fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #4608 ]

⌈ Secret Post #4608 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

[Lucifer]

__________________________________________________

03.

[Emma Watson as Meg March in Little Women]

__________________________________________________

04.

[Tales of Zestiria]

__________________________________________________

05.

[The Irishman]

__________________________________________________

06.

[Yuri!!! On Ice]

__________________________________________________

07.

[Outlander]

__________________________________________________

08.

[Kaibaman, Yu-Gi-Oh GX; Griffith and Femto, Berserk]

__________________________________________________

09.

[So You Think You Can Dance]

__________________________________________________

10.

[Silmarillion]

__________________________________________________

11.

[The Hobbit]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 61 secrets from Secret Submission Post #660.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

03. https://i.imgur.com/iEu1wdA.png
[Emma Watson as Meg March in Little Women]

I can't believe people are going to make me defend Emma Watson

You're not actually defending her.

nayrt but +1

Do my eyes deceive me, or did they finally get her in a corset?

LOL... surely not!

Oh man, no wonder I suddenly stopped feeling empowered for no apparent reason!

I always thought the “Emma Watson insisted for no corsets for Belle” stuff was a hamfisted attempt to counter all the “whatsherface in Cinderella was put on a liquid diet and couldn’t eat during filming because fairytale princess=18 inch waist” publicity.

What's the deal with her being in a corset?

They made a big song and dance about how one of the reasons that ugly yellow atrocity she wore in Beauty and the Beast was so terrible and ill fitting because she refused to wear a corset since they are totally unfeminist.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2019-08-19 17:45 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2019-08-19 23:32 (UTC) - Expand

It bothers me a teeny bit that Meg is supposed to be "plump", because that was in keeping with the standard of beauty at the time - and Meg is supposedly the prettiest of the sisters.

I confused myself the first time I watched the trailer and thought she was going to be Beth, which I thought was a great casting.

I've never read or seen LW, strangely. Should I?

That depends on how many novels of that era or earlier you've read and enjoyed, IMO. Little Women is a childhood nostalgia thing for most people. There's a lot that doesn't necessarily stand the test of time, especially the author's moralistic tone.

Seconding this completely. (Oh god, the moralizing - especially about Jo's writing. Grrrr.)

If fiction from that era is not something you generally enjoy, I would say give it a pass, try one of the movie adaptations, and if you feel driven to give the book a try afterwards then do so.

(Anonymous) - 2019-08-18 22:24 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2019-08-18 23:05 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2019-08-18 23:13 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2019-08-19 00:26 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2019-08-19 01:17 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2019-08-19 04:36 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2019-08-19 20:45 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2019-08-19 00:35 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2019-08-18 22:35 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2019-08-18 22:38 (UTC) - Expand

greghousesgf - 2019-08-18 23:29 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2019-08-19 00:46 (UTC) - Expand

Save some time and just watch one of the many movie adaptations instead.

(Anonymous) - 2019-08-18 22:34 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2019-08-19 02:59 (UTC) - Expand

I say go for it. Yes, it's 'old' and has some out-of-date ideas. But it's a fictional book idealizing ideas and families and lives. It has some lovely moments, and the characters are fun.

If you don't like it, you don't like it, no harm done.
Avoid if at all possible the Wynonna Rider movie, it is *dreadful*.

I adored this book as a child and read it several times. Memories!!

I picked it up recently to re-read and couldn't get through the first chapter. The Christian hectoring was too much for me.

So I guess it's whether you have any interest in that era and what was popular then, but it's a tough book for the modern reader. Unless you're clergy, then it might feel refreshing I guess.

I haven’t read Little Women or seen any of the adaptations, so I could be wrong, but as I understand, all the sisters are pretty young. Emma Watson is pushing thirty, which while not old by any means is a too old for the youngest sister, surely?

I think Meg is the oldest and she's... 17? Amy is supposed to be 12, I think. I don't think Watson could play Amy now, but back in the day, sure.

Yeah, they totally didn't cast the ages correctly, which kind of sucks.

Well, when it starts, anyway. Some years pass and if they don't want to recast, then they choose actors they think can play all the ages. But, yes, the youngest, Amy, is supposed to be 12 when it starts. I do actually think they've skewed a little old this time and that they should also be closer in age to each other (the four sisters at the start are 16, 15, 13, and 12, and the actors are 29, 25, 20, and 23). In the 1994 version, the actors are 27, 23, 15, and 12 (and 24 - an older actor portrays an older Amy in the second half).

Oh shit, she is, isn't she? Lol. I sometimes forget that celebrities are subject to the passage of time, because I just remember them by one role or one era. I expect a lot of people do that, though.

pretty cute of you to expect age appropriate casting out of any movie

I agree.