Rating: 
Summary: Little Women= The Best Movie Ever Made!!!!!
Review: I REAAAAAly love this movie. Its about 4 sisters and their growing up & getting married, and so on. It takes place during the Civil War. The father is away fighting. The mother [called Marmee] is very kind and charitable to others. It has a perfect cast, and incredible direction. Winoma Ryder and Susan Sarandon were perfect picks for Jo and Marmee. This is also my favorite book, and though they made a good movie out of it, the book is ALWAYS better. If you enjoy this movie, you will also love the book by Louisa May Alcott.
Rating: 
Summary: Good movie, bad actress (Winona)
Review: The movie overall was great because it was based on Louisa May Alcott's book "Little Women" but the choice of actress was terrible! I got so annoyed by the way Winona Ryder played Jo: too soft and feminine for a Josephine March. For this reason I ended up loving the June Allyson version more than this recent one...not only because June Allyson plays Jo's character so well, but also because there were parts in the movie where actors/actresses used the exact same lines as in the book. Try the June Allyson version! You'll see the young Elizabeth Taylor playing Amy March...surprise, surprise!:) Everybody loves it. Louisa May Alcott (the real Jo March) would have been happier with a stronger voice and boyish manners from Jo in this movie.
Rating:
Summary: Removed the religion and replaced with feminism
Review: Winona Ryder, who as far as I'm concerned can't act to save her life usually, somehow pulled it all together for a magnificent performance in this adaption of Little Women. But even this performance can't save this film, which is NOT Louisa May Alcott's Little Women.The book, for those of you who haven't read it, is not peppered with feminist bumper sticker statements, for example, there is no condemning of 19th century female undergarments in the book, but the movie does take its swipes. The book also is loaded with religious references, especially to the book Pilgrim's Progress, but the movie doesn't mention God so far as I can recall, not once. In this way the film skewers the 19th century sensibility that was so keenly expressed in the novel and does not fairly represent the time or the novel or New England's greatest woman novelist. By slighting her work in this way for politically correct reasons, the film ironically does a disservice to women or at least to this one very talented woman, Loisa May Alcott. Merely using the actual house Louisa May Alcott grew up in for filming doesn't get at the heart of things, which in this film has sadly been cut out and offered on the altar of all things correct in the late not-so-great, stifling 1990's. See the version with Katherine Hepburn.
Rating:
Summary: Fine and Faithful Rendition of the Children's Classic Story
Review: This version of "Little Women" is quite fine, really, and there is very little that I can find to criticise. Winona Ryder does a good job as the independent Jo, the other actresses are also very good in their roles. Susan Sarandon is, alas, wasted in the role of Marmee but pretty much any good actress would be-- Marmee is a 2-dimensional character, all kindliness and charity. Marmee is not much of a role, and Ms. Sarandon does not try to make it any more than it is because it would not add anything to the story to try to find additional dimensions. Excellent actress that Ms. Sarandon is, she also knows what an ensemble cast is supposed to be and she does what is needed without upstaging anybody or anything. If I wanted to go looking for problems in this rendition, I would have to say that the only one would be with Winona Ryder as Jo. She was really too young to be playing that part, which is more than that of simply a tom-boyish girl awkwardly trying to find herself an identity as a woman. Winona has done some really fine work in several films, and she certainly isn't bad at all in this one [especially in the beginning of the movie], but she is out of her depth in 1994 playing a young woman in love with a much older man. Gabriel Byrne is as close to perfect as you can possibly get in his role as Professor Behr, but Winona is hardly more than a teenaged girl and her responses to him are a bit "off". I think it's because she was so young here and life experience was working against her for the latter part of the film. Otherwise, the film was tastefully and artfully done. I give it 4 out of 5 stars. It's definitely worth your time to watch.
Rating:
Summary: A Great Movie
Review: A charming family movie, very superbly acted, with excellent music and realistic sets. Winona Ryder is a perfect Jo, and Trini Alvarado, Kirsten Dunst, and Claire Danes are immediately Meg, Amy, and Beth. Susan Sarandon is also great in this movie, a good mother and a courageous wife.
Rating:
Summary: Magical
Review: I must confess: I never read the book; I never saw the theatrical release; I never even watched this movie when it was first shown on TV. Somehow, by the rarest of conincidences, I caught it again in its unedited entirety on television last Christmas. Late at night, watching this movie alone after everyone's gone to sleep, with the spirit of the holidays still fresh in my body, I was entranced. I couldn't turn myself away. This was no movie; it was a revelation to me. This must sound silly to most people, for someone to relate a movie watching experience akin to religious awakening. To understand my initial response to this film would take scholars in psychology and sociology. Suffice it to say that I being an only-child has no siblings, and watching this movie makes me feel like I'm part of a real family every time, only if it's just for a couple of hours. Being a long-time resident of the area (Vancouver) where this movie was made couples me even closer to it emotionally. Every time that Thomas Newman score starts, every time the camera pans across the spring flowers, fall leaves and winter snow, every time any one of the "sisters" flashes a smile on screen, I feel like time and space stopped just a little, for me. I have since that initial viewing purchased the DVD. I watch it whenever my life gets too noisy. Go out and buy it if you haven't already. After that, whine to your mom for a sister or brother. I sure wish I did. :)
Rating: 
Summary: Not much like the book
Review: I am surprised at how many reviewers think this movie is "just like the book." It is actually quite far from the book, and in fact, the producers made it a mishmash of Little Women and Louisa May Alcott's biography. While Alcott based Little Women on events in her family, it is by no means an autobiography. But yet, the mother is made into a feminist. Alcott's own mother was ahead of her time, but Mrs. March certainly is not.It is the book she is simply a good 19th century mother, waiting for her husband to come home. When on earth does she ever comment on corsets, for example? The story was also too Hollywoodized--for example, Winona Ryder to play Jo was poor casting. Jo was plain and tomboyish, not at all like Winona Ryder. And professor Baer, who she eventually marries, was a much older man, not young and handsome like in the movie. The movie was okay as a movie, and can stand on its own, but as an adaptation of the book, it is a far cry from the real thing. In fact, I would say that this version is the most glizty and least like the book of any version thus made. This is the politically correct version.
Rating:
Summary: Little Women
Review: Little Women is one of my favorite books so I was skeptical about the movie. How could anyone possible convey all that is in the book in one short move? Well they can't. What they did instead was make the most of what time they had. The characters were real and I fell in love with them all over again. No movie can convey every thing in this book but this movie comes very close. I love to watch it over and over just like I love to read the book over and over.
Rating:
Summary: Timeless Classic made by a Timeless Actress
Review: Winona Ryder is at her best in this fantastic adaption of Loiusa May Alcott's splendid book. In fact, all of the fine members of the cast and crew do a bang up job in this piece. The classic tale of Jo, Meg, Amy, Beth, their friend Laurie, and Marmie is properly done with the dignity and warmth of the book. It is too bad that Ms. Ryder has not reached the apex of her acting career after this movie. This film to date is her best acted piece. Her strength, joy, and incredible beauty give me goose bumps and make my heart soar. Jo March is everybody if we are able to channel the goodness of our heart and dare to live a dream. That really is what Little Women is all about. This is a great movie and will be a wonderful addition to anyone's collection if they collect movies. Thank you BB
Rating:
Summary: The best movie adaption of the novel!
Review: Of all the versions of Little Women that I have seen, Gillian Armstrong's is the best! She definitely chose her actors/actresses well - the cast includes: Winona Ryder (Jo), Claire Danes (Beth), Trini Alvrado (Meg), Kristen Dunst (Amy), Christian Bale (Laurie), Susan Sarandon (Marmee), and Gabriel Bryne (Professor Bhaer). What an astounding performance they gave - this movie made me laugh, cry, and feel for the characters each and every time I watched it! . . . And though some of my favorite scenes from the book were missing, it still portrays the characters extremely well. I love this movie and highly recommend this to all Little Women fans, the people who didn't bother to read Little Women, and everyone else!
|
