Tag: Writing

Dresses, Film Costume Recreations, Historical, Jane Austen, Movies, Sewing

Recreating Lizzie Bennet’s Brown Frolicking Frock

by Simply Megan Joy2 Comments on Recreating Lizzie Bennet’s Brown Frolicking Frock

“First, I must tell you how ardently I love this dress. From the moment I saw it, I never wished to be parted with it from that day on.”

If you’re as big a fan as I am of the 2005, Pride and Prejudice starring Keira Knightley and Matthew MacFadyen, you’ll recognize the above quote, though it is slightly altered. 🙂 There are a few films that I can play all the way through in my head, scene by scene and this is one of them. The other two are The Wiggles Magical Adventure, and The Apple Dumpling Gang. Take that information as you will.

Here’s my recreation of the opening title.

Fun Fact: the book Lizzie is reading as she walks in the opening scene is actually text from the last page of “First Impressions,” the original title Jane Austen put down for today’s Pride and Prejudice. The book I’m holding is a 1903 edition of Pride and Prejudice. I recently discovered that walking and reading at the same time is a skill yet to be acquired.

Keira Knightley, Pride and Prejudice, 2005.

Out of all the beautiful gowns in the film, this one is my favorite, and I instantly knew I had to make it for myself. After a LONG time researching and looking for the right materials (I went to so many fabric stores to find this exact fabric, and finally found it at a random Joann’s) I started to self-draft the pattern. As with any of my recreated film costumes, I always watch the movie it appears in as I sew. It’s a cool experience! Until the movie is over and there’s only half a bodice completed because Mr. Bingley is having a ball, Lydia has run away, and Charlotte Lucas is engaged to be married!

I looked at a LOT of still shots of Keira wearing this gown, and attempted to replicate (almost) every pleat, seam, and detail visible. The most important thing for me was getting the silhouette right. Long live trial and error. I also had the white blouse to figure out. I was about to start drafting a pattern when I realized that I already had a white blouse exactly like this. It even had the overlapping shoulder seams like the original. All I had to do was make a wider collar and hand sew it on, which I must admit, is already coming loose. That’s something I’ll have to fix.

A little disclaimer: this dress is not historically accurate to the era in which Pride and Prejudice occurs. It was designed by Jacqueline Durran, (who also designed the dreadfully inaccurate costumes for Little Women, 2019 which I despise and ranted about in this post. . . but let’s overlook that). As long as it is duly stated that this gown is not accurate to the regency times, we may continue. I may be a bit of a hypocrite, but I do believe Durran’s work in Pride and Prejudice proves much more historically accurate than in Little Women. Speaking as someone who has studied Victorian fashion, and not Regency.

This was absolutely the most fun day, running around in fields with my sister until sunset, playing the soundtrack to the film along the way, and saying almost every quote we could remember. I felt like I was in the movie. Although dressing like a fictional character from another century can definitely deliver you some odd looks, finger points, and quiet conversations as people walk away, it wasn’t as bad as I had predicted. Even in the mall afterwards, I didn’t seem to notice too many people questioning my attire, (yes, I went into a busy mall in this dress to pick up my other sister, and yes it was pretty fun).

A quick review of the opening scene.

I’m definitely not the first to recreate this design, nor the last. There are multiple YouTuber’s videos/tutorials out there that show the whole process of creating this gown, if you’re interested in making one of your own. Here are some of my tips for recreating this gown:

  1. Make sure your fabric is correct (I used a thin linen.) I’d also recommend buying it in person and not online. Photos and descriptions can be deceiving.

2. Make it a wrap dress. I’m not sure if this is specific to the original, but I think it’s a lot easier not only to make, but to put on and actually use as a functioning dress. I added ties to both the inside and outside flaps. The buttons aren’t really doing much.

3. Wear proper undergarments. I wore a cotton chemise, regency half-stays, and a white petticoat under the dress, but by all means you don’t HAVE to. (After all it’s not even a historically accurate dress). Putting on any ankle length skirt underneath should be good enough to fill out the dress properly and help with the flow of the fabric. But you definitely need something to help with the fullness of the skirt.

4. If you don’t feel comfortable drafting the pattern yourself or just hand draping it as you go, find some paper patterns that are similar to this design. Maybe you can find a separate one for the skirt, one for the bodice, and one for the blouse. Having a dress form really helped with draping; it’s nearly impossible to make a fitted garment without one.

…………………………………………………..

Which did you experience first: the book or the movie (or the 90s series in which I do not find favor)?

Who’s your favorite P & P character?

When was the last time you ran around in a field? If it wasn’t yesterday, my sincere condolences.

Dresses, Spring, Vintage Fashion

The Spring Brings Art Shows and Allergies

by Simply Megan JoyLeave a Comment on The Spring Brings Art Shows and Allergies

Every spring my family and I attend an annual art show, held at an historic site. It’s been tradition, for almost as long as I can remember. As kids, we would always be given a scavenger hunt paper at the front door: find a painting with five dogs in it, how many red barns can you spot, can you find a sculpture made out of marble? We’d work together, give each other hints until we found everything. I know there was a prize at the end, but I don’t remember what it was. We’ve all grown taller now, so we don’t get scavenger hunt papers anymore, unfortunately. I did glance to see if they still had them, and I didn’t see any. Perhaps the children of today are not as lucky as we were in our youth, without any artistic scavenger hunts.

It was a cloudy and humid day with puddles reminding us of the morning rain. There’s something about this kind of weather that makes my allergies worse than usual, and from the time I woke up, I knew it was going to be a sneezy day. Then put me in an old (and somewhat musty) building and I WILL NOT stop sneezing. Since it’s hereditary, my family knows better than to say “bless you” after every sneeze. They say, “bless you for the rest of the day” and that’s that. However, the strangers throughout the building just trying to look at art peacefully couldn’t have known this and gave their blessings anyway.

The first floor of the building is where the larger (and most sizably priced) art pieces are displayed, many by well-known artists from the area. Room after room full of art, some old and some new. I wish I had remembered to choose my favorite among them, but I was too busy sneezing, I think. These photos are from upstairs, where the smaller pieces are kept. Some of them are so pretty, I’d like to fill an entire bedroom wall with tiny little frames, instead of wallpaper. And I would paint them myself in order to make that happen, however, I have no talent for painting. Truely, it’s something I am absolutely no good at. (Insert a horrified Lady Catherine de Bourgh scoffing at the fact that I do not draw).

There are so many paintings each year, they resort to hang them over the windows, so there is this odd sense of dimension to the art. There’s a canvas with its colorful display, then the frame, then behind it a sheet of glass encased in its own frame (aka the window), and then another display beyond that, one of nature.

These old ruins have intrigued me since forever and seeing them from afar makes them look all the more mysterious. It reminds me of Jane Eyre. P.S. who else thinks that Mr. Rochester is totally creepy and not romantic at all? Anybody?

Being out in the fresh air again seemed to lessen my sneezing, long enough to get some photos outside. And a big thanks to the lady who offered to take a few pictures of my sister and me, even though I had my eyes closed in all of them, as I usually do.

Despite the allergies, it was a wonderful day spent with people I love, and filled with childhood flashbacks. There’s really nothing like the feeling of reliving a day from your past. It was so familiar, yet still new. And nothing makes you feel more like a kid again than running around some old ruins.

And here is a completely unrelated photo of Raisin and Charlotte the sheep, being absolutely adorable.

…………………………..

dress: Little Women Atelier

shoes: thrifted

……………………………

How do you deal with Spring allergies?

What kind of art is your favorite?

Have you read Jane Eyre? If yes, seriously why did he think it was a good idea to dress up like a gypsy? Why?!

Tips and Tricks

Six Things to Do Instead of Being on Your Phone

by Simply Megan Joy4 Comments on Six Things to Do Instead of Being on Your Phone

Our phones. They do so much for us. They’re our alarm clocks in the morning, they allow us to check on a late family member or friend when they don’t come home on time, and they make it possible to capture special moments with a press of the screen. It’s never been so easy to watch a video tutorial on how to replace a driver’s-side car shock that was destroyed by an unavoidable pothole exactly five-hundred feet deep; a pothole so stealthy and evil, it maliciously calls your name every time you have to drive by it again, a pothole that will now and forever haunt you in your dreams. . . not like that ever happened or anything.

But this post is not about potholes. . . back to the original topic: our phones are capable of so much that they can easily become a main focus in our lives. We can depend on them too much and eventually consider them a necessity of life. The reason they were created in the first place was to allow easier communication between people, but in the cellphone’s journey to 2022, it might be doing somewhat of the opposite.

I don’t know if this happens to you, but I’ve noticed that any time there’s a lull in the day or when I’m just sitting and waiting for something (like in the car or a waiting room), I open my phone to waste time. Apps like Instagram, Pinterest, and YouTube (among many others) are specially designed to keep its audience’s attention from the first moment we open it, and we often end up giving them too much of our precious time. It’s hard not to automatically use our phones to distract ourselves, whether we want to be distracted or not. It just becomes a habit, a way of going about our day. We open our phone and who knows what time it will be when we finally look up again. Today, smartphones are created to be addictive and there’s never been a time in history when so much of the population is just sitting, distracted by such a large amount of fruitless digital content.

So now that I’ve ranted and raged over the problem, I offer an easy solution (insert Professor Harold Hill singing “Ya’ Got Trouble”). The first step to spending less time on your phone is simple: move your icons.

For the app your finger most often gravitates toward when idle, just move that icon to a different place on your phone, even onto another page if you want. This way, you can’t, through muscle memory, open it. You’ll have to make a conscious effort to find the icon, and this is your new signal. Each time you go looking for that one app, you can decide to spend some time OFF your phone.

Personally, I switched out my icons and put my Bible app where I usually keep Instagram. I was amazed at how many times I mindlessly opened it because it was in that specific location. Every time I would go for Instagram, I’d click on the Bible app in its place, so I’d read a few verses instead. It really worked, to just move or replace those most popular icons.

Step 2: turn off your notifications.

Go into settings and block the notifications that are most likely going to get your attention. Of course, you can choose which ones you want to leave on, ones that are actually helpful and not merely a distraction. The idea is just to limit the number of possibilities of you seeing something enticing and clicking on it. It’s the “out of sight out of mind” deal. A lot of apps have detailed settings that allow specific/custom notifications to go through, but not all of them, which will definitely lower your chances of mysteriously finding yourself on your phone again.

Step 3: find something else to do with your time.

Once you’ve already eliminated some notifications (step 2), moved your app icons (step 1), then gone to press the icons and realized they weren’t there anymore, that’s your cue to start breaking an old habit (step 3). Below is a list of six things you can do instead of spending time on your phone. All of them can be done while just sitting, waiting, at home, in the car, indoors, outdoors, anytime and anywhere. Instead of falling into that tendency of receiving input, these things are mostly “output,” things that will get your brain to work differently than when it’s just staring into a little screen.

This one is a bit obvious and the most common alternative. Books are easy to transport and there are about one hundred million to choose from. Now technically, reading is still “input,” however much easier on the eyes than a phone. Also, books can’t run out of battery. My family has this thing about not leaving the house without a book to read, just in case. You never want to be stranded someplace without a good book nearby.

I know some people just don’t like to read, and that’s totally fine. If that someone happens to be you, then what you need are puzzle books! Sudokus, crosswords, and trivia puzzles are great options. A whole book of them can cost only 99 cents and you can find them at almost any store, not just bookstores. They’re even stocked in the magazine section in the grocery store. Puzzle books are “output” and thought-provoking things to do and they’re actually pretty fun. Sudokus are my favorite since it’s all about deducing. Just easy enough for me to do and tricky enough to make me feel smart 🙂

This is a favorite of mine. All you need it a pen and paper (a napkin works if necessary). Spend your time making to-do lists for today, tomorrow, next month, or next year. Big goals or little tasks you know you need to get done. Write it all down. Meal lists, errand lists, a list of your favorite films, it really doesn’t matter. You don’t have to have something extremely important to write down to make a list, it can be something as insignificant as a list of all the times you visited “blank” or the days you were the happiest you’ve ever been. It not only gets your mind motivated to think, but it can also bring back some special memories. A grocery-list or the best-moments-of-your-life-list, either one is sufficient. Choose your fancy.

My portable hobbies are knitting and creative writing. Perfect for waiting or traveling. Both only require two different items each: knitting needles and yarn, and a pen and a notebook. Both hobbies are creative and productive and to me, very enjoyable. They’re not too difficult to carry around and when stuck in a waiting situation, they both keep my mind occupied and content. If two knitting needles and a ball of yarn are too bulky to carry, try crocheting, which only uses one small hook. And the yarn you can always wrap around a piece of cardboard so that it’s flat and transportable (and can’t roll away, which can be very embarrassing when in public, speaking from experience).

I’m terrible at drawing, the most I can do are pine trees on a hilly horizon, maybe some snowy mountain peaks in the background, and a full moon hanging above. Or stick figures. I’m pretty good at those. No matter your skill level, drawing is a highly creative activity with which to amuse yourself, and no, it doesn’t have to be a masterpiece. If drawing scenes or people is not your forte, then draw floorplans. You can design a new floorplan or try to put on paper the blueprints of your own house. It will definitely entertain you, trying to imagine the layout from above. You can draw it how it is now, or how you might want to try it in the future by moving the furnishings around. Again, all you need is a pen and paper.

This one might be tough, but super fun. No pen or knitting needles required, only perfectly square pieces of paper and a fantastic memory. Putting it that way makes it sound difficult, but really all you need is a small pocket-size origami book with the paper already included. Inside, half the book is filled with rip out sheets and the other half with directions to make the origami. Even without square paper, you can still make origami with any other kind (including dollar bills). It’s also fun to see what you can make without directions. (I could probably make a swan by memory if I really thought about it, but then again it might just come out as a paper airplane).

And lastly. . .

This is for when you’re bored, alone, have none of the above resources, and only have with you your trusty smartphone. If you need to occupy yourself, but can’t think of anything else to do, not a single thing, then you can stay on your phone. BUT, try to be productive. Clean up the device storage space and memory, organize those rogue photos that could easily be put into categorized files, delete old stuff you don’t want anymore, change your lock/home screen, get rid of unused apps and old voicemails, anything that is productive and beneficial to your life. If you finish that within a few minutes and you’re still bored, call or text someone you haven’t talked to in a while. Check on them, see what they’re up to. Use your phone for its first intended use, communication. Talk to another person. That way you can still be spending your time wisely and with someone you enjoy being with, even though they’re not physically with you at the time.

I think we can each try to be more meaningful with how we spend our time, especially when it comes to those pesky handheld distraction devices. Now, let’s see if I practice what I preach and spend my time more wisely when it comes to getting distracted by my phone. . .

……………………………

What are some ways you like to spend waiting time, without being on your phone?

Do you like drawing floorplans for fun?

Have you, likewise, a hatred for relentless potholes?

Little Women, Quizzes

Which March Sister Are you? // Quiz

by Simply Megan Joy4 Comments on Which March Sister Are you? // Quiz

Meg, Jo, Beth, and Amy are four of the most beloved literary sisters in history, let’s see which one you are!

Click here to take the quiz!

I’ve suddenly discovered a way to create quizzes, and I think I cannot stop. It’s just too much fun!

After you take the quiz, be sure to let me know which sister you got, and if you agree with the answer or not! Which sister is your favorite? (mine’s Jo, of course.) Are there any other quiz topics that you’d like to see? Just let me know and I can make one!

1930s, 1940s, 1970s, Dresses, Film Costume Recreations, Movies, Summer, Vintage Fashion

A Day at the Museum // And Other Adventures

by Simply Megan Joy3 Comments on A Day at the Museum // And Other Adventures

Well, well, well. I’ve again returned from the tight clutches of reality to my special little place on the internet, and with good reason. (Yes, I am celebrating my blog’s fifth anniversary this week, but that is not the reason for my posting.) I’ve happened to experience a day of glorious adventures, and not far from home. I do believe that I went overboard with editing these photos. Some I edited to make them look vintage, others are overedited because of poor indoor lighting. I only ask you to overlook the ones less than desirable, as they show their quality. *insert Faramir meme here*

There was a special exhibit at one of my favorite museums, one that my sister and I immediately planned to see as soon as the museum announced its arrival. I knew I had to dress vintage for the trip.

There was no particular decade to this outfit, it was a more of a mish-mash. . . pardon me, a “collection” of different decades. The dress was given to me by a friend (thanks Miss Sue) and I altered it a bit to make it appear more vintage. I’d like to think that it could fit into either the 30s, or 40s. However, some of these photos remind me of ones from the 1970s. Let’s just say, I was a time traveler that day.

You may be wondering about this special exhibit, the one I was so excited to visit. Well, first take a guess. . . hint: It rhythms with Hatharine Kepburn. I’ll give you a moment to think real hard on this one.

Did you get it? Of course, you did. Katharine Hepburn is one of my favorite actresses (pictured here with Cary Grant from the 1938 film Bringing Up Baby, which also happens to be one of my favorite movies).

I was lucky enough to be in the presence of many of Katharine Hepburn’s film costumes spanning over her entire career. Two large rooms were filled with gowns, suits, shoes, accessories, and personal items that once belonged to her. I could have spent hours in front of each display, it was captivating to be so close to history, and old Hollywood. Pictured below are just some of the many costumes in the exhibit.

Here’s her famous black gown from Adam’s Rib (1949).

Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner (1967).

The Philadelphia Story (1940), Stage Door (1937), The Little Minister (1934), and then Me (2021).

The Lion in Winter (1968), and Long Day’s Journey Into Night (1962).

Mrs. Delafield Wants to Marry (1986).

Her personal everyday shoes.

The Lake (1933) Broadway Play.

These three above are from a TV show, The Corn is Green, from 1979. A lot of the costumes were from productions I’d never seen before, like this one. My list of movies and shows to watch had doubled after leaving the museum.

Oh, yeah, there was also a Lego exhibit. . .

After the museum, my sister and I had some adventures around town.

This was right around the time when a motorcycle gang showed up. They also decided to blow out two sports car engines (sounded like literal canon fire) for five minutes straight. It was strange, hence my expression and awkward stance above. The gang also asked if I had any hand sanitizer they could use, and yes, I gave them some out of my car. They now ride around town with jackets embroidered, “The Germ-Free Angels.” No they don’t.

All in all, it was a wonderful day of adventures. I hope you can set aside a day to have one just as good this week. Always have a friend with you, never forget to buy some chocolate milk on the way, and always give a motorcycle gang some hand sanitizer upon request.

Dress // gifted

Shoes // thrifted

Clutch purse // thrifted

Hairclip // gifted

Writing

How to Create Unique Character Names

by Simply Megan Joy1 Comment on How to Create Unique Character Names

One of my favorite things to do as a writer is to create character names. It’s one of the first things I do to start a new story. Names can say a lot about a person and finding just the right title for your characters can really help the story flourish.

Firstly, there are a few types of names in the story world, and I’ve come up with five different categories, just for fun. We have: bland names, overused names, hard-to-pronounce names, principal-character names, and side-character names. Now, let’s talk about them in a little more detail.

These are the names that don’t really stand out, the names that we have to go back through the book searching for because we forgot who “that guy” was. Go through your memory and try to think of some dull character names from stories you’ve read. The characters you’ve forgotten about entirely, just because you forgot their name.

Yet another thing to consider, for characters that don’t really matter to the story, people who don’t need to be remembered at the end of a book, bland names are perfect! If you’re looking for a name to fit someone who is insignificant to the storyline, bland is just fine.

Okay, we’re talking the kind of names you can find in basically every young adult paperback sitting in used bookstores from here to Timbuktu (perhaps an mild exaggeration, as I often exaggerate things with ease). Think “generic.” Of, course, different genres are going to have different overused names. For instance, open a historically set book and you’ll probably find a John, a James, a Henry, a William, a Mary, etc., because those names were very popular in history. Something from the 1990s might have a Jessica, a Brittney, an Ashley, a Chad, and a Michael. So, yes it will be historically correct to use these names, but not necessarily unique, since they can be found in many other books. If you’re looking for highly accurate names for the time, go with those even if they’re overused. If you feel you could be a little more lenient, gather uncommon and unique names, ones that are still accurate yet rare.

I think overused names can be found more frequently in surnames, like Smith, Jones, Brown, Johnson, etc. Yet, there’s nothing wrong with using any of these names, first or last. Indiana Jones is a world-wide known name, because the ordinary surname is overridden by a very unique first name. Another example, Luke Skywalker: very common first name, very uncommon last name. So you have the freedom to choose whatever arrangement sounds best for your character. There are no “rules” here, play around with the names, generic or unique! You can also take a popular last name and use it as a first name, and visa versa.

(Side-note: Jane Austen often used the same name for many of her characters, like Jane, Fitzwilliam, Anne, Fanny, Mary, Robert, and John, and it obviously didn’t hurt her writing career because of it, so do whatever you may!)

Most certainly more than once, I’ve read a name over and over again throughout a book without knowing how to correctly pronounce it, mumbling it in my head, and hoping I never have to read it aloud. It could be a name from a different language, or completely made up, like “Poigly” or “Maigdor” (how did you pronounce those; I’d like to know?) We can go through an entire book and simply skim over actually understanding that one name, because we’re unsure of how it’s supposed to sound. Perhaps using one or two hard to pronounce names is perfectly harmless, but an entire book of it could easily hurt the flow of the story if the reader is fumbling through every other sentence. Imagine reading Genesis chapter 10 in a consistent flow. Yeah, impossible.

Secondly, a name can just be too long. It can get tiring for the reader to sound out 2 four-syllable names every time the character is mentioned. So maybe give them a nickname!

This is your main character’s name, the one that you want everyone to be able to remember, with a unique ring to it, and some sort of tie to their personality. A nice blend of easy to remember/catchy, yet unique. You can pick a name that reflects the traits of the character. Wise people would have intelligent sounding names, untrustworthy people, a suspiciousness about their names. If you have several main characters, make sure they don’t sound strange when put together (since they’re probably going to be mentioned together often), like Will, Bill, and Jill (unless it’s important to the storyline).

These are the names that lay somewhere in between the bland names and the principle character names. The ones that don’t really have to stand out, but have to sound realistic for their character, time period, and location. Any name that doesn’t make the principal-character cut, move it to the side-character list. A great sidekick needs a great name!

Where to find unique names?

  • A physical phone book – if you can find one. It’s always fun to do the random flip and point trick to create names. It never fails to give me unique and creative titles.
  • Cemeteries – This is my secret place for gathering names, shh don’t tell anybody. I’ve filled page after page with rare and interesting names that sounded fascinating to me, from several different cemeteries. If you’re looking for historic names, look at the older headstones. (And no, I don’t consider this morbid in any way, these people would have most likely been thrilled to find out that a writer from the future had included their name in a story.)
  • Your family tree – Look back into your own history and write down some of your favorite names, and of people who have been an inspiration to you from your family. It’s a good excuse to research your ancestry in detail, and you can even use some of the information and tales you find to include in the story.
  • Old censuses – this might be your last resort. If you can find an old census in the library or online, you can pinpoint the date and general location when and where a certain name was in fashion. But reading through document after document, you may find it easier to try the other methods first.

So whenever you’re in need of names, grab your trusty notebook and make two categories, first names and last names. Gather anything and everything that catches your attention. Mix and match to created hundreds of different names. You’ll know a good name when you see one. Sometimes a name alone can spark the idea for a whole new story!

You can also use your list of newly gathered names for streets, towns, and establishments. There’s no limit to what you can use your research for, and the good thing about doing all your own research is that no other writer is going to have the same list of names. It will be completely distinct.

All this to say: you don’t have to use the internet name-generators that everyone else uses. You can be unique and special by finding them yourself, in the world, in your hometown, and in your ancestry. So have a ball gathering wonderful names and watch your characters come to life!

………………….

What’s your go-to way of naming characters?

Do names just come to your head, or do you go out and search for them?

Have you ever created a great name, only to then discover it’s already a famous literary character’s name and you can’t use it anymore, or is it just me?

Civil War, Little Women, Reviews, Writing

Oh No, Not Another Little Women

by Simply Megan Joy4 Comments on Oh No, Not Another Little Women

Forget my last post. THIS, apparently is what brought me back to blogging: the need to rant about yet another version of my precious Little Women, which has somehow found its way onto the big screen, again. Yes, a new film was released around two weeks ago, claiming to represent the beloved Louisa May Alcott work about four sisters and their coming of age story. Just how many versions of this story can be made, one may ask? Well, if you were to include silent films, theatrical plays, musicals, operas, radio programs, tv shows, and films, there would be a grand total of 20 documented versions of Little Women.

You may have read my post on the PBS’s Masterpiece version that was released just last year, and I’ve promised myself that I won’t be as harsh with this one. . . if at all possible.  I’m sure we can all agree that Gillian Armstrong’s 1994 version of Little Women has for certain, risen above all other attempts and that Meg, Jo, Beth, and Amy March were represented extremely well by Trini Alvarado, Winona Ryder, Claire Danes, and Kirsten Dunst, and it stands to reason that there will never be a better Laurie than young Christian Bale.

Now, after watching the film trailer, which can be found on YouTube, I’ve decided not to pay thirteen dollars to see this new version in theater because I would surely disrupt it for other viewers as I stand upon my seat screaming “That’s not historically correct!” or “That’s not even in the book!” After all, you can have all the best lighting, sets, color grading, and visual effects, but those things don’t really compete with the way the actual story of Little Women is told, and how the dialog and costumes are used to make us truly believe we’re in the middle of the Civil War.

On the other hand, maybe you’ve seen this new take on the book and found it enjoyable? That’s completely fine! Remember this is only me sharing my personal opinion. However, I did notice a few things in the official 3-minute-long trailer which at this moment has half a million views. Here’s what I noticed:

0:12 – We see four sister walking down a snowy street, two without any hats or bonnets (historically inaccurate). They also look a little homeless, but maybe I’m just too picky?

0:23 – We hear Amy tell her sisters that she wants to be the best artist in the world. Is it just me or does she seem older than all the sisters, and not the youngest child in the family? Why didn’t they find a younger actress to play ten-year-old Amy instead of trying to fool us out of knowing that the actress is actually twenty-three years old in real life?

0:57 – Jo’s at a party with her hair down. How did she get away with that? Quite shocking if you were to ask any historical reenactress today.

1:23 – It sounds like Jo is trying to convince Meg that they should run away from home? What?

1:32 – Ok, what in the world were they thinking? It’s Meg’s wedding day and she appears to be wearing something perhaps more fitting for the 1970s rather than 1870s, with her hair DOWN, uncurled, and with a side part (very historically inaccurate). With a budget of $40 million dollars, couldn’t they have hired someone who knew a little something about the standards of 1860s-1870s beauty? It’s her wedding day and is looking as though she forgot to wake up in time to do her hair. All throughout the trailer in fact, we see side parts and either straight or beach wavy hair, down about their shoulders and not up where it should be while in public, historically.

1:43 – Why is Jo burning her own writing? What happened to that being Amy’s trademark?

2:00 – Here is a staircase full of women presumedly at the Moffat party, perhaps? Ten girls dressed in basically the same dress, only each in a different pastel color with matching elbow length gloves, (not actually in fashion during the Civil War). It reminds me of a Disney cartoon/fairytale, instead of a historical drama in the way that each dress is the same. But that is only my personal opinion, of course. I also want to mention that I DID see many historically accurate gowns and outfits in the trailer that were quite beautiful in fact, ones that I absolutely cannot complain about.

2:29 – Jo is fashioned in a man’s jacket and derby. That would have been almost as strange to the people of New York in the 1870s as a man in a dress, literally. Yes, we all know Jo is a tomboy, but I doubt she would actually get away with that in public and not be harshly questioned for it.

What also riled me was that along with this new movie comes the selling of a book that a few people I know have bought. The front cover is a photo from the new film and inside are more pictures of the same. What I want to know is: Is this book the original book, or it is the 2019 adaptation that changes the plot to match Greta Gerwig’s script? Because, after reading a few articles, I know that not only little changes were made, but big ones too, like the ending. Emma Thompson, screenwriter and co-star of Sense and Sensibility 1995 once wrote in her production journal, “The Sense and Sensibility Screenplay and Dairies” that she strongly rejected the idea to republish Jane Austen’s book as a “novelisation” adapted to match Thompson’s screenplay, and sell it as the real thing. She said the idea was revolting, meaning that if someone wanted to read Sense and Sensibility, they should read Austen’s original work. I must agree with our dear Emma.

Little Women 2019, which stars a slew of famous names, has been spoken of well by film critics (but we all know that means almost nothing) and was already nominated for two Golden Globe Awards, Saoirse Ronan for Best Actress and Alexandre Desplat for Best Original Score. Now, I’ve done some little detective work and have found the following interesting facts:

  1. Winona Ryder was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Actress as Jo March in 1994 but lost to Jessica Lange for Blue Sky.
  2. Thomas Newman was nominated for Best Original Score in 1994 but lost to Hans Zimmer for The Lion King.
  3. The great Colleen Atwood was nominated for Best Costume Design in 1994 but lost to Tim Chappel for a movie I’ve never even heard of.
  4. Little Women, 1994 budget was $18 million dollars. Little Women, 2019 budget was $40 million dollars.

Now for a few more recent facts about the 77th Golden Globe Awards, held on January 5th, 2020:

  1. Christian Bale (Laurie, Little Women, 1994) was nominated for Best Actor in Ford vs. Ferrari.
  2. Thomas Newman (score composer, Little Women, 1994) was nominated for Best Original Score in 1917 and was against Alexandre Desplat who wrote the new score for the 2019 Little Women.
  3. Kirsten Dunst (Young Amy, Little Women, 1994) was nominated for Best Actress in a Television Series.

None of these nominations ended up winning last night, but I did see that both Thomas Newman and Kirsten Dunst were at the awards on Sunday night, (no Christian Bale though). Now, I was thinking. What do Christian, Thomas, and Kirsten, who are all heavily connected to the previous Little Women think about this new production? What do the rest of the cast and crew think? Do they think it was time for a remake, or are they like me and not ready for a new take on this beloved story?

Maybe I’m a little sour over this whole ordeal, but what else am I to think while feeling as though the book has been ripped from my hands, cut up, pasted back together with modernly crafted glue, plastered with an unknown photo from a film, stripped from its universally known ending, then released to the entire world to accept as once before? What do you think? Please let me know! I want to hear any and all opinions!

………………..

Have you seen this 2019 version? Am I dreadfully wrong not to see it and yet criticize it?

Should I stop this continuous ranting of movies I don’t like? (Insert mysterious pirate accent here: Because I hear tell there be a trailer for a “Secret Garden” remake that I feel the need to tear apart, being a strong believer in the treasure that is the 1993 version, arrgg!)

………………..

Megan Joy

Holiday

Twenty Twenty

by Simply Megan Joy2 Comments on Twenty Twenty

What’s this? What could have possibly delivered me from the vices of reality and returned me safely to my dusty keyboard for the sole purpose of pecking away in merriment, resulting in the sudden creation of a blog post? (Truly, my keyboard is far from dusty, considering I use it every day to write, just not for blogging, nevertheless it sounded nearly poetic, so I left it in.)

Perhaps it was the commencement of a new, exclusive, never-before-seen decade that forced upon me the urge to jot down a few paragraphs? To begin a blogging schedule again in 2020 most certainly is not a New Year’s resolution of mine, I’ve decided, because I know I won’t be able to keep it for very long. Instead I want to write for my blog when I have the time, which is much more fun than crafting a schedule, only to feel like a failure each time I skip writing a post.

But enough about schedules, certain failure, guilt, and the like (horrible things, I must admit). I am only here using up your precious time (technically this is your own fault for clicking on this and I am not to blame, but I do thank you for reading, assuredly), to make myself known as not dead, but alive, contrary perhaps to what was once believed after I abruptly dropped off the face of WordPress in June of last year. No, I am very much alive and inspired to gain nothing but the joys of writing, (because blogging is actually very fun, and certainly takes less effort than writing an entire book.) So, let us each lift a glass of orange tea (or chocolate milk, perhaps) in a toast to the future of unknown happenings and also to the past for all its acquired lessons!

With my parting words, I will leave you: “Use this new decade well, for it is limited edition and only guaranteed to be in stock for the next ten years. No refunds. See calendar for details.”

………………..

Megan Joy

Little Women, Movies, Reviews, Writing

Little Women Enthusiast Reviews PBS’s Masterpiece Adaptation

by Simply Megan Joy22 Comments on Little Women Enthusiast Reviews PBS’s Masterpiece Adaptation

A little disclaimer: being an aspiring filmmaker, I tend to look at a movie most critically and judge it by its content, presentation, what emotions it evokes, and its lasting takeaway. I do like to be truthful in my views, however I will attempt not to make the following as blunt as my original draft. 😊 Do remember, this is only my personal opinion.

Second disclaimer: this review DOES include spoilers.

Costumes

There were two or three scenes showing the girls in corsets. Firstly, not all the March sisters wore corsets that early into the book. Secondly, some of the ones used are from the wrong time-period. Meg’s corset was styled from the late 1700s while Jo’s corset was that of a later Victorian design. That’s a 100-year gap between the two, and neither were exactly accurate. Furthermore, they were not wearing the corsets correctly. This caused the corset lines to be seen through some of the dresses, also revealing that they were not wearing corset covers that would have helped to smooth those lines.

Regarding the dresses, I’d have to say that most of them would be considered accurate, however, many were ill fitting, which would have been unusual considering the Marches could to their own sewing and altering.

In two different scenes, Jo can be seen wearing some sort of odd floral bathrobe, which did not remind me of any 1860s styles.

In the boating scene, Miss Vonn is wearing a blue, late 1700s styled gown, and even though she was from England, it was established in the book that her family was wealthy, therefore I doubt she would have to wear a 90-year-old dress.

Makeup 

The makeup director seemed to know little of historical beauty. Each of the March sisters were in more modern makeup styles, including mascara, eye liner, lipstick, and blush, especially little Amy. While some of these beauty enhancers had been used subtly in the 1860s, none of the March girls would be wearing it around the house, and especially not to bed. Also, Laurie was for some reason wearing noticeable makeup.

Acting

The main issue with this adaptation perhaps was that the acting was over rehearsed and, in some cases, insincere. I may be quite spoilt by the 1994 version where every single line was performed brilliantly and believably, however good acting should be a main focus in the creation of any film, and one might say that this version fell a little short.

I found some flaws in the portraying of the characters, as well. Timid Beth is too scared to even enter Mr. Lawrence’s front gates, though eventually gets up some courage to go into the house and sit at the piano. She is frightened when Mr. Lawrence tells her to stop, however is smiling without a care in the same scene when this stranger of an old man comes to sit and listen to her play. She doesn’t even appear to be nervous anymore. I know I would be!

The relationship between Jo and Amy seems much harsher than in the book or any other version. One could also say that Amy was plain evil toward Jo and the rest of her family, and much more ill-mannered overall. Her actions, replies, and glares were certainly on the modern level of bad behavior. Furthermore, I found that Jo attacking Amy and slapping her in the face was overly dramatic.

Considering the filmmakers had three entire hours to fill with the book’s contents, I felt that there were not enough moments of true loving connection involving the March family. Marmee appeared as a very independent woman who seemed to know little of her daughters’ true feelings and oft gave poor advice at the wrong times (like in the attic after Amy burns Jo’s manuscript).

Music

The soundtrack trilled of modern breathy humming and ukulele strumming, which stands as an unusual choice for this newest version of Little Women. Perhaps the idea was to be set apart from the traditional orchestral music of historical productions, and if this was indeed their true intention, they were successful. I think that the music would be enjoyable for a different setting, though to pair it with forever famous “Little Women” can detract from the story and draw us away from 1860s New England.

Screenplay 

The opening credits were unusual; however I enjoyed it. On the other hand, the opening scene was quite the contrary. The overall feeling was that we were watching the girls do something of a repulsive nature, when really their main deed was to each snip a lock of hair to send to their father. By the editing and acting, it seemed as though the March sisters were doing this sweet gesture with an odd sense of wickedness. Let me just say that it was strange!

Also, Mr. March is certainly more present than in the book or other film versions, showing him caring for a dying slave in his chaplain’s tent. I think the decision to actually show Mr. March’s life in the army prevents the viewers from feeling how the March girls felt. They couldn’t see their father, spend time with him, or truly understand what he was going through. They were left only to know things by what could be relayed through a pen, and the fact that we were seeing the real picture while they were not, seemed to eliminate the viewer’s desire to know, which differed from what the March girls were presently feeling.

I think that it would have been very smart to use two different actresses for the role of Amy to play her different ages, however this version had one actress play both the adolescent Amy and married Amy, which I felt weakened the overall effect and story.

Additionally, there was a “half-undressed” scene that I saw as unnecessary. There were also two different mentions of suicide which I thought was irrational extra drama.

Lastly, I did not admire how all Biblical lessons that are readily available to acquire from Little Women, were excluded, or replaced with feminist views. In the book, when trouble hit the March family, they called upon God for strength. In this new version, the girls drew strength from their “womanhood” and powered through with female independence, instead of harnessing God’s love to continue with their difficult lives as they did in the book.

Flubs and Mistakes 

The green-screening and CGI were quite recognizable.

When Jo runs into the woods to get a stick to rescue Amy, (which seems to be difficult even though she was in a late-winter forest) she returns with the stick and somehow has stabbed her hand and is covered in blood. Additionally, her cheek was also bleeding, while Amy, who was in the water for over a minute and a half, didn’t even catch cold. It takes about 15 minutes for one to get hypothermia and die, so let’s be thankful that Jo didn’t run any further into the woods than she unnecessarily did!

When Jo gets her hair cut, it is styled in a more modern fashion and there were no cut marks.

Beth’s hands were not moving at the piano while it was playing.

In one scene, the CGI snowflakes were falling up.

………………………………………………………………………………………………….

In conclusion: I must say that this miniseries does get better with each episode. By the end, there is a good quality to it that can possibly smooth over some of its faults. So. . .

Is this version of “Little Women” an accurate representation of Louisa May Alcott’s wonderful book? No.

Will watching this miniseries before reading the book hurt your reading experience? I think so.

Is this version historically accurate? Not quite.

Overall, is the 1994 Little Women version better? The answer is quite obvious, my friends.

Should you bother to watch this miniseries if you love the book? Yes, but be discerning and keep an eye out for its discrepancies.

Am I being too frank in my review? Probably.

Am I a crazy history loving girl who gets slighted when I meet someone who has never read Little Women? Yes!

……………………………………………………….

Have you seen this miniseries yet?

If so, what did you think?

Am I being too severe in my truthful opinions again? 😊

………………………………………………………

Megan Joy

Collections, Historical, Music, Spring, Winter

A Dozen Ways to Keep Busy During a Power Outage

by Simply Megan Joy11 Comments on A Dozen Ways to Keep Busy During a Power Outage

A Lack of Power - Simplymeganjoy.wordpress.com 1

A few weeks ago, I lived by candlelight. No electricity, no internet, no running water, no refrigerator, no heat, and no oven. It was fun for a while; it was like living in the past. However, after continually trying to get things done and failing miserably for four days, life got very frustrating, very fast. So, I’ve put together a list of fun things to do to keep you busy during a power outage.

1)      Collect candles. Gather every candle and lantern that you can find in the house. Also, for more light, gather some empty glass jars, put tea lights inside, and place them all on a big metal tray (not plastic) and carry it around from room to room for some extra light. Just be cautious and extra safe about where you put flames and never leave them unattended. Duh.

2)      Play a board game. Gather your family and use candles or a flashlight to illuminate the room. Scrabble, Clue, and Life are some fun games to play!

3)      Make music. You could sing or play an acoustic instrument. If it’s too dark to read music, try playing by ear.

4)      Play hide-and-seek (or sardines). Make special rules like: you can only hide on one level of the house, or only the seeker can have a flashlight. It can make the game so much more thrilling when the seeker has to go through a pitch-black house searching for everyone. But do not use any real flames when doing this! (p.s. no one is ever too old to play a game of hide-and-seek)

5)      Do a coloring page. Get some colored pencils and a coloring book. A power outage is a great excuse to do something you wouldn’t have time to do ordinarily, like coloring. I personally like this book!

6)      Read these verses. 

John 8:12 – “Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.”

Psalms 119:105 – “Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.”

John 9:5 – “As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”

Psalms 139:12 – “Yea, the darkness hideth not from thee; but the night shineth as the day: the darkness and the light are both alike to thee.”

Ephesians 5:8 – “For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light:”

7)      Write in a journal. Document everything that happens and write down how life is different with and without electricity.

8)      Play the story round game. Set a flashlight on the floor facing up and gather around it, (maybe with blankets and snacks, it can get cold without a working heater in the house). Have one person begin a story with one sentence. Then have the next person in line continue it, and so on until the story ends. Make it as wild or as mild as you wish!

9)      Make shadow puppets. Use a flashlight to cast shadows on the wall. There are so many different animals to do, you could make up a whole show. Make it a game by casting a shadow and having the others guess what it is.

10)  Read a book. It only takes one candle to illuminate a page. You could even read it aloud to someone, if you wanted.

11)  Make a list of all the things you have to get caught up on once the power is back on, things like, reset all the clocks, dispose of thawed-out food in the refrigerator, and recharge all electric devices.

12)  Remember the olden days. Electricity is one of the world’s more modern discoveries. Up until the late 1800s, every family had to live without running water, electric lights, and heaters. They used candles or lanterns for light, wood or coal for warmth, and hand-drawn water every day. Thinking about it this way can even make us feel spoiled by all the many “luxuries” we’ve all been given, like flipping a switch to brighten a room, not to mention cell phones, computers, or toaster ovens!

Living in the past for a while has certainly made me more appreciative of what my ancestors once lived without, and I feel very thankful that I do not have to continue without power permanently. What are some other fun things that you could do during a power outage?

……………………………………………

Which board game is better: Scrabble, Clue, or Life?

Have you had a power outage yet this winter?

…………………………………………..

Megan Joy