Little Women (1979)

Louisa May Alcott’s beloved novel is brought to life by a stellar cast and all-star creative team in this acclaimed production, which has been hailed as the most faithful adaptation of the children’s classic. Set in New England during the Civil War, Little Women chronicles the lives and loves of four sister – Jo, Meg, Amy and Beth – who after their father leaves for battle, must rely on each other for strength in the face of tragedies both large and small.

An Admirable Adaptation

Louisa May Alcott's beloved novel is, in my opinion, one of the most difficult books to adapt to film. Much of the story revolves around inner struggles, which is hard to portray on screen, the period costumes are anything but simple, and besides this, a great deal of time transpires, so often the actors either look too old or too young for their parts. While this TV miniseries isn't perfect, I think that the filmmakers did an admirable job. The running time of a little over three hours gives the advantage of accuracy, without ever dragging. Even though certain portions were altered or cut out altogether, the script flowed naturally and presented many of the often overlooked facets to this lovely story. In my review here, I will attempt to report both the strengths and weaknesses of this movie.

On a positive note, the four March sisters are superb in their roles. Susan Day is the most human and real Jo I have seen so far, combining all the fiery temper, kindness and impetuous loyalty she possessed in the novel. Not only was Meg (Meredith Baxter) sufficiently pretty, but I was very much pleased to see her character given more development as she grew from girl to woman. Eve Plumb became everything I had ever pictured Beth to be and Ann Dusenberry's Amy grew on me, although she never became a favorite of mine. Altogether, I felt that this film captured the sisters dynamic well and gave each of them a chance to shine. The rest of the cast did a good job too, and I especially loved Greer Garson's proud and stuffy "Aunt March" and Richard Gilliland as the neighbor boy, Laurie. Speaking of Laurie, it was a delight to see the conflict between him and his grandfather included, which is usually glossed over. Other highlights are the beautiful sets, outdoor scenery, gorgeous costumes and especially the appropriate ending where Beth is remembered.

Now onto some of the flaws: as usual, the movie reflects the era in which it was filmed, which in this case is the 70s. My sister couldn't help but point out Laurie's plaid suit and the dated hairstyle. Speaking of hair, Jo's never seemed to grow back even as time passed, which I personally found a bit frustrating. Couldn't they have filmed the scenes at the end and the beginning while Susan Day had long hair, and then gradually cut it shorter as they got to the middle point where Jo sacrificed it for her family's sake? I also didn't care for the score (it wasn't subtle enough) and I hated the dramatic fade outs, which broke up the flow of the scenes. However, the age of the actors (particularly Laurie and Amy) at the start of the movie probably bothered me the most. They looked silly pretending to be younger than they were. This really cannot be helped though, and one of the reasons that "Little Women" is so hard to adapt is because so much time elapses with little physical change in the actors.

As a huge fan of Louisa May Alcott, I am always skeptical when I see a movie version of "Little Women." I know that the perfect adaptation of such a classic is probably impossible, but I honestly enjoyed this one. The acting was good; the material was handled with care, with a couple of allusions to Alcott's upbringing and time period. I couldn't help but overhear a bit of conversation between Mr. March and Mr. Brooke on transcendentalism and the allusion to women's rights after the civil war when the March girls, as well as Laurie and Mr. Brooke, go to see the feminist Susan B Anthony. Those little details showed me that the filmmakers cared about Alcott and sincerely did their best to honor her while bringing wholesome entertainment to the viewer. Because of that, I can wholeheartedly recommend this DVD! June 9, 2008

Very good for a 1970s TV movie

I hadn't seen this back in the 1970s when I was growing up, but I would have loved watching it then because it had actresses from my favorite TV shows at the time (The Brady Bunch - Eve Plumb, The Partridge Family - Susan Day, Family - Meredith Baxter). I enjoyed it the other night, and those actresses showed more acting talent than I was expecting. The sets were sometimes cheap (fake snow, etc.) and the newer version with Wynonna Ryder and Susan Sarandon was better produced, but a young girl would definately appreciate this one too. April 29, 2008

Little Women

I enjoyed this version of Little Women because it adhered very closely to the novel. I found the casting believable and hence excellent choices. It is always good to see how each character is presented and I was happy with this - Although it is not my favorite rendition. December 12, 2007

Dated production, but very good adaptation

I remember seeing this when it aired on TV lo so many years ago, and am very happy that it is now available on DVD.

There are many things to recommend about this production; first of all, Susan Dey as Jo. Physically, she's closer to the vivid description Alcott herself gives us (tall, long-limbed, round-shouldered, and awkward) than is Wynona Ryder--much as I admire Ryder's performance, her petiteness keeps me from truly seeing the Jo March I imagined as a child. Dey is also by turns funny, tender, fiery, and poignant. Meredith Baxter-Birney is an appropriately pretty Meg, and portrays the character's little vanities while retaining her essential appeal. As gentle Beth, Eve Plumb is surprisingly affecting, particularly in her final scene with Jo at the seaside. As for Ann Dusenberry...one wishes they had cast a true 12-year-old for the young Amy, as Dusenberry's valiant attempt to play young unfortunately results in an overly-petulant Shirley Temple. Her grown-up Amy is the least satisfying protrayal of the four sisters.

Richard Gilliland's Laurie seems too modern and all-American for a character who was reared and educated in Europe. Cliff Potts, on the other hand, is a good Brooke, upright without being stuffy. William Shatner's customary hammy style somehow works for Professor Bhaer, but his German accent is unconvincing, to say the least.

Of the "veterans", Greer Garson stands out for her memorable Aunt March: no crusty, bad-humored fossil of a woman is she, but an elegantly overblown product of her era and upbringing, with foreshadowings of Wilde's Lady Bracknell. Dorothy Maguire and Robert Young as Marmee and Mr. Laurence turn in solid, intelligent performances.

My biggest gripes are the non-period turns of phrase in the script, the non-period character shoes (WHITE ones, yet!) on all the sisters (Edith Head, what were you thinking???), and the blatantly non-period music Laurie bashes out on the piano, which sounds closer to Andrew Lloyd-Webber than Beethoven. Amy's wigs are interesting, as well...

Of course, the time constraints of television necessitates a cut-and-paste version of this long novel, but the overall construction of the script is quite satisfying. Hopefully there will be an adaption in future which puts Laurie's proposal to Jo in its proper place, which is AFTER she comes back from New York, but before he goes back to Europe.

Despite the above-mentioned flaws, this is a DVD well worth purchasing and recommending to any fan of Alcott's beloved classic.

November 11, 2007

Not As Good As I Remembered

I remember watching this on TV and thinking how good it was. I was disappointed when I rewatched it. It's ok, but the newer versions and especially the older (B&W) versions are much better. November 3, 2007

More reviews at Amazon.com ...