I almost didn't go see it because Meryl's overacting (which isn't that bad in this movie because she's just a commentary role) ... her overacting which almost ruins her is dwarfed by her disgusting political character. If she were a star of this thing it would have been ruined.
That said - good solid flick. I get the criticisms this critic has.
But it was VERY NICE to see a story about women, who were all good women, that was PRO-women, that didn't feel the need to crap on men.
Bitter feminism has done a great great injustice to young women. It's made them all want to be like their illusory oppressors, rather than to simply enjoy the freedom earned over the centuries by the sexes having more strongly adopted their roles and used that structure to build civilization until such time as the rigidity of those roles wasn't (isn't) as necessary (but the roles, as opposed to the full rigidity of the past) are always necessary for civilization)
I liked it. Wasn't a classic, but was a very good, if at times a little slow, human story - in this case about women human's, but without the full modern delusion.
So you are saying you DID see this latest? Or not? And you liked it?
I agree with your assessment! I can’t stomach much from Hwood, but this was tolerable. Streeps role is small—I couldn’t have taken it otherwise. Watching the movie together proved to be a very delightful outing for my two daughters and me on the day after Christmas.
You have to see the early Golden Age “Little Women” flicks.
Most connieseurs love the Katherine Hepburn, which is OK, but I adore the June Allyson. There are some licenses taken with the book (which yes I read, due to my love for the movies), but the gist is true and they are wonderfully entertaining (funny) as well as reasonably deep.
almost didn’t go see it because Meryl’s overacting
“””
That Meryl Streep. She’s such a phony!