Spoilers.
Hmm, I don’t think I’m a fan of the nonlinearity. I can’t completely pinpoint why I have a problem with it, but I nevertheless can tell you I do because the film works for me the best when it spends a significant amount of time in a single time and space. Like Amy and Laurie’s conversations in Europe. And when Amy burns Jo’s papers. And the final 30 minutes. The cutting between the past and present—it made me take way too long to get comfortable with this group of characters. I wasn’t buying them for a good portion of the film, and I’m not sure if it’s because of the frustratingly frequent temporal disruptions or if those were put in place as a distraction from the weaknesses in the characters’ depictions. Regardless, what I’m left with is a strange sense of inauthenticity. Letterboxd reviewer @tectactoe said it well, “None of them assimilate their 19th Century roles convincingly and the film is not reflexively anachronistic like e.g. Coppola’s Marie Antoinette; as a result, nothing feels genuine or truly lived-in.” Although, I don’t share that feeling entirely (by the way, the example I had in mind was The Favourite). Those aforementioned scenes, when we get to be with the characters for more than a fleeting moment, I’m invested. I’m learning about these people on screen. Amy is pretty interesting! With her inferiority complex. And of course so is Jo. But we only really get to see them at their highest and lowest points—other than that, it’s a lot of that intercutting, musical montage sort of thing that doesn’t help one bit with developing their arcs. It’s like they wanted the full 135 minutes to be the baptism scene from The Godfather, over and over again.
As I said, the last 30 minutes or so refocuses, and it’s very much for the better. It’s Jo’s ending, and it’s in the present. It mixes fiction with metafiction, but that’s perfectly fine as it is all geared toward something: Jo finding her footing in the aftermath of Beth’s death and Amy marrying Laurie. I find it compelling. Characters are communicating with each other; it’s not just a series of generic familial images, joyous dancing, caring for the sick child, etc etc. My critical perception of the film changed so radically during the last portion that I began to wonder if I had misjudged what I had seen earlier. During the bookbinding close-ups, I was like, “Is this thing actually amazing?” But that was a fleeting thought as I began to reflect on the film holistically.
There’s a flawed epic in here somewhere (although, still with some funky acting—huh, was that Saoirse’s Irish accent peeking out? And I don’t think Laura Dern is capable of playing someone as sincere as Marmee; she always seems like she’s hiding something, i.e. in Inland Empire, Marriage Story, The Master). Maybe Gillian Armstrong made what I’m imagining in ‘94; or the ones in ‘49 or ‘33; I don’t know. All I’m saying is that sometimes linearity is incredibly powerful. You’re watching people grow. It’s the miracle of life, baby!
Note: The film is gorgeous. Beautiful super 35 from cinematographer Le Saux (besides a couple noxious steadicam moves). That shot of Jo and Beth sitting on the beach’s horizon with the sand blowing toward the camera—insane. And of course, the art direction/costume design.
Note 2: Honestly I think Gerwig should have gotten a director nod instead of one for screenwriting.
Note 3: movie theater rant I will say, the particulars surrounding this screening might have affected my perception of the film. It was the least romantic of circumstances: a ramshackle, uncleaned Houston theater, a constant, loud hum from the speakers (like when you don’t properly ground a phono output), and (this is the oddest one) an old lady ringing a bell (or maybe rattling her keys) for almost the entirety of the film. If I didn’t feel like I needed to support these small(ish) films monetarily, I’d stay far away from non-independent theaters. No excuse for playing Uncut Gems at half the volume they played it at Lincoln Center. I guess they’re preempting old-dude complaints, but come on guys, NYFF is filled with boomers and they don’t skimp on the audio gain. Same thing with the second time I saw Jo Jo Rabbit; the audio was so low, I couldn’t laugh or else my companion would miss the dialogue completely. And since when have chain theaters stopped using their surround-sound speakers? The audio is only coming out of the front two these days, and I know all of these films have at least 5.1 mixes. Ridiculous. You’ve got the equipment already installed; use it ya dummies.
Note 4: Wow I used a lotta contractions in this review.