Timothée Chalamet makes Emma Watson cry | Little Women | CLIP 

Yes

Eleventy-one

lol, that's sad

Except Beauty and the Beast 🐪

@@flamingomelodystars7124 She did cry in that one too 😭

@@Dyuti-zb2oz FR

​@@flamingomelodystars7124 why'd you put a camel to represent "beast" 😭

I found they did a better job representing this scene in the Winona Ryder version cause it showed the girls mocking her a little more and her being a little more "easy" around the other men. Like if it weren't for Laurie she would've gone down a toxic rabbit hole of sleeping around and not being true to herself. Plus in that one he wasn't so mean

In the book I think the idea was that they were treating her like a doll out of pity and she was trying to be a people pleaser in order to get what she wanted. He saw her as becoming a toy and losing her personhood.

Laurie was looking out for her, she was changing who she was to fit in and even allowing herself to be made fun of and given a pet name. He saw that and didn’t like it and he knew that if any of her sisters or her mother were there she would have never allowed herself to be taken of advantage of in that way. Yes she wanted to have fun, but she didn’t have to change herself to do it.

Actually, he knew her family raised her to more conservative and the snobby girls dressed her up in one of their more fashionable dresses and got her drunk in the book. Laurie didn't like it, as he knew her family. Later, when she's married she is spending all their money on the fancy fabrics and when her husband gets mad she gets her friend to gift her.

what page?

I didn’t get that vibe from him at all!🤔

@@alishamashburn412 Interesting!

Oh my gosh I thought the same thing! I also thought it was weird how material things were considered good when Laurie and his grandfather were giving them to the Marches but when these rich girls were giving Meg a dress she was being vain and stupid. Like it's only good when noble Laurie does it.

@@cappuccinobean2442 Good point! I hadn't considered that part of his attitude. Almost like he was jealous that there were others who could also provide charitable gifts to the March's.

I think he was clumsily trying to get her to appreciate herself for who she already is

Stop comparing her always with Hermione, here she is Meg. You are not doing any good to Harry Potter actors like this.

@@love-ed3vj I know I know i love emma for who she is and i know they strugled back then and still now. I will always sport them for who they are and their talents. But Im talking about the writers of the little women movie. They did wrote it like this but its a sweet thing tho 🌸

@@chisedrizzle I am not sure if it´s the same exact line, but I am pretty sure the scene in the book predates Harry Potter by a century or so :D

@@kefinkamed is there a line like this in book? I never reed the book only watched the 1994 version and i think theres no line like that. Yes meg getting angry and running away but not like this. so thats because i thought it been writen for the new version of LW and added in emma watsons line.

Well the nuances are different and very well conveyed. I think both are lovely.

I just saw a tik tok saying the same, so I came to see the whole film

I couldn't agree more :)

Its in the book😮

He's supposed to be like that😮

If I recall correctly, the point in the book was that the worldly standard for fashion didn't necessarily align with the Godly standard of conduct that the March girls were raised on in their Christian household. I also seem to remember that dress was supposed to show a good bit of skin and was too tight for Meg to draw a full breath so she was irritable and lightheaded even though part of her was delighted to fit the standard of her wealthy friends. I haven't seen the new film, but it seems that maybe the dress wasn't faithful to the book, and therefore the scene is incapable of making the same point as the book.

For me, I can see both perspectives. For Meg, she should be allowed a night of fun and pretty dress, and not be judged by rich boy. Laurie on the other hand sees Meg as someone of substance who is pretending to be less than she is to fit in with a shallower sillier society. Meg , as Laurie sees it, is being seduced by something that lacks true value and if she's not careful she could end up in an empty marriage, living a frivolous life. Meg's guilty looks suggests he wasn't wrong about that. Still, comes from a place of such privilege making his judgement-filled questions very obnoxious.

​ @jieliaarcueno7176 , it wasn't portrayed like this in the book, though. It was described as "her frizzled head, her bare shoulders, (and) her fantastically trimmed dress." The dress Emma Watson is wearing in this scene isn't nearly that dramatic, and she isn't covered with fancy accessories, as Meg was in the book. In fact, her main adornment is flowers, which is exactly what her mother recommended, instead of all the jewelry and accessories that she wore in the book. A bystander commented, "They are making a fool of that little girl." Later on, Meg described her makeover to her mother in this way: "I told you they dressed me up, but I didn't tell you that they powdered and squeezed and frizzled, and made me look like a fashion plate. Laurie thought I wasn't proper, I know he did, though he didn't say so, and one man called me "a doll."......I drank champagne and tried to flirt, and was altogether abominable." The suggestion was that Meg was so anxious to look pretty and fashionable that she went overboard, and ended up embarrassing herself. And that's probably what Laurie was reacting to, just as a family friend would react nowadays to a 16 year old girl from a conservative family, who got drunk and boisterous at a party.

well, the rich girls were humuliating her by giving her a pet name and by bossing her around...He helped her to remember about her pride and self worth

@@a.m.z1710 ya. We all know the story lol- im privy and not new here. The pet name wasn’t humiliating at all. And one of the girls let her borrow a nicer gown to fit the part. Her beauty alone would have made her stand out amongst the rest. Once again, I stand by my statement. Laurie ruined her chances of being courted to the rich.

@@Chelseattv pet name is not humuliating for a human girl that wants to join society? Ok, I guess that we have diferent opinion about that

@@a.m.z1710 very different opinion.. letting someone borrow your dress isn’t “humiliating” and the pet name was a regular “human name” …

Yeah he was being a dick to her. Amy definitely likes fuss and feathers and pomp and splendour (I'm not ragging on Amy like it's a bad thing. This is how she is, Jo mentions her constant preening). But Laurie never shamed Amy for having fun or enjoying the finer things.

I think that the hermione association had a part to play in killing her adult career

i cant not see hermione when i see her and i mean it in a bad way

@@amgm1996 huh

i honestly dont get the obsession either. i dont think he's good looking. he just looks like a 16 year old boy

It's not all about looks you know? Many people like him because he's charming and funny

@@Nancy-ff5tr there's a lot of people that are charming and funny and dont get the kind of recognition he's getting. in that kind of industry, looks play a HUGE part.

He looks very young and handsome, he is extremely good looking, @@bluejay2867

He's a good actor, that's really the bottom line. The world is full of "pretty faces". Chalamet can act.

Slut shaming her? Please further some pointers for your claim.

Her accent's good, don't know why you're complaining.

@@jonathancharron7360I love her, but no, her accent is definitely not good. It comes and goes, you can clearly hear her slipping back into British pronunciation. Not every actor can do everything, that’s just a fact. It’s just unfortunate for her that the rest of the non-US cast did so well.

LOL. She didn't have to take the job!

@@kefinkamed who cares the movies is not just for people that are speaking with American accent, English is my second language so I don't really care about The accent as long as I can understand what they are saying

@@love-ed3vj And I am happy for you, honestly, it means you've enjoyed the movie more than many others who absolutely care, at least based on all the comments out there. I am also not a native speaker, but I've been learning English long enough to recognise the difference. It pulled me out of the story because my brain registered the difference, especially compared to the rest of the cast whose accent was a lot better.

It literally does not, like at all.....

ok thats ur opinion, we all have different ones@@Lulu-mj2fi

well said!

he’s an 15 year old orphan wanting to belong to someone (march family)

She's the weakest actress out of the 4, definitely forgettable.

@@SanBear7 it’s only after the Harry Potter movies ended and she was cast in other movies that I realised how bad an actress she actually is! 😂 Most movies she was in that I’ve watched, I’ve forgotten she was in them 😐

​@@skylar_kadashe was great in noah what the hell are you talking about

it's odd. emma watson is pretty but in a sort of forgettable kind of way. and she doesn't project much of a presence or personality

she was never good in anything

This movie was made around 2018-2019. So he was 23-24 yrs old. He was born one day after Christmas in 1995....I'm 7 yrs older than him.

he was 22

Lol

She doesn't actually. She can say just few words

@@gigia95421 but she was born in France

@@darladimple8437 yep, until she was 5 and then went back to England. I saw some interviews and she doesn't speak French

@@gigia95421 ok

lol, so? romance and culture aren't the sole dominion of the French. get outside your bubble

Yes

I think had he care to this version of Laurie could it have any of the Marsh sisters but wants too desperately in love with Jo

mfs wanting fake platitudes?? get outta here with that

Saying emmas's acting was great is...... A hot take to say the least

lol he's an actor.... 😂He's not Paul 😅

@@yinloveyang I meant Laurie, he was everywhere

thats weird dude

same, my partner and I are both confortable in anythinf

It's actually Disney

@@davidthirugnanakumar7888 no she was the one that refused a corset

That was a movie for children. This is a book adaptation for mostly adults I'm assuming

@@jadexx1 no emmma refused to wear a corset bcs she said it was a prison for women the movie being for children has nothing to do with it,

Christian f-king BAALLE 😭🧎‍♀️

Who hurt you

@@serenitysubs933 Emma’s painful acting hurt me.