Little Women (1994) Reviews

• "Little Women" in it's own right

  mercybell2002-09-11

  Though some may argue that the older classic versions of Little Women with Katherine Hepburn and June Allison may be better because it sticks to the book, this is the only version that captures the spirit of the book. Though the filmmakers took license to cut away certain specifics, the end result is an absolutely gorgeous film that stands on it's own completely. One would be able to watch this film without ever having read or known the book and seen it as it's own film. The film thrives on small scenes and nuances, moments of person to person contact, production design and cinematography, the all important score (which adds a great deal to the film). This delicate and complicated symbiosis between all aspects tactfully and poignantly creates the story, something missing from many movies these days which creates a tangible and effervescent emotional layer. Then the acting of one of the best ensembles to hit the screen in a long time. Keep an eye out for Susan Sarandon and Claire Daines in roles that ought to have been nominated along with Ryder. These actors create people that endear themselves to us, and make the film even more than it could have been. It's a small scale masterpiece that will leave you in tears. The film is honest and true in it's portrayal of human emotion. It went from being an adaptation of the book to it's own story and portrayal of people and their lives. It's beautiful aesthetically and dramatically, and a real gem of a film.

• Heartwarming and true to the book

  LeadingLadybug2006-02-12

  "Little Women" is a gem of a movie, encompassing comedy, drama, and romance into one well-made film that is true to Louisa May Alcott's literary classic. It follows the lives of the four March sisters, from the turbulence of youth, the turmoil and romance of adolescence, the joy of love, and the pain of loss. The quality of this movie depends entirely upon the chemistry between the actors, and it accomplished this with success. The film is a vignette of scenes throughout the sisters' lives, showing their relationships with one another and with the people around them. Winona Ryder is the quintessential Jo, the tomboyish, spirited sister who dreams of becoming an accomplished writer. She brings a refreshingly sweet, human touch to the character, who is as impulsive and headstrong as she is ambitious and loving. Ryder carried the film beautifully, and much of its success is due to her. Trini Alvarado made a very pretty and convincing Meg, the dependable older sister, although she is not so set on marrying for money as she is in the book. Claire Danes as sweet, selfless Beth, really shone in one heartbreaking scene that is impossible not to cry through. For her performance as the spoiled youngest sister, Amy, the very young Kirsten Dunst showed remarkable potential, and brought humor to the character. Christian Bale as Laurie was everything the "boy next door" should be: handsome, kind, and charming. His chemistry with Winona Ryder was considerable, and made their friendship very believable. Susan Sarandon played a wonderful Marmee, supportive and loving towards her girls. Another thing I would recommend is the soundtrack to this movie, composed by Thomas Newman, which has some gorgeous music on it. 10/10

• a triumph

  mercybell2003-04-04

  I hear it's really hard to turn a book into a movie, and even as a viewer, I notice this. You can keep the book and lose a movie, or you make a movie and lose a book. But this balances and keeps the essence of the book and creates a miraculous movie that works on every single level. It's depth, it's warmth, it's beauty (from aesthetics to costumes to storyline), it all works. I saw this movie before I read the book, and my mom, a big fan of the book loved it, so did my dad who had never read it. Unlike a lot of period classics that are turned into films, this one has no rigidity or boring spots, and it doesn't feel like the dime a dozen period films out there that re-use the same costumes and replay the same stories. It flows and invites you into the world of these girls, making the 1860s and the March family intensely real. Fabulous acting by an ensemble cast completes this film. Winona Ryder was inspired casting, and in my opinion makes the best screen Jo ever. She's feisty, strong, tomboyish, but has a warmth and grace about her that I feel Katharine Hepburn and June Allyson (the most famous Jo's) didn't have and suits the character wonderfully. the best thing about these characters is that they endear themselves to you, something many movies lack. Great ensemble as well: Susan Sarandon, Christian Bale, Claire Danes (at 14, believe it or not), Eric Stoltz, Kirsten Dunst, Trini Alvarado, Susan Wickes, Gabriel Byrne all of them are incredible, and fit perfectly. And if you can get through Beth's death scene without crying, you're pretty tough. It's a scene that doesn't pull sentimental melodrama, but plays honestly and goes to that heartbreaking sadness of losing someone. And the geranium petals and dolls and Thomas Newman's brilliant score finish off the scene, and I think makes it one of the greatest scenes in any film of the last 10 years (and they didn't even include it in the 75th Oscars montage, tsk tsk). The ending is incredibly lovely, and as James Lipton of the Actors Studio says, only needs those "three words" to coney everything that needs to be said. This is a beautiful film. It's inviting, but not overly sweet, and though nothing too exciting happens, still very fulfilling and entertaining; it can be very bittersweet, but it is a joyful film, and says a lot about people and our emotions and our lives and yet is not confrontational in the least. It pulled out themes and messages which are often looked over out of one of the world's most famous books and made a lasting work of art that touches your heart.

• I have always loved "Little Women" this is a wonderful rendition.

  The_Sisk02002-09-05

  The actors did a wonderful job. The wardrobe, scenery, furniture --- everything seemed authentic. I smiled, laughed and cried!!!!!! I really enjoyed watching this movie. Susan Sarandon was just perfect (as usual) I usually don't like remakes of any movie, but this one was wonderful!!!

• Perfectly cast, lovely

  rachel.near2001-04-12

  This version of Little Women is lovely. Everyone is perfectly cast, and fans of the novel will be happy that it is quite true-to-book. Winona Ryder is perfect as Jo, quite equal to Katherine Hepburn's performance in the 1933 version. Susan Sarandon is wonderful (though I'm not sure Marmee would talk about 'restrictive corsets' to John Brooke). :) Christian Bale is an excellent Laurie, and Gabriel Byrne is wonderful as our Professor Bhaer. Kirsten Dunst and Claire Danes showed acting ability beyond their years. Trini Alvarado was a very pretty and sweet Meg. Samantha Mathis was a very pretty older Amy, but she could have been more lively. Eric Stoltz was a great John Brooke. I had never pictured Brooke with red hair, but it was nice. The rest of the cast was terrific, especially Mary Wickes as Aunt March. For once, Mary wasn't playing somebody's nurse or maid. :) The music and cinematography were beautifully done. It was absolutely wonderful, and I highly recommend it (and the book of the same name). :)