(ask me about the Marie Antoinette film, I dare you)

[deird1]

I don't tend to think of myself as being that interested in visuals. Despite this, last night I realised that I will often love (or loathe) a film based purely on whether their costuming is any good.

Pride and Prejudice (2005), for instance, is a terrible film. Because their costuming is not as accurate as it should be. (And for… no other reason that I can identify within my own brain.)

Little Women (2019), is, likewise, a dreadful movie – and not a patch on Little Women (1994). Because 2019 has inaccurate costumes, and 1994 is extremely accurate.

And Bridgerton? Not even worth watching. Because costumes.



And, on the other hand, I tracked down Gentleman Jack mainly because I saw a YouTuber raving about how historically accurate the clothes were – and apparently that really matters to me.




(Gentleman Jack, by the way, is really worthwhile. Especially if you're into historical lesbian dramas based-on-a-true-story with a tonne of upper-class Yorkshire snark.)

Comments

[petzipellepingo]

Because 2019 has inaccurate costumes, and 1994 is extremely accurate.

I just say that yesterday and I was wondering about that.

[deird1]

I have seen many YouTube videos discuss the costuming of these movies, with much more knowledge than I have. Mostly what they said lined up with what I already felt: that 2019 looked more interesting, but 1994 was much more realistic.

(I lost a fair amount of respect for 2019's costume designer when I found out that she dressed the March girls in cotton because they were poor. As one of the YouTubers pointed out, this was during the American Civil War, so cotton prices in the north were INCREDIBLY high.)