Pugh has a strong future on screen. I was so impressed by how she was able to shift herself from young, insolent Amy to graceful and sophisticated Amy. She was totally deserving of that Oscar nomination.
I have read about how "male gaze" in film tends to position women as stationary objects to be observed, while men move around the scene as actively making things happen. I was really fascinated how this scene flipped the script: for most of it Laurie was lounging in either one part of the room or another, while Amy was standing, walking, moving things around. It positions her as a powerful presence in the room, refusing to sit still and wait for things to happen for/to her - even if economically that's the only option available to her.
Why not have both characters moving about.....sad that movies directed by woman seem to sell a woman-power message, which apparently can only be obtained through the belittling of men.
@@hellogoodbye4061 I don't think Laurie is positioned as a completely powerless or belittled character. But in this part of the plot he is sort of throwing away all his power and skills, not using them well, so it fits to show him as rather passive here, while Amy claims the very small amount of power she had - to marry a rich man.
@@hellogoodbye4061 No its just like... about her? So why would he be moving. The point being made is that usually even when the scene centres around the narratives of the female characters, its still often the men doing the moving and making things happen. This isn't a *new* spicy way of doing things, its just correct.
Hello Goodbye This is Amy’s scene-she should be the focus. That’s it. Maybe think a little harder before projecting your issues on the internet. Everyone can see through it and it’s just embarrassing.
Where I feel this version of Little Women stands apart from previous iterations is how seriously they take Amy and her artistic pursuits. Amy is just as ambitious as Jo and when she realizes she doesn’t have the talent to truly be great she’s upset and angry. We also completely understand where she’s coming from when she says she has to marry rich because women didn’t have many choices and opportunities back then in regards to making a living for the themselves and thus had to marry into wealth. Florence captures all of this so beautifully and fully recuperates a misunderstood character who has been neglected and overlooked in the past when she’s really been great all along.
It may stand apart but it also stands apart from the book for that reason. The book was about the 4 sisters living in a difficult period but it was mostly about Jo and her relationships with her sibs, parents and the men in her life. It was how Beth's death, Meg's marriage, Laurie's wanting to marry her, and all of the other episodes in the book affected her. I believe the author was writing about herself who was obviously a writer. Jo was the central character. The movie may be interesting and may bring out the state of women's rights, or lack thereof and may say something profound about art but that is not the book; it is artistic license. For one of my favorite books as a young girl, I prefer a movie that recreates the book. ☹️
I’m in the minority as I’ve always liked and understood Amy’s character. I think a lot of people misunderstand “Little Women.” It’s a semi-autobiography describing a poor society family’s “experimental upbringing” of their 4 daughters to create “modern independent women.” What most don’t understand is that the experiment is largely a failure. Meg as the oldest was inflated with a lot of “poverty pride.” She married a poor man and was widowed young with 3 children. Jo enjoyed a successful writing career and a happy marriage and family, but in real life the happy marriage/family and school never happened. Beth’s self-sacrifice led to illness, decline in health, and young death. Amy, the youngest, has the sense not to repeat her sisters’ mistakes. (In real life, Amy lives in Europe for much of her life, attempting to perfect her artistic talents, marries a much younger man in middle age, and they, like her other family, are largely supported by Jo.) My theory: Louisa May Alcott was an incredibly successful and lucky woman. Most authors, male or female, don’t earn enough to be self supporting. Alcott was talented and driven but she was also lucky. She also spent her life supporting her indigent sisters and their families because they married men who couldn’t or wouldn’t support them. I believe Alcott used Amy’s fictional story to show her readers that it’s NOT shameful or wrong to “marry well” if that’s what best suits the woman.
@@amasion2882 she was a spoiled brat who early on decided that she wanted to marry rich. She destroyed Jo' s manuscript when she didn't get her way. She sucked up to her rich aunt to get benefits tho she didn't like her aunt. And she got what she wanted: her aunt took her to Europe and she married Laurie. Not my favorite character.
Amy is just as ambitious but more practical than Jo. Jo would work herself into poverty trying to get published, because her pride and dreams won't allow her to quit. It is ironic to me that Amy is seen all along as flighty and vain, when she is (as an adult) actually the most sensible and logical of the march sisters. Florence pugh portrayal is 👌
in the book amy originally wants to marry rich but after a conversation with laurie she realises the negative sides of it and eventually rejects fred. and she was not in love with laurie then. i cant understand the hate towards amy. in the book she has flaws of course, but she is still a nice person, trying to be her better self as everyone else did in conclusion: i dont think louisa's intention was to say marrying rich is ok
Fun fact: Amy's speech about marriage wasn't in the initial script, but Meryl Streep suggested it be written in to emphasise to contemporary viewers how women were perceived to be powerless unless they were married, and even then, everything they had would automatically belong to their husbands.
Not only goddess in acting, Meryl Streep always improvise the movie script into a better level. I remember when she changed the famous line of her in Devils Wears Prada last scene. Instead of "everyone wants to be me" she said "everyone wants to be us" such a powerful ending to the movie.
@@gingerisevil02 AMY: "Well, I'm not a poet, I'm just a woman, and as a woman there is no way for me to make my own money, not enough to earn a living or to support my family and if I had my own money, which I don't, the money would belong to my husband the moment we got married, and if we had children they would be his, not mine, they would be his property. So don't sit there and tell me that marriage isn't an economic proposition, because it is, maybe not for you but is most certainly is for me!" TODAY'S MAN: Well, I'm not a poet, I'm just a man, and as a man there is no way for me to make my own money, as half of it would go to any wife who chooses to divorce me the moment we were no longer married, my pension, my home, gone, and if we had children, they would be hers, not mine, they would be her property, of which I would need to pay dearly for the privilege of seeing them on occasion, so don't sit there and tell me that marriage isn't an economic proposition, because it is, maybe not for women, but it is most certainly is for us!!" My, how times have changed.
Times have changed so much that there are women that out earn their husband and have to pay them after the marriage is over. Times have changed so much that a spouse can leave a bad marriage. Now there are states that actually uphold the vow 'for richer or for poorer.'
Hello Goodbye I don’t know in which country you are but in Canada, the agreement during a divorce to see the kids can easily be 50/50 and the person making significantly more money have to give money to the other one in a divorce, but a lot of persons are not married so the successful one give money to the other one for the kids. It’s NOTHING like it was in the past. You just take the worst examples and exaggerate. It’s not a “norm” like it was before and settlement in divorce can be quite fair. It was NEVER fair back then (or extremely rare) Kids are not the women’s property. My mother asked my father if the split can be 50/50 and he said no. He felt he won’t be a good father (it’s what he said to me) and preferred to see his kids a couple of times during a month. My stepfather can see his kids 50/50 of the time by example because he wanted to.
I can't believe Florence Pugh was in Little Women, Lady Macbeth and also Midsommar which are all so different and sophisticated and she slayed them ALL
Aside from the wonderful speech, it feels like Florence Pugh potrayed two characters in this movie, one is childish, bubbly and an optimistic and the other one is mature, sophisticated and a realist. You can really see Amy grow up into a woman who has accepted her fate. Edit- I just noticed that Laurie changed his sentence from " You look beautiful" to "You are beautiful". It was such nice detail to add, it shows that he actually listened to what she said and genuinely likes her not just for how she looks.
She has such a strong and commanding yet at the same time delicate and tender voice. Her confidence is also beyond her age. Reminds me a lot to her predecessors, fellow established, accomplished British actresses, Kate Winslet and Rachel Weisz. An acting force to be reckoned with.
Right? I hope people finally stop sleeping on her! In the last 4 years she played the main role in Lady Macbeth, portrayed wrestler Paige Knight in Fighting with my Family, played Amy March in Little Women, and played the main role in Midsommar. All of those movies and roles are so different yet she plays every one of those roles so convincing that you tend to forget she has ever played any other role. And she's only 24. I totally see her as an Oscar winner in the future
This is not strong and commanding. She is just complaining. A strong character would continue working until she achives greatness, not complain how everything is so "hard" for woman. Acting force to be reckoned with? If you say soooo. LOL
@@Galbex21 Did you not watch the whole movie? Did you not see how she transitioned from a childish girl to a mature lady? That is what the OP's trying to address with their comment, not just this scene. And her character isn't "complaining" here by the way, she's taking matters into her own hands and trying to make the best of the options that she has available to her, which is getting married to someone and settling with kids. Seriously, if you didn't like the movie, or the message, then don't come back here to watch it and ruin other people's experiences. Go watch a different movie, comment on other clips.
@@avanicole6700 Maybe you dont know good quality men. How do you think your water and light works? Who repairs all the infrastructure of your town and cities. Mostly men. I know its painfull to accept. No worries we will keep working even for complainers. Thas what men do. Work hard regardless if its appreciated, recognized or not. Not like this girl that wants easy recognizition just because.
When Laurie says "You look beautiful", he takes a beat, really truly seeing Amy for the first time and corrects himself, "You are beautiful" That gets me every time
The fact that she needed another's help to remove a garment speaks to that oppression, too. A man's clothes were designed for him to dress himself. Women's clothing required others.
I actually learned the other day that that is the reason why buttons are on the right on men's clothes and on the left on women's clothes. Back in the day, men of high status usually dressed themselves, while women were usually dressed by their maids, so the buttons were positioned to accommodate the person fasting them, and that is still how clothes are made today. I love little facts like these.
the SHOT at 2:06 is just so damn compelling i HAVE to talk about it: locked in on Pugh at center frame (the entire rest of this scene uses the standard Rule of 3rds) to give a sense of structure. its a dolly shot, gently moving from a medium shot to a close-up. she's moving around in the space, yes, but within the structure of her center-frame (the structure of society / the structure of the narrative) she will always locked in, trapped in, by that frame, by that very structure she is describing in her monologue. B R I L L I A N T.
Also, the strong female portrait she painted is both in the opposite way from her movement, and looking away as if neglecting or giving up on her. Meanwhile, she moves gradually into a more pastel light to occupy the left portion of the set where dull and purely decorative vases of flowers are. As she makes her very last statement, describing the binding she is determined to take upon, her close up includes a female statue resignedly taking up a mantle and looking inward, locking her into the frame.
And before anyone says we're overanalyzing it: this is a pivotal shot in the film. Gerwig has immense talent and is very much a perfectionist. This is far from unlikely to have been all calculated, nuanced filmmaking.
there's also symbolism of amy walking away from her artistic projects/pursuits (aka. her dreams) as they fade into the background, and walking towards laurie (aka. settling down and marrying)
wait. really? i just can't get over how much impact those two had over him🥺 jo was his childhood but amy his adulthood, jo introduced him into her family and amy gave him a family of his own
just looking at how mature their conversation is and how mutual respect there is in the way they pursue the argument you can understand why Amy is the best choice for Laurie
Well, this version of Amy does nicely for this version of Laurie. Amy here is practical and able to express in words and action to Laurie how she feels, which is sooo nice to watch. Then again, I know this is due to me being a modern audience and I appreciate this speech so much, because...FACTS during that time. In the original one, there's no such speech, there was this unspoken understanding between Amy and Laurie when Amy proclaimed that she always knew she couldn't marry a pauper. Laurie didn't react much to it because he's somewhat aware of women's standing (and the situation of the March sisters, with Beth sickly, parents living in impoverished gentility, Meg marrying poor and Jo seemingly is going to be a spinster then and pursuing writing which did not pay a great deal then--Amy knew that she would have to be the one taking care of the sisters financially if needed), but for the modern audience, that unspoken sentiment is not as clear so Meryl Streep's suggestion to add this is good.
The only thing that makes this movie a good adaptation is the fact it gives Amy attention. It doesn’t show every March sister is a lead, it completely ignores Beth.
@@mm4843 Well, not exactly completely ignoring her, but it does not give her death the same weight as the earlier movie. She also does not seem substantially weakened after her bout with scarlet fever so you do not quite grasp why she jhad to die.
The boyish, knuckle-head, shoving-punching relationship he had with Jo, vs. this mature, intelligent, tender, and sexual-tension relationship with Amy. I really appreciate this movie taking the time to show the difference between both, because it always felt creepy to me when Laurie chose to be with Amy- like a weird rebound where he pretends in his head that he got Jo. But in this movie it felt so right for them to be together.
Their relationship always felt off to me. In the book, previous movies, and the musical. We never really got to see them take the time to fall in love. But we do get to see it here. How their relationship matured and how he fell in love with her as a mature, artistic, and intelligent woman.
They are Just two kids who playfully teasing each Other... 📢Knock. knock.. This might me comes as a Little shock to You,But Guess what "A Boy and Girl Have a Platonic Friendship,and You Don't have to Feel Creepy about it"
I personally feel that this scene shows how men and even society in general tries to gaslight women for wanting better lives. As a society sometimes we tend to romanticize poverty, not understanding that being poor is hard. Poverty means no money which means no privilege and therefore means no access to even the most basic necessities of life. But when a woman realizes this and says she wants to marry well she is judged, and if she marries poor she is also judged. I dont think that there is anything wrong with marrying for money. Although I love Laurie, I felt in this scene that he was essentially calling her a gold digger while being unsympathetic to her plight as the youngest of the sisters and also oblivious to his privilege as a rich young man. Its easy to judge people but if you dont have a solution to their predicament then you should be quiet and I'm glad Amy told him off on that.
Thats not the point. It seems like you only read to respond, please try and read to understand what's being said . It's easy to talk about right vs.wrong but like I said above "It's easy to judge people but if you don't have a solution to their problem then you should BE QUIET ".
@@bt9833 I completely disagree. Marriage is more than just an economic transaction. I do judge people who are nothing more than GOLD DIGGERS. Of course nobody is perfect. But just because we shouldn't judge people doesn't mean we can judge actions. I don't know why people do what they do and struggle with what they struggle with, but if a person commits a wrongful act I'm going to call it a wrongful act. And you know full well that if man is marrying a woman for wealth he will be judged as well ..if not more so. I think the social stigma of a lazy man living off his rich wife carries more shame not less.
@Jael S Ummm, love is apart of marriage in any culture or time period. There are obligations and duties obviously and there may be other reasons to marry IN ADDITION to love. The romance aspect is what varies.
@@jaimearviso4642 I think what they mean is that marriage in those times isn't necessarily constituted by love rather by an "economic proposition." A wealthy family would never let their children marry someone lower than their status. They would never 'gain' something from it. Sons would probably still have control over whom they want to marry, but daughters, not so much. Different rules apply to people living in poverty such as the March family. While Jo blindingly follows her passion of becoming a writer to earn money for the family, Amy goes for the most practical and easiest way: to marry rich because that is the only way she can support her family, her only choice. Her talents are never enough to fully support her unlike Jo. Love usually comes later. She either learns to love her husband or she learns to tolerate him.
"You look beautiful." He says this shyly and can't look directly at her. I think even one day before this scene, he would have had no problem looking at her directly and saying how pretty she is. But now he's noticed her as a woman.
One of the things I love most about this scene is how there is such a dichotomy of mental states at the beginning, that shifts over the course of the scene, and afterwards; Laurie is lounging about, not taking things seriously, not taking anything she says seriously, 'I believe the poets would disagree' he says with a smirk, jokingly. 'Well, I'm not a poet, I'm just a woman' Amy replies, with a straight face, no laughter in her eyes at all. She lays out her argument, her position, in plain English to Laurie, smirking down at her from on high, both physically, and societally, and as she speaks to him he seems to shrink, and she grows as she moves forward in the frame, so that the next time we see him, they are together in the shot, and he is smaller, behind her in the scene. She also almost immediately turns from him, dismissing him when we here the carriage arrive. Laurie has been taken down a peg or two from position of wealth and arrogance. It is after this scene that we begin to have some serious growth in Laurie's character, until he is finally deserving of her by the end of the film.
Interesting how the suggestion of "having power over who we love" is advice Laurie ends up taking - it makes the end result a lot more satisfying to know he didn't necessarily "settle" but rather took a different path. Maybe in some sense this gives more meaning to his union with Amy, in that it wasn't just some love that "happened" but rather a deeper, understood connection built upon their own decisions, a path carved by themselves.
I love how for the first time we get to see Amy's real intelligence, she knows she is pretty enough to be an "ornament to society" if she wants to be but her understanding of a woman's ability in this time and place is truly fantastic.
i honestly got surprised for amy to be that matured i mean in the movie when she was younger she's like the most childish one the one that u can't take so seriously so this is a great preach her character is amazing she did an amazing job
I think a lot the spoil kids they are aware that they spoiled they just learn how to go after what they want. She is like Jo the only difference Jo had to grow up more faster the Amy did because she was the second oldest while Amy being the baby wasn't expected to have as many responsibility until her Aunt told her that she was the one that had to take care of her family. She carried that because even tho she was spoiled she loved her family even tho she didn't always get her way. And even tho she wouldn't cut off hair like Jo to make money she would marry rich to support her family.
I would like to think that Amy continued to have role models in Marmee, Aunt March, and her older sisters while she grew up. In a chapter that the various films never show, Amy was being unfairly outmaneuvered by a rich girl while they were both setting up their art exhibits for a local art faire. The girl was taking away exhibit decorations that Amy rightly had access to. Instead of making a fuss, Amy worked with what she had. Thanks to Jo, Laurie, and other friends they made Amy's booth a success. Then Amy told them to also buy some pieces from the rich girl, whose booth was actually not doing well. Amy earned the girl's respect instead of making her an enemy. Jo had even complemented Amy on how civil she was during the whole situation. It did not go unnoticed and contributed to the later decision to invite Amy to go on the trip to Europe.
The life of a women in Victorian era was really claustrophobic, just imagine living like that, always be dependent on your husband, for everything. I don't even know the word for how to describe this situation
IVE JUST REALIZED Amy leaving the studio is symbolic of her giving up her artistic dreams for marriage. She hears Fred's carriage so she decides to go, BUT LAURIE IS THE ONE TO UNBUTTON HER APRON FOR HER.
I feel the same about my writing. But if you think about, there is no one great novel or painting or song. People are moved and inspired by different things.
Winter Bliss well, you won’t create anything at all. Perfectionism is counterproductive. You’ve got to learn, try and fail and fail again before you can be the best. If you’re not up to that, if you don’t create just because you know you are not the best at the moment, then you’ll be stalled for a long time and eventually you won’t do a thing.
The statement is powerful, amazing, and ultimately foolish. Imagine if the plumber refused to repair your taps cos he wasn't the best plumber around. Imagine your local farmers refused to grow crops because the adjacent farm produced better. Imagine a cop refused to protect you cos he wasn't the best cop there is. Perfectionism is often a harmful desire. Especially in art, where perfectionism is subjective. Van Gogh painted in his dismal room, without anybody recognising his art as great, cos he wanted to. And we are thankful today for that.
@@teti9087 Same! And the funny thing is that most of people say: "I would love if Florence won but i like Laura too, she is a great actress". They never say that she deserved to win for this role. Only that she is a good actress. I have to laugh! She didn't deserve. Btw she was better in Little Women than Marriage Story but whatever.
I really like this scene a lot. It’s not too heavy handed about how things were, it just puts them out there as a way to explain that Amy intends to make the best of her situation. I think a lot of us can relate to making the best of not being exceptional, even if her circumstances were harder than most.
@@Galbex21 no need to worry, my love life is okay enough for me to know what tension is. And yeah I watch many movies (blame it on Covid), enough movies to know that tension in period drama is extremely subtle and that's what I like about it, sue me. I also study communication and took a few cinema and cinema interpretation classes so hmu whenever you will feel like you are competent enough to talk about cinema byeee
Okay but LISTEN- Having Amy's meaningful, confident, stern but powerful speech with her natural passion running underneath it- And then the next moment, having her back and bare neck to him as he undoes the buttons and ribbon... he fell for her maturity, passion, and confidence- and then to have a tender, vulnerable soft moment. This is the true definition of sexual chemistry.
*"Well, I'm not a poet, I'm just a woman, and, as a woman, I've no way to make my own money - not enough to make a living, or to support my family...and if I had my own money - which I don't - that money would belong to my husband, the moment we got married, and if we had children, they'd be his - not mine, they would be his property. So, don't sit there, and tell me that marriage isn't an economic proposition, because it is. It may not be for you, but it most certainly is for me."* This monologue though.
the lighting narrative of amy starting her speech in moderate shadow in the room and then walking into the window's natural light IS SO *CHEFS KISS* it can symbolize how laurie finally sees amy, it can symbolize how amy has grown into herself, it can symbolize the ferocity and with what truth she speaks, it is SO BEAUTIFUL, THE LIGHTING DESIGN IS SO BEAUTIFUL, THIS SCENE IS SO BEAUTIFUL
2:06 the portrait of Mary Wollstonecraft behind her adds so much strength to her speech. She wrote A Vindication of the Rights of Woman: With Strictures on Political and Moral Subjects and talked about the economic differences because of the gender hierarchy of these times. Genius touch.
Its so sad how the characters in the movie, primarily Jo, dont realise how much Amy has had to sacrifixe for the family as well. She never persued Laurie because he had that thing with Jo, so instead she gave up on love and had to "become an ornament to society" and marry a man who was rich is monetary items but not love. She was kept in the dark over Beth's illness despite her constant asking and Jo gets mad at her for " always finding a way to escape the troubles of life". After aunt March saw Jo as a lost cause, that burden went onto Amy. Despite always feeling like she was in her sister's shadow and being left out in everything, she still loves her family and tries her best for them
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this before but something I always find interesting and great about this scene is the context as to why Amy views her skills as "middling talent." This film takes place at the turn of the century when impressionism, what was considered genius (Claude Monet, Edgar Degas, Paul Cezanne, etc.), was just starting to pop off. Amy is traditionally an excellent painter but her skillset just was "going out of fashion" for the times.
It may have been the era when the Impressionists' work was taking off, but this is not "turn of the century." Amy was 12 when the book opens, during the American Civil War. She's 20 here, so this is 1872 at the latest, quite possibly a year or so earlier (since both Mr. March and John Brooke were sent home from the war for illness/injury, not because of the war's end in 1865.)
As an artist when I read little women Amy was my least favorite because artistic perspective didn’t connect with me. This speech totally revives her by showing her vulnerability and the truth behind her seeming vain at times. This whole scene from beginning to end was so very real. As a woman artist coming from a culture where marrying well is important, I can say I’ve had this conversation a few times before. From the feeling of not being good enough to make a career/support the family, the guilt of being of middling talent that you waste good opportunities, being too self critical that you don’t see potential in yourself, being told since young as a woman this career is temporary and to focus on being a caretaker for the family rather than a financial provider. This scene is such a timeless conversation. Absolutely love Amy❤️
Amy knows she has to marry rich. Meg can’t, Jo won’t, and Beth is too young. She takes it upon herself to be realistic and provide for her family. She can’t make money off her art, because while it’s good, it’s not amazing enough to sell and she knows this. So she takes the opportunities she has and chooses to marry rich instead. It hurts her to give up her art, but right now, she believes it’s her only option. Also, she’s frustrated with Laurie because he has opportunities handed right to him, and he chooses to lounge around instead.
Florence did probably the best job as Amy like she made her such a more likeable and nicer character and florence really did an amazing job with her and Greta the director i think definitely made amy and laurie a much much more likeable couple and that’s why this version of little women is really the best in my opinion
This scene haunts me. Its so beautiful and honest. It made me understand Amy as a character so much deeper. I really empathize with her. I've watched this scene so many times, and it still gets me.
I understand where Amy’s coming from in this scene, but imagine if every artist who didn’t consider themselves The Best just gave up and stopped creating? We would have tons of crappy art from people who thought they were incredible and hardly any from people who were amazing but not confident enough. Not only that-I read somewhere once that you should never let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Always keep creating.
Abigail Alcott on whom Amy March was based was complete opposite of Amy as far as career went. She pushed the boundaries of American women pursing art and did some fantastic critically acclaimed work. If she hadn't died of child birth complications she might have been as famous as her sister Louisa or perhaps even more.
actually no, most artists nowadays are perfectionist in the sense they feel lack and in comparing themselves with other artists. Thus why they push themselves repeatedly to learn new techniques, new angles, to achieve the standard they look up to.... a standard they repeatedly pull higher and higher each time. the right attitude however, is to not be satisfied but find comfort in the lack of satisfaction. it's motivation
you can feel the frustration her voice at 0:22 to 0:27 . she's one of those actors who when you watch them it doesn't even seem like they're acting she's so talented.
Everyone says Amy is childish but only she is grown! She understands the unfortunate time she lives in and twists it in her favor. It’s not wrong that she tries to provide for her family in the best way she can.
This scene is classic. Florence Pugh made her character with so much character and personality. She’s filled with so much ambition and humbleness. I Stan anyone with that.
I find Jo so immature and annoying, and for some reason I've always liked Amy. I'm glad that in this version she finally get the recognition she deserves.
I think why I love this version is the way they explore Amy's character. She grows into a smart sophisticated young women, they show her (in my opinion) to be Laurie's true match. She is ambitious, but makes the hard and wise choice to not pursue it as she is unlikely to be successful. We all know Amy wanted to marry a man with money but this adaption (I feel) explains why.
I loved Florence’s performance, but Laura Dern was so compelling in Marriage Story, that you hated her as though she had personally affronted you. Florence was a very close second though, and shouldn’t be overlooked. Both are doing such great work. Just my opinion though
i'm super split. like on the one hand, florence was absolutely perfect and exquisite and versatile. on the other, dern was absolutely perfect and exquisite and contributed genius ideas to her role as a co creator with the director (i was obsessed with her performance and listened to everything behind the scenes when it came out)....it's like do you prefer flawless execution and dazzling range or flawless execution and strategy (what actors are talking about when they talk about "craft")...idk i think it's partly that and also, the oscars love rewarding long neglected actors who have paid their dues etc and rarely give it to the brilliant first time nominee....anyway lol i'm writing too much but there you go lol
1:49 i’ve always known I would marry rich. Why should I be ashamed of that? Well, I believe we have some power over who we love. It isn’t something that just happens to a person. Well, i’m not a poet. I’m just a woman. And as a woman, there’s no way for me to make my own money. Not enough to earn a living or to support my family, and if I had my own money, which I don’t, that money would belong to my husband the moment we got married. And if we had children, they would be his, not mine. They would be his property, so don’t sit there and tell me that marriage isn’t an economic proposition, because it is. It may not be for you, but it most certainly is for me.
The smile she had the day she first met Laurie & the way she acted when she met laurie again in Prais, both were so naive and daydreamer type. But as the movie progresses, you realise how she has shed off all the naive immaturity & become this Bold & Realistic Woman❤️
Pugh delivered her performance brilliantly in this movie. She has so much potential. She’s gone from Little Women to Black Widow, she’s an outstanding young actress.
I like that they spend more time fleshing out Amy's character. She grows so much from childhood to adulthood and it really shows here. She is poised and graceful and so smart. Truly one of my favorite interpretations of Amy.
Amy is always given so much hate, partly because since Louisa May Alcott is so much like Jo, it's like the story is written from Joe's point of view. Jo is more of a tomboy, and finds the rules of society annoying, where women have to dress pretty and cannot work. She constantly rebels against the norms set for women during that time, especially those who are poor. While Amy is her polar opposite. She is more feminine and poised, and while she doesn't necessarily like following the norms, she comes to terms with them and the fact that it's very hard for a poor woman to thrive in society, and patronage and the help of people richer than her does not trouble her when it's well meant, because she has to make do with what she has. Jo, although she loves Amy, does not agree with her point of view, and finds elements of fitting in in society, such as making calls and visiting other people, annoying. Hence, many readers who are like Jo, sympathize with her, and find Amy's behavior annoying as well. While Amy was no doubt kind of bratty as a child, (like the burning of Jo's book. I would have been furious if I was Jo), she grew to be much more mature. She often treated bad situations and rude people with grace and politeness. In Jo's own words: “You’ve a deal more principle and generosity and nobleness of character than I ever gave you credit for, Amy. You’ve behaved sweetly, and I respect you with all my heart." Jo was always seen as the strong, independent sister of the family, while Amy was seen as the baby, and was ignored a great deal by the family. When in reality, Amy was more selfless than she is given credit for. She believed it was her duty to become a respected member of society, and marry well, so that she could support her family and help them financially. She was willing to marry Fred Vaughn all though she didn't love him. Although it wasn't what she wanted, she took it as her responsibility. Just because Amy was different from Jo doesn't mean she was a bad person. Although I loved the Little Women movie, I like the relationship between Amy and Jo in the books more. Jo didn't like Amy's wanting to become, at that time what was considered an ideal woman. Respectful, feminine and polite. And Amy didn't like Jo's tomboyish and carefree behavior. Yet, they still admired and respected each other very much. Jo admired how virtuous Amy was and how she had a way of making people like her, while Amy admired Jo's independence and how strong she was. In the movie, when Jo finds out that Amy is going to Europe instead of her, both she and her mother are visibly disappointed and do not look the least bit happy for Amy. Instead, it seems as though Jo is being condescending and entitled and being visibly surprised that Amy was chosen to go over her, while their mother also seems visibly disappointed, and it looks as though she is showing outright favoritism. However in the books, the sisters' mother is extremely happy for Amy, and although she feels bad for Jo, she tells her not to behave sad in front of Amy and put a damper on her happiness. Jo herself never shows Amy that she's disappointed, because although she really wanted to go to Europe, she loves Amy and is happy for her. Their relationship is further strengthened after they realize that life is too precious to spend it fighting with your own sister. I've seen so many people fight over Jo vs. Amy, and who's better. But in the end they both are great characters although they have flaws. But I am a little biased and still prefer Amy over the other sisters.
I am so impressed by Florence and her ability to give such an incredibly fierce and restrained speech at the same time. She doesn't have to scream to get her point across, but believe you me, she definitely gets it across.
I love how this is one of the few films that openly reflect the role of women in society in these times. Many movies do a great job of showing it, but you rarely see/hear someone simply openly reflecting it as it is
@@myytchanneldinakoha8498 Right? The 1994 version did a great job, from the conversation of the girls with their mothers to the overheard gossip at the ball, of getting across the sentiment of this scene without being so heavy-handed and on the nose.
People hate Amy but she sacrificed to save her family. As the youngest all the pressure was on her, to save her family from poverty, though it shouldn’t have been. Beth got sick, Jo followed her dreams, and the other sister married for love. Amy didn’t have the leisure to follow her dreams or “love” she made the sacrifice instead.
See when I clicked on this video I was expecting for most of the comments to be gushing over how hot Timothee is because, let's be honest, whenever Tim is in anything that usually ends up being the focus of the discussion. And I'm not saying that's necessarily bad, there's always a time and a place for that stuff, but it just makes me so tremendously happy that this comment section is actually appreciating Florence Pugh's performance, because she absolutely kills in this movie - especially in this scene. She deserves all the praise and more, so glad to hear she got an Oscar nomination.
I have never been encouraged to marry for love. Growing up in my former country was hard, limited resources, lack of birth control, limited space, limited access to information, etc. I was told numerous times by women that either not to get married or marry someone who takes care of you so, I was conditioned starting very early in my life to have limitations and be pretty much a doormat. I wasn’t encouraged to follow my dreams if I had any, fight for what I believe in if I believed in something and be my own person. That made me a rebellious and depressed woman at the same time for pretty much my entire life. And unfortunately this mindset is still taught and applied in many countries especially in the East. Although there’s truth to the fact that finances play an important role in our lives women should not be raised as accessories. At least in my case, I learned very fast to do things behind people’s backs thus creating some form of personal power over my own destiny.
Me neither. I wanted Laurie to end up with Jo. However, funny thing is that this Amy IS also in the book. There is actually a line in the book when she realizes that it is up to her to marry well to take care of the family because: " Meg didn't, Jo won't, Beth can't yet, so I shall, and make everything okay all round". But I so wanted to be like Jo that "of course" I wanted her character to get the boy. Now I am older and I realize that the author really did want for Jo to be a spinster. And this movie did such a good job of portraying Amy and Laurie together that it felt natural for them to be the end game. Furthermore, it shifted our perspective of Amy because when we first meet her she is intelligent witty grown up woman (so this is now our baseline), and not a jealous little girl who burns Jo's manuscript.
That's because Jo is the protagonist and we tend to side with those even if the other character has a point. Amy is basically what Jo COULD have been if she wasn't as talented as she was at her craft and was more ruthlessly pragmatic and realistic about the world.
Pugh has a strong future on screen. I was so impressed by how she was able to shift herself from young, insolent Amy to graceful and sophisticated Amy. She was totally deserving of that Oscar nomination.
Should’ve won it if you ask me
She should've won. Never Laura.
DL 540 did you not see the Kirsten Dunst version of Amy in the 1994 one? Hers was spectacular too
everywhere at the same time I haven’t yet, but I’m sure Dunst did great (she usually does)!
She was great in Midsommar too.
I have read about how "male gaze" in film tends to position women as stationary objects to be observed, while men move around the scene as actively making things happen. I was really fascinated how this scene flipped the script: for most of it Laurie was lounging in either one part of the room or another, while Amy was standing, walking, moving things around. It positions her as a powerful presence in the room, refusing to sit still and wait for things to happen for/to her - even if economically that's the only option available to her.
Why not have both characters moving about.....sad that movies directed by woman seem to sell a woman-power message, which apparently can only be obtained through the belittling of men.
Because most of the movies are kinda belittling woman?? And to give those people who don't get that a lesson?
@@hellogoodbye4061 I don't think Laurie is positioned as a completely powerless or belittled character. But in this part of the plot he is sort of throwing away all his power and skills, not using them well, so it fits to show him as rather passive here, while Amy claims the very small amount of power she had - to marry a rich man.
@@hellogoodbye4061 No its just like... about her? So why would he be moving. The point being made is that usually even when the scene centres around the narratives of the female characters, its still often the men doing the moving and making things happen. This isn't a *new* spicy way of doing things, its just correct.
Hello Goodbye This is Amy’s scene-she should be the focus. That’s it.
Maybe think a little harder before projecting your issues on the internet. Everyone can see through it and it’s just embarrassing.
Where I feel this version of Little Women stands apart from previous iterations is how seriously they take Amy and her artistic pursuits. Amy is just as ambitious as Jo and when she realizes she doesn’t have the talent to truly be great she’s upset and angry. We also completely understand where she’s coming from when she says she has to marry rich because women didn’t have many choices and opportunities back then in regards to making a living for the themselves and thus had to marry into wealth. Florence captures all of this so beautifully and fully recuperates a misunderstood character who has been neglected and overlooked in the past when she’s really been great all along.
It may stand apart but it also stands apart from the book for that reason. The book was about the 4 sisters living in a difficult period but it was mostly about Jo and her relationships with her sibs, parents and the men in her life. It was how Beth's death, Meg's marriage, Laurie's wanting to marry her, and all of the other episodes in the book affected her. I believe the author was writing about herself who was obviously a writer. Jo was the central character. The movie may be interesting and may bring out the state of women's rights, or lack thereof and may say something profound about art but that is not the book; it is artistic license. For one of my favorite books as a young girl, I prefer a movie that recreates the book. ☹️
I’m in the minority as I’ve always liked and understood Amy’s character. I think a lot of people misunderstand “Little Women.” It’s a semi-autobiography describing a poor society family’s “experimental upbringing” of their 4 daughters to create “modern independent women.”
What most don’t understand is that the experiment is largely a failure. Meg as the oldest was inflated with a lot of “poverty pride.” She married a poor man and was widowed young with 3 children. Jo enjoyed a successful writing career and a happy marriage and family, but in real life the happy marriage/family and school never happened. Beth’s self-sacrifice led to illness, decline in health, and young death. Amy, the youngest, has the sense not to repeat her sisters’ mistakes. (In real life, Amy lives in Europe for much of her life, attempting to perfect her artistic talents, marries a much younger man in middle age, and they, like her other family, are largely supported by Jo.)
My theory: Louisa May Alcott was an incredibly successful and lucky woman. Most authors, male or female, don’t earn enough to be self supporting. Alcott was talented and driven but she was also lucky. She also spent her life supporting her indigent sisters and their families because they married men who couldn’t or wouldn’t support them. I believe Alcott used Amy’s fictional story to show her readers that it’s NOT shameful or wrong to “marry well” if that’s what best suits the woman.
@@amasion2882 she was a spoiled brat who early on decided that she wanted to marry rich. She destroyed Jo' s manuscript when she didn't get her way. She sucked up to her rich aunt to get benefits tho she didn't like her aunt. And she got what she wanted: her aunt took her to Europe and she married Laurie. Not my favorite character.
Amy is just as ambitious but more practical than Jo. Jo would work herself into poverty trying to get published, because her pride and dreams won't allow her to quit. It is ironic to me that Amy is seen all along as flighty and vain, when she is (as an adult) actually the most sensible and logical of the march sisters. Florence pugh portrayal is 👌
in the book amy originally wants to marry rich but after a conversation with laurie she realises the negative sides of it and eventually rejects fred. and she was not in love with laurie then. i cant understand the hate towards amy. in the book she has flaws of course, but she is still a nice person, trying to be her better self as everyone else did
in conclusion: i dont think louisa's intention was to say marrying rich is ok
Fun fact: Amy's speech about marriage wasn't in the initial script, but Meryl Streep suggested it be written in to emphasise to contemporary viewers how women were perceived to be powerless unless they were married, and even then, everything they had would automatically belong to their husbands.
Not only goddess in acting, Meryl Streep always improvise the movie script into a better level. I remember when she changed the famous line of her in Devils Wears Prada last scene.
Instead of "everyone wants to be me" she said "everyone wants to be us" such a powerful ending to the movie.
Greta Gerwig may as well have wrote it on a napkin before they shot the scene because it was so last minute
Abhra SRoy I remember Greta Getwig said it herself in an interview on The View
It was always in the script, Maryl Streep just added a line
good thing they did that cos I would of totally forgotten women were oppressed
"I'm not a poet. I'm just a woman." That's powerful, and how the times have changed.
lowri ia we still have a long, long way to go
@@gingerisevil02 AMY: "Well, I'm not a poet, I'm just a woman, and as a woman there is no way for me to make my own money, not enough to earn a living or to support my family and if I had my own money, which I don't, the money would belong to my husband the moment we got married, and if we had children they would be his, not mine, they would be his property. So don't sit there and tell me that marriage isn't an economic proposition, because it is, maybe not for you but is most certainly is for me!"
TODAY'S MAN: Well, I'm not a poet, I'm just a man, and as a man there is no way for me to make my own money, as half of it would go to any wife who chooses to divorce me the moment we were no longer married, my pension, my home, gone, and if we had children, they would be hers, not mine, they would be her property, of which I would need to pay dearly for the privilege of seeing them on occasion, so don't sit there and tell me that marriage isn't an economic proposition, because it is, maybe not for women, but it is most certainly is for us!!"
My, how times have changed.
Times have changed so much that there are women that out earn their husband and have to pay them after the marriage is over. Times have changed so much that a spouse can leave a bad marriage. Now there are states that actually uphold the vow 'for richer or for poorer.'
@Om Patel No, if the woman out earns her husband she has to pay him.
Hello Goodbye I don’t know in which country you are but in Canada, the agreement during a divorce to see the kids can easily be 50/50 and the person making significantly more money have to give money to the other one in a divorce, but a lot of persons are not married so the successful one give money to the other one for the kids. It’s NOTHING like it was in the past. You just take the worst examples and exaggerate. It’s not a “norm” like it was before and settlement in divorce can be quite fair. It was NEVER fair back then (or extremely rare) Kids are not the women’s property. My mother asked my father if the split can be 50/50 and he said no. He felt he won’t be a good father (it’s what he said to me) and preferred to see his kids a couple of times during a month. My stepfather can see his kids 50/50 of the time by example because he wanted to.
Though Jo is the main character in this movie, this Amy blew me away!
I can't believe Florence Pugh was in Little Women, Lady Macbeth and also Midsommar which are all so different and sophisticated and she slayed them ALL
91clarie she was also in that wrestling movie which was waaaaay different
@@claireleeann1689 yeah Fighting with my Family, right? That was also awesome
Yep. I didn’t like Jo this time around, but really loved Amy.
I would watch a spinoff just about Amy and Laurie ❤️❤️
Aside from the wonderful speech, it feels like Florence Pugh potrayed two characters in this movie, one is childish, bubbly and an optimistic and the other one is mature, sophisticated and a realist. You can really see Amy grow up into a woman who has accepted her fate.
Edit- I just noticed that Laurie changed his sentence from " You look beautiful" to "You are beautiful". It was such nice detail to add, it shows that he actually listened to what she said and genuinely likes her not just for how she looks.
i really like it too
She has such a strong and commanding yet at the same time delicate and tender voice. Her confidence is also beyond her age. Reminds me a lot to her predecessors, fellow established, accomplished British actresses, Kate Winslet and Rachel Weisz. An acting force to be reckoned with.
Right? I hope people finally stop sleeping on her! In the last 4 years she played the main role in Lady Macbeth, portrayed wrestler Paige Knight in Fighting with my Family, played Amy March in Little Women, and played the main role in Midsommar. All of those movies and roles are so different yet she plays every one of those roles so convincing that you tend to forget she has ever played any other role. And she's only 24. I totally see her as an Oscar winner in the future
@@91clarie ^
@@91clarie - amen to that...she has definitely captivated me with her presence.
This is not strong and commanding. She is just complaining. A strong character would continue working until she achives greatness, not complain how everything is so "hard" for woman. Acting force to be reckoned with? If you say soooo. LOL
@@Galbex21 Did you not watch the whole movie? Did you not see how she transitioned from a childish girl to a mature lady? That is what the OP's trying to address with their comment, not just this scene. And her character isn't "complaining" here by the way, she's taking matters into her own hands and trying to make the best of the options that she has available to her, which is getting married to someone and settling with kids. Seriously, if you didn't like the movie, or the message, then don't come back here to watch it and ruin other people's experiences. Go watch a different movie, comment on other clips.
"I want to be great or nothing"
20/20 boss vibes
@@Galbex21 idk if your comment was meant to be funny, but you saying that men always work hard really made me laugh
🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢vain and weak vibes
Speaks more of vanity to my mind. Makes it seem like she'll abandon something she enjoys, art, unless she's an internationally acclaimed genius.
@@avanicole6700 Maybe you dont know good quality men. How do you think your water and light works? Who repairs all the infrastructure of your town and cities. Mostly men. I know its painfull to accept. No worries we will keep working even for complainers. Thas what men do. Work hard regardless if its appreciated, recognized or not. Not like this girl that wants easy recognizition just because.
@@wanefelicia8779 🙄🙄
When Laurie says "You look beautiful", he takes a beat, really truly seeing Amy for the first time and corrects himself, "You are beautiful"
That gets me every time
If you look closely, he takes off the ring Jo gave him when he says “you are beautiful”
@@juheejain2046 omg
Oh my god, yes! Never noticed!
@@juheejain2046he’s just playing with it
The fact that she needed another's help to remove a garment speaks to that oppression, too. A man's clothes were designed for him to dress himself. Women's clothing required others.
I actually learned the other day that that is the reason why buttons are on the right on men's clothes and on the left on women's clothes. Back in the day, men of high status usually dressed themselves, while women were usually dressed by their maids, so the buttons were positioned to accommodate the person fasting them, and that is still how clothes are made today. I love little facts like these.
I think that's a bit of a reach. It's not speaking towards oppression, but more towards status.
Never thought about that. Thank you for sharing that.
@@idek7438 It’s still that way, but women had two hands back then as they do now and could still dress themselves.
@@_trixieburg26 Overall I wouldn't view it as oppression, but in this scene I think it is supposed to be symbolic.
the SHOT at 2:06 is just so damn compelling i HAVE to talk about it:
locked in on Pugh at center frame (the entire rest of this scene uses the standard Rule of 3rds) to give a sense of structure. its a dolly shot, gently moving from a medium shot to a close-up. she's moving around in the space, yes, but within the structure of her center-frame (the structure of society / the structure of the narrative) she will always locked in, trapped in, by that frame, by that very structure she is describing in her monologue.
B R I L L I A N T.
I can tell you’re a filmmaker
Also, the strong female portrait she painted is both in the opposite way from her movement, and looking away as if neglecting or giving up on her. Meanwhile, she moves gradually into a more pastel light to occupy the left portion of the set where dull and purely decorative vases of flowers are. As she makes her very last statement, describing the binding she is determined to take upon, her close up includes a female statue resignedly taking up a mantle and looking inward, locking her into the frame.
And before anyone says we're overanalyzing it: this is a pivotal shot in the film. Gerwig has immense talent and is very much a perfectionist. This is far from unlikely to have been all calculated, nuanced filmmaking.
there's also symbolism of amy walking away from her artistic projects/pursuits (aka. her dreams) as they fade into the background, and walking towards laurie (aka. settling down and marrying)
@@ItsMaddieHere true!
and red is Jo's color, blue is Amy's, and in this scene as Laurie is moving on from one towards the other, HE WEARS ALL PURPLE
wait. really? i just can't get over how much impact those two had over him🥺 jo was his childhood but amy his adulthood, jo introduced him into her family and amy gave him a family of his own
Where is the blue you mentioned Laurie was moving towards tho??
@@SG-pu3rx i think op meant moving on from Jo to Amy
just looking at how mature their conversation is and how mutual respect there is in the way they pursue the argument you can understand why Amy is the best choice for Laurie
Compared to Friedrich Nietzsche and Jo
@@dannyvista6541 this comment is so funny
Well, this version of Amy does nicely for this version of Laurie. Amy here is practical and able to express in words and action to Laurie how she feels, which is sooo nice to watch. Then again, I know this is due to me being a modern audience and I appreciate this speech so much, because...FACTS during that time. In the original one, there's no such speech, there was this unspoken understanding between Amy and Laurie when Amy proclaimed that she always knew she couldn't marry a pauper. Laurie didn't react much to it because he's somewhat aware of women's standing (and the situation of the March sisters, with Beth sickly, parents living in impoverished gentility, Meg marrying poor and Jo seemingly is going to be a spinster then and pursuing writing which did not pay a great deal then--Amy knew that she would have to be the one taking care of the sisters financially if needed), but for the modern audience, that unspoken sentiment is not as clear so Meryl Streep's suggestion to add this is good.
I love that this film recognizes that every March sister is a lead. This is my favorite adaptation.
The only thing that makes this movie a good adaptation is the fact it gives Amy attention.
It doesn’t show every March sister is a lead, it completely ignores Beth.
@@mm4843 thanks lol
@@mm4843 Well, not exactly completely ignoring her, but it does not give her death the same weight as the earlier movie. She also does not seem substantially weakened after her bout with scarlet fever so you do not quite grasp why she jhad to die.
The boyish, knuckle-head, shoving-punching relationship he had with Jo, vs. this mature, intelligent, tender, and sexual-tension relationship with Amy. I really appreciate this movie taking the time to show the difference between both, because it always felt creepy to me when Laurie chose to be with Amy- like a weird rebound where he pretends in his head that he got Jo. But in this movie it felt so right for them to be together.
Their relationship always felt off to me. In the book, previous movies, and the musical. We never really got to see them take the time to fall in love. But we do get to see it here. How their relationship matured and how he fell in love with her as a mature, artistic, and intelligent woman.
@@juliamiller5120 yess
They are Just two kids who playfully teasing each Other... 📢Knock. knock.. This might me comes as a Little shock to You,But Guess what "A Boy and Girl Have a Platonic Friendship,and You Don't have to Feel Creepy about it"
@@matchesmalone5284 I think they mean creepy regarding Amy being Jo's little sister
I personally feel that this scene shows how men and even society in general tries to gaslight women for wanting better lives. As a society sometimes we tend to romanticize poverty, not understanding that being poor is hard. Poverty means no money which means no privilege and therefore means no access to even the most basic necessities of life. But when a woman realizes this and says she wants to marry well she is judged, and if she marries poor she is also judged. I dont think that there is anything wrong with marrying for money. Although I love Laurie, I felt in this scene that he was essentially calling her a gold digger while being unsympathetic to her plight as the youngest of the sisters and also oblivious to his privilege as a rich young man. Its easy to judge people but if you dont have a solution to their predicament then you should be quiet and I'm glad Amy told him off on that.
There is nothing wrong with marrying for money as that is responsible. However, if you don't actually love the person then that is a problem.
Thats not the point. It seems like you only read to respond, please try and read to understand what's being said . It's easy to talk about right vs.wrong but like I said above "It's easy to judge people but if you don't have a solution to their problem then you should BE QUIET ".
@@bt9833
I completely disagree. Marriage is more than just an economic transaction. I do judge people who are nothing more than GOLD DIGGERS.
Of course nobody is perfect. But just because we shouldn't judge people doesn't mean we can judge actions. I don't know why people do what they do and struggle with what they struggle with, but if a person commits a wrongful act I'm going to call it a wrongful act.
And you know full well that if man is marrying a woman for wealth he will be judged as well ..if not more so. I think the social stigma of a lazy man living off his rich wife carries more shame not less.
@Jael S Ummm, love is apart of marriage in any culture or time period. There are obligations and duties obviously and there may be other reasons to marry IN ADDITION to love. The romance aspect is what varies.
@@jaimearviso4642 I think what they mean is that marriage in those times isn't necessarily constituted by love rather by an "economic proposition." A wealthy family would never let their children marry someone lower than their status. They would never 'gain' something from it. Sons would probably still have control over whom they want to marry, but daughters, not so much. Different rules apply to people living in poverty such as the March family. While Jo blindingly follows her passion of becoming a writer to earn money for the family, Amy goes for the most practical and easiest way: to marry rich because that is the only way she can support her family, her only choice. Her talents are never enough to fully support her unlike Jo. Love usually comes later. She either learns to love her husband or she learns to tolerate him.
"You look beautiful.... you are beautiful."
April 7th needs to hurry and get here so I can watch this multiple times while eating ice cream.
And what’s happening that day?
I would like to know as well please
@@sionjang9167 That's when it comes out on dvd!
It’s available for purchase on Amazon video already!!!
@@kathleen4032 I know but I collect physical copies of films
"You look beautiful." He says this shyly and can't look directly at her. I think even one day before this scene, he would have had no problem looking at her directly and saying how pretty she is. But now he's noticed her as a woman.
Omg yes ! When they first saw each other and he called her beautiful too, such different scenes, thank you for opening my eyes to this
If Laura Dern wasn’t nominated, Florence Pugh would’ve definitely won the Oscar
Cody Higinbotham agreed
I wish.
I still think Florence was robbed. With or without Laura she should've won.
I don't think so, even though I really like her
Scarlett Asian Tree Johansson would've taken it if Laura wasn't there
One of the things I love most about this scene is how there is such a dichotomy of mental states at the beginning, that shifts over the course of the scene, and afterwards; Laurie is lounging about, not taking things seriously, not taking anything she says seriously, 'I believe the poets would disagree' he says with a smirk, jokingly. 'Well, I'm not a poet, I'm just a woman' Amy replies, with a straight face, no laughter in her eyes at all. She lays out her argument, her position, in plain English to Laurie, smirking down at her from on high, both physically, and societally, and as she speaks to him he seems to shrink, and she grows as she moves forward in the frame, so that the next time we see him, they are together in the shot, and he is smaller, behind her in the scene. She also almost immediately turns from him, dismissing him when we here the carriage arrive. Laurie has been taken down a peg or two from position of wealth and arrogance. It is after this scene that we begin to have some serious growth in Laurie's character, until he is finally deserving of her by the end of the film.
Are you a film or English major?
love this analysis
Interesting how the suggestion of "having power over who we love" is advice Laurie ends up taking - it makes the end result a lot more satisfying to know he didn't necessarily "settle" but rather took a different path. Maybe in some sense this gives more meaning to his union with Amy, in that it wasn't just some love that "happened" but rather a deeper, understood connection built upon their own decisions, a path carved by themselves.
But the same can't be said for Amy though. So this line is ironic too
I love how for the first time we get to see Amy's real intelligence, she knows she is pretty enough to be an "ornament to society" if she wants to be but her understanding of a woman's ability in this time and place is truly fantastic.
i honestly got surprised for amy to be that matured i mean in the movie when she was younger she's like the most childish one the one that u can't take so seriously so this is a great preach her character is amazing she did an amazing job
I think a lot the spoil kids they are aware that they spoiled they just learn how to go after what they want. She is like Jo the only difference Jo had to grow up more faster the Amy did because she was the second oldest while Amy being the baby wasn't expected to have as many responsibility until her Aunt told her that she was the one that had to take care of her family. She carried that because even tho she was spoiled she loved her family even tho she didn't always get her way. And even tho she wouldn't cut off hair like Jo to make money she would marry rich to support her family.
I would like to think that Amy continued to have role models in Marmee, Aunt March, and her older sisters while she grew up. In a chapter that the various films never show, Amy was being unfairly outmaneuvered by a rich girl while they were both setting up their art exhibits for a local art faire. The girl was taking away exhibit decorations that Amy rightly had access to. Instead of making a fuss, Amy worked with what she had. Thanks to Jo, Laurie, and other friends they made Amy's booth a success. Then Amy told them to also buy some pieces from the rich girl, whose booth was actually not doing well. Amy earned the girl's respect instead of making her an enemy. Jo had even complemented Amy on how civil she was during the whole situation. It did not go unnoticed and contributed to the later decision to invite Amy to go on the trip to Europe.
The life of a women in Victorian era was really claustrophobic, just imagine living like that, always be dependent on your husband, for everything. I don't even know the word for how to describe this situation
If they were good husbands it was probably much more stress free. If they were horrible husbands it was an endless nightmare.
If you were poor you were outside and working all the time, even doing "men" things
Victorian era? Thats literally the average women in the middle east
Hell
sadly its not victorian era alone because its still the case for so many women in modern patriarchal socities.
IVE JUST REALIZED
Amy leaving the studio is symbolic of her giving up her artistic dreams for marriage. She hears Fred's carriage so she decides to go, BUT LAURIE IS THE ONE TO UNBUTTON HER APRON FOR HER.
This scene-this whole movie-is a masterclass in acting
Hmm, ok.
she reminds me so much of kate winslet
especially with a partner who looks like a child, just as baby-faced Leonardo in Titanic
Laurence H. Collin yup, same voice
Yes I can see that
I don’t see any resemblance
I think soirsa Ronan looks like Kate more
“I want to be great or nothing” 🥺 so true
like, what’s even the point? i want the best out of whatever I want to create, or I won’t create at all.
I feel the same about my writing. But if you think about, there is no one great novel or painting or song. People are moved and inspired by different things.
Being "best" is subjective though
Winter Bliss well, you won’t create anything at all. Perfectionism is counterproductive. You’ve got to learn, try and fail and fail again before you can be the best. If you’re not up to that, if you don’t create just because you know you are not the best at the moment, then you’ll be stalled for a long time and eventually you won’t do a thing.
The statement is powerful, amazing, and ultimately foolish. Imagine if the plumber refused to repair your taps cos he wasn't the best plumber around. Imagine your local farmers refused to grow crops because the adjacent farm produced better. Imagine a cop refused to protect you cos he wasn't the best cop there is.
Perfectionism is often a harmful desire. Especially in art, where perfectionism is subjective. Van Gogh painted in his dismal room, without anybody recognising his art as great, cos he wanted to. And we are thankful today for that.
That’s not how that works, and causes stagnation
With or without Laura, Florence was the one who should've won. I said what i said.
*SAY IT LOUDER!!!!!!*
I can’t believe she won for that small part on Marriage Story..
@@teti9087 Same! And the funny thing is that most of people say: "I would love if Florence won but i like Laura too, she is a great actress".
They never say that she deserved to win for this role. Only that she is a good actress. I have to laugh!
She didn't deserve. Btw she was better in Little Women than Marriage Story but whatever.
Florence should have won for Midsommar
@@teti9087 A good performance shines, no matter how long or small the part is...
I really like this scene a lot. It’s not too heavy handed about how things were, it just puts them out there as a way to explain that Amy intends to make the best of her situation. I think a lot of us can relate to making the best of not being exceptional, even if her circumstances were harder than most.
The underlying sexual tension when he unbuttons her apron byeeee
Was it tension? She didn't seem concerned with it at all. Tension is between two people, that was just from Laurie.
What tension? Like 0.000001% even less. You need to stop watching movies, they are not reality.
You took the words "sexual tension" and ran with them.
@@GloriamMonarchia You never watched period drama movies and it shows
@@Galbex21 no need to worry, my love life is okay enough for me to know what tension is. And yeah I watch many movies (blame it on Covid), enough movies to know that tension in period drama is extremely subtle and that's what I like about it, sue me. I also study communication and took a few cinema and cinema interpretation classes so hmu whenever you will feel like you are competent enough to talk about cinema byeee
Okay but LISTEN- Having Amy's meaningful, confident, stern but powerful speech with her natural passion running underneath it- And then the next moment, having her back and bare neck to him as he undoes the buttons and ribbon... he fell for her maturity, passion, and confidence- and then to have a tender, vulnerable soft moment. This is the true definition of sexual chemistry.
IKR!!!
I mean if I'm Laurie I would definitely fall in love with Amy too.
Me tooo
i'm like a girl laurie and by the end i fell for amy
The tension is so thick when he's taking off her apron. Phew.
5 words
*should have won the Oscar*
Kesh Kesh did you not see Kirsten dunst’s version of Amy in the 1994 one? Hers was spectacular too
everywhere at the same time I didn’t discredit her version I’m sure she was great !
I lovedddddddddddd Laura performance so bad but I can't stop thinking that Florence BLEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW THIS PERFORMANCE AWAY.
John Yamawaki I know Florence was incredible
*"Well, I'm not a poet, I'm just a woman, and, as a woman, I've no way to make my own money - not enough to make a living, or to support my family...and if I had my own money - which I don't - that money would belong to my husband, the moment we got married, and if we had children, they'd be his - not mine, they would be his property. So, don't sit there, and tell me that marriage isn't an economic proposition, because it is. It may not be for you, but it most certainly is for me."*
This monologue though.
Totally agree with her 🤩💯
^^
it’s always “wyd” not “you look beautiful, you are beautiful” :(
Amy had the biggest character development in this movie by far
Everyone says thank you Meryl Streep for writing Amy‘s speech about marriage
the lighting narrative of amy starting her speech in moderate shadow in the room and then walking into the window's natural light IS SO *CHEFS KISS* it can symbolize how laurie finally sees amy, it can symbolize how amy has grown into herself, it can symbolize the ferocity and with what truth she speaks, it is SO BEAUTIFUL, THE LIGHTING DESIGN IS SO BEAUTIFUL, THIS SCENE IS SO BEAUTIFUL
2:06 the portrait of Mary Wollstonecraft behind her adds so much strength to her speech. She wrote A Vindication of the Rights of Woman: With Strictures on Political and Moral Subjects and talked about the economic differences because of the gender hierarchy of these times. Genius touch.
"You're not engaged.. I hope" 🥺🥺
Its so sad how the characters in the movie, primarily Jo, dont realise how much Amy has had to sacrifixe for the family as well. She never persued Laurie because he had that thing with Jo, so instead she gave up on love and had to "become an ornament to society" and marry a man who was rich is monetary items but not love. She was kept in the dark over Beth's illness despite her constant asking and Jo gets mad at her for " always finding a way to escape the troubles of life". After aunt March saw Jo as a lost cause, that burden went onto Amy. Despite always feeling like she was in her sister's shadow and being left out in everything, she still loves her family and tries her best for them
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this before but something I always find interesting and great about this scene is the context as to why Amy views her skills as "middling talent." This film takes place at the turn of the century when impressionism, what was considered genius (Claude Monet, Edgar Degas, Paul Cezanne, etc.), was just starting to pop off. Amy is traditionally an excellent painter but her skillset just was "going out of fashion" for the times.
It may have been the era when the Impressionists' work was taking off, but this is not "turn of the century." Amy was 12 when the book opens, during the American Civil War. She's 20 here, so this is 1872 at the latest, quite possibly a year or so earlier (since both Mr. March and John Brooke were sent home from the war for illness/injury, not because of the war's end in 1865.)
@@marysueeasteregg My apologies for the incorrect phrase but yes, this is definitely the impressionistic period that I was referring to.
@@Joroumii Your point was valid and interesting. : ) I wasn't trying to invalidate it, being vague on when Impressionism came to prominence.
As an artist when I read little women Amy was my least favorite because artistic perspective didn’t connect with me. This speech totally revives her by showing her vulnerability and the truth behind her seeming vain at times. This whole scene from beginning to end was so very real. As a woman artist coming from a culture where marrying well is important, I can say I’ve had this conversation a few times before. From the feeling of not being good enough to make a career/support the family, the guilt of being of middling talent that you waste good opportunities, being too self critical that you don’t see potential in yourself, being told since young as a woman this career is temporary and to focus on being a caretaker for the family rather than a financial provider. This scene is such a timeless conversation. Absolutely love Amy❤️
When they write the script so good that Amy outshines the main charector Jo.
The way he says “i said his name” makes me laugh more than i should
Amy knows she has to marry rich. Meg can’t, Jo won’t, and Beth is too young. She takes it upon herself to be realistic and provide for her family. She can’t make money off her art, because while it’s good, it’s not amazing enough to sell and she knows this. So she takes the opportunities she has and chooses to marry rich instead. It hurts her to give up her art, but right now, she believes it’s her only option.
Also, she’s frustrated with Laurie because he has opportunities handed right to him, and he chooses to lounge around instead.
Florence did probably the best job as Amy like she made her such a more likeable and nicer character and florence really did an amazing job with her and Greta the director i think definitely made amy and laurie a much much more likeable couple and that’s why this version of little women is really the best in my opinion
I think that part when Laurie unbutton Amy's apron was the most sensual scene in the movie, im blushing everytime i watch it
And you know this is when he realizes he is in love with her. He has a completely different attitude before her speech and after
This scene haunts me. Its so beautiful and honest. It made me understand Amy as a character so much deeper. I really empathize with her. I've watched this scene so many times, and it still gets me.
This is my Roman Empire
To think she was handed the speech just minutes before the scene, Florence is sick a good actress.
I was amazed at Pugh's acting and then I scrolled down to the comments and apparently I'm not alone lol
"I'm a failure."
Relatable....
Don't forget that 'That's quite a statement to make at 20'
2019 was Florence Pugh year
A Girl nah
I understand where Amy’s coming from in this scene, but imagine if every artist who didn’t consider themselves The Best just gave up and stopped creating? We would have tons of crappy art from people who thought they were incredible and hardly any from people who were amazing but not confident enough. Not only that-I read somewhere once that you should never let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Always keep creating.
Yes, but Amy is a perfectionist
Abigail Alcott on whom Amy March was based was complete opposite of Amy as far as career went. She pushed the boundaries of American women pursing art and did some fantastic critically acclaimed work. If she hadn't died of child birth complications she might have been as famous as her sister Louisa or perhaps even more.
actually no, most artists nowadays are perfectionist in the sense they feel lack and in comparing themselves with other artists. Thus why they push themselves repeatedly to learn new techniques, new angles, to achieve the standard they look up to.... a standard they repeatedly pull higher and higher each time. the right attitude however, is to not be satisfied but find comfort in the lack of satisfaction. it's motivation
Amy always was practical. She knew she was mediocre.
Nobody liked Van Gogh's paintings until well after his death. Imagine if he just stopped painting because he didn't think they were perfect.
I cannot get over how large Amy's dresses are
because she's a midget lol
I love how she looks in them 😍😍
@@Jennifahh i dont think she is 💀
you can feel the frustration her voice at 0:22 to 0:27 . she's one of those actors who when you watch them it doesn't even seem like they're acting she's so talented.
Everyone says Amy is childish but only she is grown! She understands the unfortunate time she lives in and twists it in her favor. It’s not wrong that she tries to provide for her family in the best way she can.
This scene is classic. Florence Pugh made her character with so much character and personality. She’s filled with so much ambition and humbleness. I Stan anyone with that.
I find Jo so immature and annoying, and for some reason I've always liked Amy. I'm glad that in this version she finally get the recognition she deserves.
jo is so self righteous and preachy i can't help but roll my eyes whenever i read ab her lol!
Well, for me all the things you said for Jo fits Amy way better.
@@SG-pu3rx Maybe you don’t have siblings or you are the oldest lol
I think why I love this version is the way they explore Amy's character. She grows into a smart sophisticated young women, they show her (in my opinion) to be Laurie's true match. She is ambitious, but makes the hard and wise choice to not pursue it as she is unlikely to be successful. We all know Amy wanted to marry a man with money but this adaption (I feel) explains why.
As much as I hate them getting married, Paul had no other way to gain control of the Imperium.
Bruh this isn't Arrakis, it's Terra
I really don't mind them getting married. In fact, I rather support it.
I really love how the whole conversations proceeds..... The script writer did an amazing job. It never felt rushed
Love Laura Dern, but Florence should have won the Oscar
Angela Baptist nah, not really
I loved Florence’s performance, but Laura Dern was so compelling in Marriage Story, that you hated her as though she had personally affronted you. Florence was a very close second though, and shouldn’t be overlooked. Both are doing such great work. Just my opinion though
Did u even watch marriage story? Dern definitely deserved that Oscar
I loved marriage story and I love laura Dern...but if u have watched jojo rabbit then Scarlett Johansson was also amazing as a supporting role.
i'm super split. like on the one hand, florence was absolutely perfect and exquisite and versatile. on the other, dern was absolutely perfect and exquisite and contributed genius ideas to her role as a co creator with the director (i was obsessed with her performance and listened to everything behind the scenes when it came out)....it's like do you prefer flawless execution and dazzling range or flawless execution and strategy (what actors are talking about when they talk about "craft")...idk i think it's partly that and also, the oscars love rewarding long neglected actors who have paid their dues etc and rarely give it to the brilliant first time nominee....anyway lol i'm writing too much but there you go lol
the acting, the script, the TENSION!!!!!!! just perfect.
This is a great message and great acting but is anyone else loving Amy’s dress???
SO MUCH ITS SO DELICIOUS
1:49
i’ve always known I would marry rich. Why should I be ashamed of that? Well, I believe we have some power over who we love. It isn’t something that just happens to a person. Well, i’m not a poet. I’m just a woman. And as a woman, there’s no way for me to make my own money. Not enough to earn a living or to support my family, and if I had my own money, which I don’t, that money would belong to my husband the moment we got married. And if we had children, they would be his, not mine. They would be his property, so don’t sit there and tell me that marriage isn’t an economic proposition, because it is. It may not be for you, but it most certainly is for me.
I love her character it's too relatable
You can even see him slip Jo’s ring off his finger after their talk in the art studio. Such amazing details!
This scene sealed her Oscar nomination. I love Pugh’s low husky voice.
Amy “How do I look, do I look alright?”
Laurie “You look beautiful. . . You are beautiful.”
The male species should take note of this interaction.
Laurie's facial expression though, when Amy said "Most likely, yes"
The smile she had the day she first met Laurie & the way she acted when she met laurie again in Prais, both were so naive and daydreamer type.
But as the movie progresses, you realise how she has shed off all the naive immaturity & become this Bold & Realistic Woman❤️
Pugh delivered her performance brilliantly in this movie. She has so much potential. She’s gone from Little Women to Black Widow, she’s an outstanding young actress.
Anyone could’ve done those parts.
I like that they spend more time fleshing out Amy's character. She grows so much from childhood to adulthood and it really shows here. She is poised and graceful and so smart. Truly one of my favorite interpretations of Amy.
"You look beautiful... you are beautiful"*smiles*
Well that warmed my heart and turned me on
This is an example of a great performance. She didn't need to scream or make big expression and yet her acting was perfect 🙌🏼🙌🏼
This was Amy’s movie and I love it
she literally stole the spotlight and I'm here for it
The longing in the music when the 'unbuttoning' happens is just... Iconic. Like two souls finally seeing eye to eye. Masterpiece.
Amy is always given so much hate, partly because since Louisa May Alcott is so much like Jo, it's like the story is written from Joe's point of view.
Jo is more of a tomboy, and finds the rules of society annoying, where women have to dress pretty and cannot work. She constantly rebels against the norms set for women during that time, especially those who are poor. While Amy is her polar opposite. She is more feminine and poised, and while she doesn't necessarily like following the norms, she comes to terms with them and the fact that it's very hard for a poor woman to thrive in society, and patronage and the help of people richer than her does not trouble her when it's well meant, because she has to make do with what she has. Jo, although she loves Amy, does not agree with her point of view, and finds elements of fitting in in society, such as making calls and visiting other people, annoying. Hence, many readers who are like Jo, sympathize with her, and find Amy's behavior annoying as well. While Amy was no doubt kind of bratty as a child, (like the burning of Jo's book. I would have been furious if I was Jo), she grew to be much more mature. She often treated bad situations and rude people with grace and politeness. In Jo's own words: “You’ve a deal more principle and generosity and nobleness of character than I ever gave you credit for, Amy. You’ve behaved sweetly, and I respect you with all my heart." Jo was always seen as the strong, independent sister of the family, while Amy was seen as the baby, and was ignored a great deal by the family. When in reality, Amy was more selfless than she is given credit for. She believed it was her duty to become a respected member of society, and marry well, so that she could support her family and help them financially. She was willing to marry Fred Vaughn all though she didn't love him. Although it wasn't what she wanted, she took it as her responsibility. Just because Amy was different from Jo doesn't mean she was a bad person. Although I loved the Little Women movie, I like the relationship between Amy and Jo in the books more. Jo didn't like Amy's wanting to become, at that time what was considered an ideal woman. Respectful, feminine and polite. And Amy didn't like Jo's tomboyish and carefree behavior. Yet, they still admired and respected each other very much. Jo admired how virtuous Amy was and how she had a way of making people like her, while Amy admired Jo's independence and how strong she was. In the movie, when Jo finds out that Amy is going to Europe instead of her, both she and her mother are visibly disappointed and do not look the least bit happy for Amy. Instead, it seems as though Jo is being condescending and entitled and being visibly surprised that Amy was chosen to go over her, while their mother also seems visibly disappointed, and it looks as though she is showing outright favoritism. However in the books, the sisters' mother is extremely happy for Amy, and although she feels bad for Jo, she tells her not to behave sad in front of Amy and put a damper on her happiness. Jo herself never shows Amy that she's disappointed, because although she really wanted to go to Europe, she loves Amy and is happy for her. Their relationship is further strengthened after they realize that life is too precious to spend it fighting with your own sister. I've seen so many people fight over Jo vs. Amy, and who's better. But in the end they both are great characters although they have flaws. But I am a little biased and still prefer Amy over the other sisters.
“You look beautiful. You are beautiful.”
This was the stand out scene of the film, for sure
"You look beautiful.... You are beautiful" love that line
I am so impressed by Florence and her ability to give such an incredibly fierce and restrained speech at the same time. She doesn't have to scream to get her point across, but believe you me, she definitely gets it across.
I love how this is one of the few films that openly reflect the role of women in society in these times. Many movies do a great job of showing it, but you rarely see/hear someone simply openly reflecting it as it is
Maybe because good movies know better to show than tell (or worse preach).
@@myytchanneldinakoha8498 Right? The 1994 version did a great job, from the conversation of the girls with their mothers to the overheard gossip at the ball, of getting across the sentiment of this scene without being so heavy-handed and on the nose.
People hate Amy but she sacrificed to save her family. As the youngest all the pressure was on her, to save her family from poverty, though it shouldn’t have been. Beth got sick, Jo followed her dreams, and the other sister married for love. Amy didn’t have the leisure to follow her dreams or “love” she made the sacrifice instead.
Totally should've won the Oscar over Laura tbh. Timothee and Florence were both amazing actors in this film.
I sAiD hIs NaME
See when I clicked on this video I was expecting for most of the comments to be gushing over how hot Timothee is because, let's be honest, whenever Tim is in anything that usually ends up being the focus of the discussion. And I'm not saying that's necessarily bad, there's always a time and a place for that stuff, but it just makes me so tremendously happy that this comment section is actually appreciating Florence Pugh's performance, because she absolutely kills in this movie - especially in this scene. She deserves all the praise and more, so glad to hear she got an Oscar nomination.
I have never been encouraged to marry for love. Growing up in my former country was hard, limited resources, lack of birth control, limited space, limited access to information, etc. I was told numerous times by women that either not to get married or marry someone who takes care of you so, I was conditioned starting very early in my life to have limitations and be pretty much a doormat. I wasn’t encouraged to follow my dreams if I had any, fight for what I believe in if I believed in something and be my own person. That made me a rebellious and depressed woman at the same time for pretty much my entire life. And unfortunately this mindset is still taught and applied in many countries especially in the East. Although there’s truth to the fact that finances play an important role in our lives women should not be raised as accessories. At least in my case, I learned very fast to do things behind people’s backs thus creating some form of personal power over my own destiny.
Why does Timothée's "I said his name" make me smile so much??
Never liked amy in the novel but this perspective shown in the movie realy made me love amy character too , this actress is so talented.
Me neither. I wanted Laurie to end up with Jo. However, funny thing is that this Amy IS also in the book. There is actually a line in the book when she realizes that it is up to her to marry well to take care of the family because: " Meg didn't, Jo won't, Beth can't yet, so I shall, and make everything okay all round". But I so wanted to be like Jo that "of course" I wanted her character to get the boy. Now I am older and I realize that the author really did want for Jo to be a spinster. And this movie did such a good job of portraying Amy and Laurie together that it felt natural for them to be the end game. Furthermore, it shifted our perspective of Amy because when we first meet her she is intelligent witty grown up woman (so this is now our baseline), and not a jealous little girl who burns Jo's manuscript.
That's because Jo is the protagonist and we tend to side with those even if the other character has a point. Amy is basically what Jo COULD have been if she wasn't as talented as she was at her craft and was more ruthlessly pragmatic and realistic about the world.
That moment when you read something misogynistic from an old story and come here to re realize how powerful this scene was
not a SINGLE day goes by where i don't think about this scene
Timothee is such a versatile and talented actor. Not one of the best of his generation but one of the best of all time.
I can relate to Amy in a way, she always thought she’s a failure and always comparing herself to her sister which I always find myself doing.