Director’s Journal

I decided to do my critique on the first five scenes of Greta Gerwig’s Little Women (2019). In these scenes, the audience is introduced to the four lead characters of the film, Jo March – the main character, as well as Amy March, Meg March and Beth March. The film is set in the late 1860’s, starting the story with Jo bargaining with a publishing company in New York to print her short story, to Amy attending to her rich aunt in Europe where she encounters her old childhood friend, to Meg feeling pressured to buy expensive fabric for a dress despite not having the funds and finally, Beth playing the piano in the March family home. 

The first five scenes of the film set up the story, its major themes, and its initial tone (I say initial tone as the film later shifts and interchanges between two timelines: the past and the present, where the past’s tone is very joyful). These first five scenes imply what the film will ultimately be about: the female experience of four sisters who each are very unique and different, facing their own struggles rooted in themselves and the male-centred society of the 1800’s. Its central themes revolve around the patriarchy, familial duty and personal growth. The film’s tone starts of rather contradicting; while it’s quite energetic as we see the quirky liveliness of these four women, the tone is also oddly dejected as we see the women struggle with their expectations of being a women: Jo’s need to sell out in order to print as a writer, Amy’s submission into high society, Meg’s confliction in spending money for her image and Beth’s solitude in her passion. I believe the first five scenes successfully implicate the ultimate theme of the film and how it will be portrayed through these characters, yet I do believe it doesn’t set the overall tone as it shifts later on in the film in the diverging timelines. I personally think it would be interesting to have introduced the other timeline earlier within the film to give the audience an early hint at what to expect. 

The performance I will be looking closely at will be Jo March, the main character of the film. She is in the first two scenes where she is living in New York, trying to get her work published. After she successfully (though not willingly) sells her work to a publishing company for cheap, she runs back to her homestay, where she lives as a tutor in a crowded apartment complex. There is a professor living there, Friedrich, an older man enamoured by Jo who has befriended her and shows interest in her work. 

There were many likable things about her performance that worked well: her expressions and subtle details in character, her burst of character and relatability. Jo has very subtle expressions that show her desperation and excitement, despite her act of keeping up appearances while trying to sell her story. I loved the small details in her performance and wardrobe: the ink on her hand, the timing of her blinks and raising of her eyebrows that communicate unease. I love how she runs through the town after selling to the publisher, it’s such a burst of energy and expression, transforming her into an interesting, likable and fun character. 

What I believe didn’t work was that we don’t get much of her personality the first time we see her. She feels out of place in her surroundings, especially with how she interacts with the people around her. It’s awkward and lacks connection. Her environment seems dull and strenuous and I can’t understand why she would want to be there. This isn’t her world and I feel like she’s unnaturally there, which would be fine if I understood why and I feel as if that’s not communicated. 

Overall, I find that it is convincing enough, but overall, not a completely convincing performance (at least not in the first two scenes). It feels forced and off putting. Some solutions to this may come with the things I would change as a director. I believe this may be due to how we are first introduced to Jo’s character, we see her back and her profile as she marches through a man’s world, yet our first look at her face is unimportant – revealed in a dirty over the shoulder shot mid-conversation. I would have added her face reveal earlier before the scene started, instead of looking at her back, I’d rather look at her face expressing her nerves and excitement prior in order to establish a connection between her and the audience. That way, the first scene where she’s putting on appearances doesn’t feel disconnected to the viewers, that way our first view of her isn’t her putting on an act of  “professionalism” but rather a face of human expression – which we can identify better with. There’s a purposeful disconnect between Jo and New York that makes her out of place; she’s indifferent with the publisher, the people in her homestay and Friedrich, yet she seems to still want to be there. I would direct the actor to be more humanized in this isolating environment, expressing her inner fears and wants, giving her small moments that would reveal her motivation to be there, without just telling it within the dialogue. This would allow Jo’s character to be more relatable from the get go, and would further connect us to the themes of dealing with the patriarchy as a woman and the struggle for personal growth.

The first five scenes have an interesting colour palette, painting the scenes to the tone of each environment that each sister is in. Jo lives in New York and it feels grimy, busy, and chaotic. It’s a high-contrast world of dark greys and blues. Amy is in high society Europe, so she is surrounded by bold royal colours such as greens, deep blues and creams. Meg is living a life of poverty yet wishes for more, so the store she’s in is coloured in dark browns and greys, except for the fabric she wants to purchase which is a beautiful bright green. Lastly, Beth resides at home, a place of love and comfort that is jarringly empty, and its sports warm yellows and oranges with a tinge of blue that symbolizes the underlying loneliness. Gerwig does a wonderful job of using colour palettes to further elevate the story and build a tone for each sister’s lifestyle. 

I find the camera work in Little Women very purposeful, utilizing a variety of shots to further emphasize the tone and emotion of the scene. Gerwig uses static and moving shots very specifically. For example, in the first scene, Jo enters the publishing company and charges forth through a room of men and the camera dollies to the right, following her. It does this again once Jo sells her stories and cheerfully runs home. The camera does this for Amy as well, as she rides a carriage and runs into Laurie in Europe, her childhood friend and long-time unrequited love. Gerwig uses movement when the women move forward in their lives, achieving an active change. This contrasts to the very still, static shots – used when the characters feel trapped or at a standstill, such as when Jo is bargaining with the publisher, when Meg worries about spending money and when Beth solemnly plays the piano at home. Movement as well as the lack of it represents progress in the women’s lives, and it is very helpful in immersing the audience and connecting them to the feelings of the main characters. 

Greta Gerwig has masterfully crafted a wonderful film that reflects on the female experience of dealing with the patriarchy while trying to grow into the person you want to become. She purposefully uses colour palettes and camera movement to elevate the story and its central themes. She craftily directs using subtly and fine details to reinforce Jo March’s character. I would love to pick up this method of directing, ensuring I use every aspect I can, every detail I can, to alleviate the story and its themes. I would love to use motivated colour palettes and camera work to tell the story in its own way. It’s very impressive how she manages to do this for four very different and unique characters, and still connect them all together under one story. I tend to only direct and do work with one central lead character but I think I could add to my directorial practice by watching more films with more than one main lead and analyzing how they differentiate each character’s environment. Furthermore, I would love to do more work that emphasizes colour, camera movement and the small details to further strengthen the story and its themes/tones. This would contribute to my overall development as a filmmaker as I would better grasp world building and how to give life to multiple characters – something I would love to do in my future career!

Ironically enough, I was unable to make it to Tovah Small’s Casting Workshop due to having to run casting auditions for my own film that day. However, I was able to attend the make-up class the next day and get a good grasp on the director’s role in casting and learn several techniques that I can integrate into my own future as a director.

A director’s role in casting is to know what to look for, while also remaining open-minded, especially towards subconscious biases. It is important for the director to really take a step back and understand the character. Being specific and asking yourself: when you think of the character, what other images come to mind? The director is the gatekeeper of the story, and must understand the story and characters to such a detailed extent, when in the casting process, the director understands what to look for in the character and the actor – to not only see that the character presented by the actor fits, but to also be aware of the actor’s skills and abilities to listen, take redirection, develop and collaborate. A director in casting is just as important of a process as directing during production, and this importance is something I will carry with me into my future.

One technique that I will integrate into my career is creating good character breakdowns. In order to know what to look for during the casting process, you need to break down the characters to find out. In the breakdown, asking strong critical-thinking questions such as: What are the important physical characteristics? What is the character’s greatest motivation? What are the character’s goals in the story? These sorts of questions can really get the director closer to their characters, allowing them to understand what to look for in terms of physicality, sociality, mentally and emotionally. This was effective in helping my understanding of a director’s role, I know that directors must know characters to such extent because such details are what brings characters to life. I have created a list of critical-thinking character breakdown questions to help me format my character breakdowns for every single film I direct/work on from now on. In the future, I will recognize the importance of character breakdowns, and I will know what to look for during the casting process. 

Another technique I will integrate into my future is learning how to analyze auditions in the moment. While watching an actor audition, it is important to use the skill of active thinking and analyzing. Some great questions to ask yourself as the director while watching an audition can be: What did you like? What didn’t you like? What worked? What didn’t work? Was it convincing, why or why not? What would you change? This helps a director decipher the performance of the actor and the character they are trying to portray. This further adds to the skillset of knowing what to look for during the casting process. I think active and critical thinking during an audition is very important for a director to do in order to find the best fit for the character. I plan to incorporate this into my life by putting it into practice, watching monologue auditions (which can be easily and readily found available online) weekly and asking myself these questions and answering them. This practice will really help develop my critical and active thinking skills, which are vital during casting. 

The last technique I will integrate into my future directing career is understanding the importance of focusing on the moment: allowing the actor to first show what they can do, then add redirection. Often, I have made the mistake or seen others make the mistake of directing right away during auditions. I believe it’s important to allow the actor to first showcase their approach to the character and story. It’s important for the director to be open minded and patient with this as you’ll never know if they might show you something that’s different but good, maybe even better. It’s also important to allow the actor to go first as it shows you trust them and are willing to collaborate with them and their ideas, which helps gain trust between actor and director. Allowing the actor to go first, then give redirection, benefits both actor and director, making way for opportunity to collaborate and improve the character and/or story. I will incorporate this into my future by ensuring every audition I attend, I will ensure that the actor goes first, and to be open-minded and patient with it. Then, using active listening/viewing skills, I can give redirection after. I believe this will overall enhance the casting experience and lead to better opportunities. 

The casting workshop class was immensely helpful, providing me with wonderful techniques that I can practice and apply to myself, as well as giving me a better understanding of a director’s role in the casting process. I look forward to applying this new knowledge onto myself and working towards my own goals as a director!