby also his famous quotes – are missing.
In addition, the character Falstaff is shown in a completely different way than in Shakespeare’s work. During Shakespeare’s plays he works as a comic relief and is always rather pitiful and ridiculous. He’s a reminder of the king’s lavious past, of a part of Hal’s personality he has to overcome once he becomes king. In the film he’s an actually useful and sympathetic companion, playing a vital role in the outcome of the war. Of course, changing the most comic character to a serious one gives the film a more serious tone than the plays. Shakespeare’s history plays are neither comedies nor tragedies: they walk the line, some leaning more to the one, some more to the other side. However, this movie mostly resembles a tragedy.
The ending creates a more pessimistic atmosphere than “Henry V” did, raising the question whether the war should have been avoided. It also gives one of the very few female characters of the movie some lines that leave the audience to ponder the action of the movie — and thereby of the plays. While the movie changed a lot of critical aspects from the plays and thereby addressed important topics like violence, it seems to ignore the lack of female characters. Instead it almost appears like the French princess Catherine was even less present than in the play.

Overall, the movie can definitely be recommended to fans of Shakespeare and English history. While the film is not perfect, it is a very interesting interpretation of some well known plays and shows great acting skills from most of the actors and actresses.

:Charleena Schweda

Timothée Chalamet | BSZ

‘‘Little Women’’: Historical setting with up-to-date messages

“The King”: Shakespeare in a new light?