Customer Reviews

Little Women

5 star:		(154)
4 star:		(35)
3 star:		(12)
2 star:		(11)
1 star:		(8)

 

 

To start out, this is one of my favorite books. So I of course started out with an additude to begin with, muttering that the book was always better. In this case, I was so wrong. The characters portrayed in this film are the same ones I met in 5th grade when I first read "Little Women". The actors shine in their roles and truly embody everyone one of the literary creations they represents.
Playing the March matriarch, Susan Sarandon is great! She is able to maintain the feel of the period while bringing to Marmee an empowering bout of women's rights thoughts. Sarandon gives off warmth and knowledge wiht the apparent ease of someone completely familiar with the material.
Wynona Ryder is another standout here. She is the raging bundle of emotion that we have all come to know as Jo March. Playing down her usually unique features, Ryder plays the part with spunk and earnestness.
My favorite here is Christian Bale as the oft put uopn Theodore "Laurie" Lawrence. Quite a jump from his "Newsies" days, Bale is the best Laurie I have seen on screen to date. He has the mannerisms and lines down to perfection, while still maintaining the spontanaity that really is a huge part of Laurie's character. He also handles the age jump incredibly well.
Not until my most recent viewing of the movie did I realize Gabriel Byrne was Professor Bhaer. The native irishman does a great job of bringing Frerdrick to life, right down to his physical bumbling and poetic heart.
In my opinion, this movie was a complete triumph and a complete success from novel to film. All actors are fine in their roles, most exceptional, and it is such a joy to see an old favorite and all-time classic brought to life which such enthusiasm and talent. This is a must-see for any fan of the novel~although it will leave you yearning for "Little Men" and Jo's Boys" featuring this cast-which has yet to be done!!

This version of Little Women is a classic in its own right. Armstrong did an amazing job here capturing the period and coaxing beautiful performances from her cast. Ryder, Dunst, Alvarado, Mathis, Sarandon, Byrne, Bale and a heartbreaking Danes are all in top form. Visually, the movie is just beautiful and the soundtrack is mesmerizing. A must see.

Louisa May Alcott's book has come to life in vivid detail and beauty. The casting is superb. The four sisters are a pleasure to watch and view as they develop into young ladies who experience both the pleasures and pains of growing into adulthood. The film depicts the changes in each character from adolescence and the growing pains associated with making independent decisions based on their personalities and values. As young ladies with education who grew up in a household where their opinions were heard and mattered, they stand in direct contrast with the majority of girls growing up at that time ...

In the attic, the sisters enact all the parts of a play which Jo had written ... it was a great moment when they invited Theodore Lawrence into their circle of friends. The individuality of each sister is quite evident. The film does a fine job of presenting each character, Jo, Meg, Beth, and Amy as unique individuals who blossom, each into her own personality, when they are forced to make choices and deal with building their own lives. The film shows the flow of everyday life around the time of the Civil War, when their father was serving as a soldier. The film does a wonderful job of showing the social structure and class differences of the era. The language, speech and manners of the times are well acted ...

The close bonds of sisterhood are threatened by Beth's illness, and eventual death. The film presents Jo, Meg and Amy as they develop into responsible adults with independent lives and interests apart from the cocoon of the family. Meg's courtship and eventual marriage to a school teacher/tutor is done well, especially the birth of their twins. Amy's ambitions of marrying into wealth and becoming a lady, and the value conflicts associated with this desire when she meets Theodore Lawrence in Paris is superbly done. Jo's move to live in New York at a boarding house, broadens her life experiences as she is challenged by Frederick, a German professor she bumps into by chance. Her wings are spread as she learns to fly solo within this new and challenging environment. Despite their differences, the sisters are forever connected by the bonds of family and love which makes the book and film an enduring classic. Erika Borsos [pepper flower]

I am 11 years old and I love to read. Louisa May Alcott is one of my favorite authors and Little Women is one of my favorite movies. I also love it because Winona Ryder is in it and i love her, she is perfect for the part of Jo March! I hope to own this movie one day! I love the whole story and they basically do not leave any of the main parts out! Some movies that are books are bad because they leave so much out but this one includes everything. My grandmother and I saw it after we read the book and it is terrific! It is a wonderful family film and I give it a definite five stars!!!!!!

While this film version of LITTLE WOMEN does not follow the book exactly, it captures its spirit with expert performances and cinematography. The soundtrack beautifully enhances this classic story of a family of women, struggling largely by themselves, in unforgiving New England.

This may be Winona Ryder's best role - she captures the ambitious spunk of Jo with a winning performance. As Jo's sisters, Trini Alvarado (Meg), Claire Danes (Beth) and Kirsten Dunst (the young Amy) give strong, if sometimes uneven, performances. Susan Sarandon as Marmee has the right measure of no-nonsense Puritanism; her feminist lines often are too heavy-handed for this film that otherwise has a light touch, but the way she sweeps into a room overshadows any flaws in the writing.

All in all, this is an excellent adaptation. Children may be bored by the art film pace, but teens and adults will delight in these characters brought to life by nuanced performances.

Highly recommended.

It's a sad commentary on the state of political correctness when a book written in the 19th century has to be "updated" instead of being preserved as a precious reminder of times gone by. Are filmmakers so concerned with the bottom line that they don't think viewers are capable of recognizing a historical setting for what it is? The virtue of the novel is in its message - that love is eternal, surpassing youth, beauty, and riches. What part of that message can't be understood by a modern audience without "sanitizing it for our protection" against mores of bygone days? Why must we be hit on the head with the Anvil of Political Consciousness in a story where those notions had yet to be brought to the fore?

If the people making this movie had been truly interested in finding feminism in Louisa May Alcott's text, then they missed the boat in three enormous ways:

1. They made Jo the prettiest girl. That casting move left all of her lines about being an awkward tomboy sound as if she were fishing for compliments. What would have been so terrible about having someone less model-waif-starlet take the role? Go back and watch June Allyson and Katherine Hepburn in their turns as Jo - they weren't prettied up by the makeup artists and photographers, and it makes them all the stronger. By making Jo so lovely, the film accidentally moves against feminism by falling into the stereotype that even "little" women have to be beautiful. (To be fair, they also make Professor Bhaer unrecognizably handsome, missing the point for the male as well as female characters.)

2. They ignored the subtle textual references about Marmee having as severe a temper as Jo. Instead of showing Marmee shouting out a window about not wearing corsets, why not show her working to control her emotions for the good of her family? Why not show her desire to work for the betterment of the poor as an outlet for her frustration over being left at home? Can you imagine what Susan Sarandon could have done with material like that?

3. I'll grant that it would be hard to portray the changes in Amy, because in the novel most of them are happening in description rather than in her actions. Simply changing actresses in mid-stream isn't enough - we should have seen her growth from inside, her desire to become a good person rather than a rich one. Instead of seeing Laurie as her just reward for having made such a difficult journey, as we do in the book, it comes across as irony that someone so selfish should wind up with the rich boy next door.

Thanks, but no thanks - I'll go back to Katherine Hepburn or June Allyson (even though in the latter version it's obvious Joan Bennett was pregnant when she portrayed Amy), and take my message undiluted.

I am suprised at the diversity of reactions to this movie, though I should not be. This was one of my absolute favorite movies, growing up. My sisters and I watched it over and over, and never got tired of it. I agree with some of the more critical reviewers that some of they key relationships and ideas from Miss Alcotts novel were definately missing in this movie, however. There are, I believe, two reasons for this: 1) A two hour show can only show so much (epsecially if your priority is to get the kissing scenes in there), and 2) Some of the main ideas (i.e. Christianity as the MAIN reason for the developing of one's charactor, ect;) were basically left out so as not to make the people's thinking seem outmoded to modern viewers. That is too bad, but it is still one of the best movies I have ever seen. The filming, acting, music, and setting are beautiful, and convincing. I cry almost every time I watch this. Anyone who has sisters they love would do the same.

There is an old maxim in Hollywood that good books make bad movies. It's only in filming lousy books that you have a chance to make a good picture. Nowhere has the lie been put to that old saw better than with this picture, the fourth (and best) film adaptation of Lousia May Alcott's beloved novel. This is one good book that has made a great film, one of the most charming and delightful I have seen in a long time.

The story revolves around the four March girls, all of them bright, beautiful and talented. Jo (Winona Ryder) is the narrator-and the author of the story-and the primary focus of the plot. She is an aspiring writer who is afraid to give voice to her heart. Rather than write about her innermost thoughts and feelings, she squanders her talent writing lurid melodramas and purple tales of romance and intrigue. It is only when she gives in to her muse and puts her true passion into her work that she finds fulfillment.

Next in age is Beth (Clare Danes), a quiet girl plagued by ill health. When she sits at the piano, you forget her frailty, captivated by the beautiful music she makes. She is a lonely girl, not as ambitious as her sisters. The only thing she wants from life is to stay home, protected by the loving embrace of her family, especially her beloved mother Marney (Susan Sarandon).

Youngest is Amy (Kirsten Dunn as a child, Samantha Mathis later), a charming little child who grows into a lovely young woman and a promising artist. She is the one who has the clearest picture of her future. No matter what, she is going to marry a man with money.

The oldest girl, Meg (Trini Alvarado) is the odd one out. She is not as pretty, smart or gifted as the others. She is, though, the most refined and proper sister, always concerned with the girls' behavior. She is also the one who finds happiness the quickest.

On no fewer than half a dozen occasions while watching "Little Women," I found myself on the brink of tears. It is certainly a story that evokes strong emotions. They are emotions, though, that are genuinely earned. I was so moved because I cared so much about the March girls. When they felt love or joy or sorrow or pain, I felt it along with them. That is a tribute to the fine work done by director Gilian Armstrong, screenwriter Robin Swicord and, especially, these five wonderful young actresses.

It is rare to see a film that deals so honestly and thoughtfully with the love shared between siblings, especially if they are women. These are girls who share a bond that is more important than marriage or wealth or anything else. To watch them together, to see the casual intimacy and obvious affection they share for each other is to witness something really special. It is a treat to be allowed, even for such a short period of time, to be part of their family. "Little Women" is an exquisitely beautiful film, and one that I shall not soon forget.

This is the 1994 movie adaptation of the wonderful Louisa May Alcott book Little Women and despite not being entirely faithful to the book with liberties being made with the plot I still liked this movie and I think the cast is good, Susan Sarandon as Marmee and Trini Alvardo, Winona Ryder, Claire Danes and Kirsten Dunst as her daughters Meg, Jo, Beth and Amy and Christian Bale as Laurie and Eric Stoltz as his teacher John and Gabriel Byrne who I thought was a great Professor Baher and very handsome! This is a lovely, sweet movie and I higly recommend this DVD!

I wanted to order this movie as a little Christmas gift for myself, and I am amazingly disappointed that it is currently not available! There's nothing better on a winter's night--or any night, for that matter--than a mug of hot chocolate, a warm pair of slippers, and Little Women in the VCR. I have gotten all of my roommates hooked! We rent it on a regular basis whenever we have spare time between final exams or term papers. Winona Ryder was deserving of the Oscar nomination she received for her portrayal of Jo! As a matter of fact, all of the actors were outstanding! Having read the book numerous times since I was a child, I find myself even more captivated by the movie! (How often is that possible! ) The score is pure magic. The colors are rich. The details are superb. While I'm usually not one for movies that end up with everyone living happily ever after in an all-too-convenient way, Little Women makes me feel content with its loving ending, rather than cynical. An especially good film for children.