2019 “Little Women” movie

  • Thread starter Thread starter EnglishTeacher
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

EnglishTeacher

Guest
Has anyone seen the new Little Women movie that came out Christmas Day? If so, what were your thoughts? How did it compare to the book and to the 1994 version (or to the 1933 and 1940-something versions)?

I thought it was a good movie in many ways and I enjoyed it. I didn’t think the flashback way of telling the story entirely worked because it sacrificed some of the character development that comes with watching the girls grow up. But it was well acted and had many enjoyable moments.
 
My favorite version is the 1944 movie. I did not like the Winona Ryder version or the one with Kathryn Hepburn. I have no desire to see this one.
 
I have seen previews of the new Little Women movie, and won’t be seeing it. I love the original book and the older films of it. This could be a generational thing, but I dislike the intense attempt to make it a modern movie. The characters appear trivialized, trite, shallow and giggly. But that’s just my opinion. It’s good if you enjoyed it.
 
I won’t be seeing it. I’ve read terrible reviews of the movie. And from what I’ve seen in the previews, the character of Aunt March is given way too much prominence in the movie–not at all like the book.

I have read Little Women (and Little Men and Jo’s Boys) EVERY YEAR since I was 12 years old. It’s a ritual with me. I’m now 62 years old. I usually have time during the summer to devour these books again (bookworms don’t read, they devour!).

So I know Little Women well, and love it. I think the book is the second greatest novel written by an American author. (The greatest is The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain.) I know entire passages of Little Women by heart, and often recite them to myself when I am in a boring place (like driving alone on a long journey).

I don’t think a movie can even begin to capture the depth of Little Women. The novel has multiple layers, which means that it can be enjoyed for a lifetime at every state of life–I first read it as a 12-year-old and loved the adventures of the March sisters and their friends. When I was a teenager, I appreciated their struggles to grow up and their romances. When I was a young mom, I appreciated Marmee’s struggle to raise her daughters well, and the pressures from society and extended family to abandon high ideals. When I was the mother of teenagers, I appreciated the sisters’ searches to discover their destinies in life and to live moral lives in spite of poverty, disappointing romances, and terminal disease. When my girls were living independently, I discerned and appreciated Alcott’s underlying scorn for men, based on her shiftless and selfish father, Bronson Alcott, who thought himself above mere work and spent his days watching his wife and daughters do the heavy work of providing sustenance for themselves and him.

The older I get, the more layers of Alcott’s trilogy i discover I just don’t think the March family trilogy will ever be successfully adapted for film.

HOWEVER…I do wish that someone would continue the story from where Jo’s Boy’s rather abruptly ends. I love to write, but I don’t have the time, freedom, or resources to research the historical setting of her “boys” (the students at Plumfield, the school that she and her husband, Professor Bhaer, opened after they were married). Often in my mind, I have imagined the lives of Demi and Alice, Nat and Daisy, Josie (the actress!), Bess (Laurie and Amy’s one beautiful art-loving daughter), Tommy and Mary, Stuffy, Adolphus, Rob and Teddy (the sons of Fritz and Jo), and above all else, Dan–one of the most interesting juvenile characters ever created, IMO.

Yes, Alcott wrapped up Jo’s Boys with a one-paragraph summary of “how they all turned out,” so we kind of know. But to hear the stories, and to even see the stories through several generations all the way to today, the 21st century–what rapture that would be for me! If anyone out there reading this has connections, please write these stories! I don’t have the resources or ability.
 
Last edited:
I was planning to watch it soon. The previews seem good enough, as I’m not into period pieces usually. Was always drawn to how different the women were from each other. I’ve heard the director adapted it for specific reasons (e.g. A nod to how the original author was pressured into marrying off one of the characters) but I don’t know much about it
 
Alcott’s underlying scorn for men, based on her shiftless and selfish father, Bronson Alcott, who thought himself above mere work and spent his days watching his wife and daughters do the heavy work of providing sustenance for themselves and him.
That’s fascinating, especially since the father in “Little Women” seems to be held in such high regard by his family.

Although I remember seeing the Liz Taylor film, the Winona film, possibly the Hepburn film, and also a stage play of it when I was a child, I agree that there is no way this book can be handled properly within the confines of a 2 hour or even 3 hour movie. It would need something more on the level of a long miniseries.
 
That’s fascinating, especially since the father in “Little Women” seems to be held in such high regard by his family.
But notice how many times in the books he is depicted as a “pastor” who basically does nothing to help support his family, but instead, gives money away to the poor (when his own family is poor!). He enlists in the Civil War as a pastor, in spite of the fact that he has a wife and four young girls dependent on him! He seems to be some kind of esoteric “being” that everyone else has to provide for, instead of him providing for the family. He doesn’t write anything–there are no scholarly books that are spoken of with pride by the family. He just exists outside of mere humanity, and the women and girls do all the actual WORK of providing an income to support themselves!

It’s brilliant writing–at the same time Alcott presents the character as a beloved father, she also makes it clear that he is a bounder.

In real life, Bronson Alcott’s family was actually starving at times while he sat in his “study” and pretended that he had a flock of disciples–all young men–who hung on his every word (and also didn’t work). One summer, the family lived on apples–nothing else!–from a tree in their yard.

There is one place in Little Women where Jo goes to her father because she is overwhelmed with grief (Beth had died), loneliness, hopelessness, and never-ending hard work. She asks him for spiritual help, and he gives it. So he is definitely a spiritual influence.

But even today, a lot of women get in serious trouble because they “fall in love” with a man who doesn’t know how to study, seek and land a job and possibly a second job, and earn an income adequate to support his wife and any children. Meanwhile, the wife is working two or three jobs and sometimes trying to raise the children without any help from her husband.

I think that Louisa May Alcott was warning women back then to be careful and select a man who works hard. Much of Little Women is about her efforts to force Laurie into giving up a life of indolence and dreams of being a great musician, and go to work for his grandfather at a real job. Amy eventually begins putting the same pressure on Laurie, and eventually, Laurie sees the light and takes up the reigns of working for his grandfather’s business–and only then does Amy allow herself to accept his love and marriage proposal.

If you’ve read Little Men, you will read the chapter where John Brooke dies, and is honored by the family as the “BEST”. His profession is teaching and bookkeeping, and he works long, hard hours to be able to support Meg and his three children, and possibly dies of overwork. But he is held up as the “Best”, and several of the boys of Plumfield, including Uncle Fritz’s nephews, announce that they want to be like “Uncle John.”

I could go on and on listing places in the March Family Trilogy where is it obvious that Alcott is trying to get across the need for women to choose husband from men who are willing to WORK hard and support their families. It’s all through the book.
 
Last edited:
While I don’t doubt that Louisa was frustrated with her father in real life, in the context of her time a Protestant minister in New England would have been considered one of the top respectable professions. The whole reason colleges were originally founded there was to prepare young men for the ministry. So it’s kind of hard to have a father who on the one hand commands societal respect and moral high ground (not being materialistic, giving to the poor and influencing his family to do the same - there’s definitely an undercurrent of the daughters wanting to behave in ways that their dad would approve, if he were there) and on the other hand is putting huge burdens on his family. The solution of having Dad be conveniently absent for the whole first half of “Little Women” and then having the second half focus more on the girls growing into adulthood so Dad is less of a factor, was pretty brilliant as Louisa never had to confront the issue head-on.
 
My favorite version is the 1944 movie. I did not like the Winona Ryder version or the one with Kathryn Hepburn. I have no desire to see this one.
I have never seen the 1933 version with Kathryn Hepburn, but I grew up watching the other two (1949 with June Allyson and 1994 with Winona Ryder). They both have strengths and weaknesses, but of the two, I preferred the 1994 version. (Part of that preference might be sentimentality; I have happy memories of my grandma taking me to see it in the theater.) I had high hopes for the PBS mini series that came out earlier this year but found it disappointing, except that it had my favorite Professor Bhaer of all the versions I have seen.

The book is still far better than any of the movie versions, though!
 
Last edited:
I don’t think a movie can even begin to capture the depth of Little Women . The novel has multiple layers, which means that it can be enjoyed for a lifetime at every state of life
I think you are right. The best chance for a great screen version would be a high-quality miniseries (rather than a two-hour movie) written by someone who knows how to adapt classics for the screen.

I love that you re-read Little Women every year. Makes me want to read it again soon; it has been a while. Maybe I can get my book club to take it on this year.
 
I have a confession to make. 😔

I have never seen any of the movies.
And I have never read the book because when I tried to read it when I was younger, I thought it was boring. 😳
 
I have only read it once and probably would enjoy reading it a second time.
 
I liked the book and the 90s film as a kid. I also read Little Men and Jo’s Boys. I think I liked the last one the best. I’ll probably see the film when it finds it’s way to a Walgreens Redbox.
 
So much so that they had a ‘living’ rather than a salary (which would have been too proletarian and therefore degrading) - in England at least.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top