Book vs. Movie: Little Women in Film & TV (1933, 1949, 1994, 2017, 2019)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 лип 2024
- Louisa May Alcott's coming-of-age classic about four sisters in Civil War-era Massachusetts has resonated with readers since 1868. In this video, we look at how the following five English language screen adaptations of Little Women compare to the novel:
Little Women (1933)
Starring Katharine Hepburn, Frances Dee, Jean Parker, Joan Bennett,
Little Women (1949)
Starring June Allyson, Janet Leigh, Margaret O'Brien, and Elizabeth Taylor
Little Women (1994)
Starring Winona Ryder, Trini Alvarado, Claire Danes, Kirsten Dunst, and Samantha Mathis
Little Women (2017)
Starring Maya Hawke, Willa Fitzgerald, Annes Elwy, and Kathryn Newton
Little Women (2019)
Starring Saoirse Ronan, Emma Watson, Eliza Scanlen, and Florence Pugh
Chapters:
0:00 Prologue
0:35 Little Women (1933)
2:50 Little Women (1949)
4:37 Little Women (1994)
6:16 Little Women (2017)
8:26 Little Women (2019)
10:09 Epilogue
#BytheBook #LittleWomen - Фільми й анімація
Finally someone talks about the 2017 version!!!
Yes! I'vd read the book about once a year for 56 years, and the 2017 version feels the closest to the book to me, though I love the others too.
am i the only one who actually love the tv series (2017)? i feel like its so underrated
It’s my favourite!!!
Same!!!! It’s my favorite one
Here I am scouring the internet and UA-cam to find this! It’s my favorite by far, alongside the 94 version probably due to nostalgia. My friends adore the 2019 version and I keep tryna get them to watch the pbs series and argue my reasons, but they don’t seem to care despite claiming to be loyal fans of the novel. Anyway .. thanks for you comment
@@ehbendisdonc44 So coming from someone that has read the novel two years ago, loved it and just watched the 2019 movie: Why is the 2017 version your favorite? I will definitely watch it either way but I would like to know upfront why some Little Women fans adore this so much. Thanks! x
I love it too. My favourite is always the 1994 version, but 2017 is so good.
1994 is in a league of its own - it makes me cry every time. The music weaves a world that makes you feel nostalgic for something you may have never had. I’ve watched that version since I was too young to understand all the philosophy flying at me from onscreen lol!
Winona Ryder is the perfect Jo, she and Christian Bale had such great chemistry on screen
she was way too beautiful and feminine for a Jo
@@mohadeses4545 I respectfully disagree with your opinion. Before I saw the 1994 version I was also concerned about Wynona as Jo, but when I watched her, her spirit convinced me. Her Jo was also given the time to connect with Professor Bhaer, and it contributed to what I felt was a more well-rounded look at Jo March.
Honestly, all the movies make the fatal error of focusing too much on Jo. They fail to realize what many book reviewers miss as well. In Little Women, there are four main characters, not just one. And even though Jo got more attention in the later part than the others, she never was meant to be the only star. In fact, I would argue that Beth was in more scenes then even Jo. Not often front and center, this is true, but almost always in the background in her quiet way. And Meg and Amy were well-rounded, fleshed out characters in there own right.
The reason that Little Women stands out is it was about a family rather than an individual. We got to see both the growth and changes of each girl and how that affected each other as a whole.
I agree with you, however, as movies have only limited time, it would possibly be over divergent to shed equal light on every character, I do think that the version of 1994 had reasonably distributed time to each character so that the essence of the characters dispositions were depicted vividly.
When you read the book, I see it as a family unit of a mother doing her best to raise 4 young girls into being women of character with her husband off in a national war tearing their country apart. The title of the book says it all… Little Women is what Marmee was working to shape.
2017. It finally gets the recognition it deserves. Regardless of all else this is by far my favourite
It really gets the most right while still being absolutely beautiful to watch. Love it!
@Lindsay J it's on Amazon prime!
@Lindsay J it's in UA-cam now
I really liked the 2019 version (though it had some flaws) because it did justice to Amy. In the previous adaptations they made it look like jo and laurie were supposed to be together and him ending up with Amy was a mistake.....
Amen sister
When I read the book, I felt like the Amy-Laurie relationship was all wrong.
Yep, and what I like is the characters development of Amy
Greta Gerwig missed so much that happened in the books that could've done more justice to the Amy / Laurie relationship. The shorthand of Amy always having a crush on Laurie is only part of why they actually develop their own unique bond and fall in love. I would've loved to have seen Gerwig add even more depth to their relationship.
1994 and 2017 are my favorites and are the ones I recommend. 2019 one was confusing for my friends who have never seen or read the book since it jumps around to much
same here!
I feel that the overlapping timeline sort of made the development of the characters flat. And it's like they said, no one changes, it's hard to think that there's 7 years difference there.
"the way the [2019] characters move is distinctly modern" THIS!! this is my biggest pet peeve with the 2019 version. Everyone is so touchy, especially Jo and Laurie. Hugging like that back then would be a big deal. In the book, Jo often scolds Laurie for being too sentimental and touchy. It makes them seem like they're in love.
I saw the 2019 one twice in theaters and loved it. I've watched it countless times now at home lol. It may not be the most faithful in the way of the timeline, lines, historical accuracy, etc, but the 2019 version just FELT like Little Women to me. I don't know how to describe it. This was the first adaption where I felt like I watched the book come to life. I love the other adaptions, but this one just really stood out to me. I realized that something that made it feel more real was the dialogue, not what they were saying, but how they said it. The girls constantly spoke over one another and cut each other off, They acted like real sisters act, it didn't feel like each person said their line and they all waited to speak until it was their turn. It felt real, like I was just peaking in on these characters, not like I was watching a movie. Greta's display of dialogue was great. (Great example is the scene when they're leaving Laurie's house) Every time I watch it I notice something new and I love that about it. I could go on and on I just think 2019 did a great job of conveying the nature of the novel. (Not to mention the soundtrack is breathtaking.)
I also love that the climax of the film is the publishing of Jo's novel, not her engagement to Bhaer. It makes the film end full circle. I love her and Bhaer don't get me wrong, but having the main focus be her dreams and not her romance was refreshing and really was what Alcott wanted it to be.
I agree
1994 is the best in my opinion.
vilandra 111 agreed. The 2019 versions had so many problems. The 1994 version showed the best depiction of the civil war and the times people on the home front were experiencing.
agreed. I actually watch every year for christmas it kinda became a bit of a tradition from my sisters and I watching it then. I loved the depiction of their hardships but resilience in the face of that. I loved the dynamic of the sisters and loved marmie. I also really appreciated the discussions on transcendentalists, with Jo and prof. Bhaer having a shared life philosophy or kindred spirit. I felt they were very different from each other he seemed quiet, soft spoken and she a bit wild, outspoken but they had shared principles so I understood why he was a better fit for her then Laurie. The only negative I have is I didn't like the actresses portrayal as adult Amy. Young Amy was so fantastically done by kirsten dunst, she could be bratty but she had charm to her and you could see how much they cared for each other as sisters even though they fought at times (which makes it more realistic). But the actress who played adult amy was so wooden and bland none of that spark from the previous actress to speak of. It was a rumor she got the part as she was dating christian bale at the time not sure if that's true but she certainly was my least favorite of the movie.
roguechevelle I agree with everything you said especially the actress playing older Amy was stiff and didn’t show any of her vivacity while she wanted to be composed and lady like she still had an underlying child like energy that burst the constraints of her own making when she saw Laurie like in the 2019 movie. I feel like the actress playing Amy in the 2019 version was a great older Amy but was uncomfortable to watch as a young Amy.
I agree so much. A lot of people got swept up in the 2019 version -- and I agree, it was great, I enjoyed it! But it just didn't do the story or the period justice as well as the 1994 version. The 1994 casting was perfect, the costumes and sets and script were all faithful to the time period, and they did a great job of emphasizing the warmth and the heart of the original story. And that beautiful score! I hope it doesn't get too overlooked now that there are newer versions!
@@roguechevelle I didn't like the adult Amy either. The chemistry between Christian and Samatha wasn't there at all. It seemed forced.
The 1994 version was the first version I saw and that will always be my "Little Women". The plot, cast, visuals and music are all spot on. I am a huge Katharine Hepburn fan and her performance as Jo (particularly in the first half) does have a special place in my heart.
2017 is my favourite though I love the 90s one like everyone else. I think it’s the most underrated.
I agree. The miniseries is much more faithful to the book and "modern"/contemporary without shoving our time's values down our rhoats. It's more subtle and complex without feeling forced. There were some fantastic new scenes, a shitton of great acting and some chances that, to me, enganche the story. There are also some some scenes that are hardly ever in any of the other adaptations. I LOVE this miniseries. Cannot stress it enough.
I agree--the miniseries gave enough screen time to each of the March sisters to show the audience their own personalities while still keeping Jo as the main protagonist. The 2019 is ok, but the time jumps were hard to follow.
The 2017 is forever my favourite. It is by far the closest adaptation to the book in my eyes and is beautifully filmed, and perfectly cast.
The 1994 adaptation is my favorite. Hard for me to think of anyone other than Christian Bale as Laurie, although Chalamet did a good job in 2019. Thomas Newman's musical score for the 1994 film is so absolutely haunting and captivating that it really immerses you into the story.
YES, that music score!
the score makes me cry every time
I think Jonah Hauer-King did a great portrayal of Laurie (2017 miniseries). I did like Christian Bale-but he's almost too good looking for the role! LOL!
To me the 1949 version will always be the best, Elizabeth Taylor's spoiled Amy was amazing and June Allyson's Jo is to me the best Jo. I guess I grew up watching the 1949. Also the "I'm Hugo and I come with wicked intentions" scene makes my day everytime I watch it,
I also love somehow most the 1949 adaption, and especially the Hugo scene, whereas I see the other adaptions always in comparison with the novel.
Although I'm even a bit younger than the 1994 adaption, the 1949 adaption was the first one I saw and even before I did even read the book, and so it was shaping my view of LW. (The only bad thing is that the German dub changed some names, so Meg became Marthe; Theodore "Laurie" Laurence became Anton "Toni" Lorenz; and John Brooke became Walter Burg. I need to find out whether there is a better one.....): )
The one thing she didn't fail to show in every single version ? -
Jo - tearing her bonnet off ! 😂
To clarify for you, Paul Lukas (who played Prof. Bhaer in the Katherine Hepburn version) spoke in his own natural accent for the role. So that is, actually, a Hungarian accent you are hearing, not Italian.
Thank you for this info💖💖💖
I was so used to the 1994 version that I learned to love Winona Ryder and Christian Bale so much but I also love the new one. I also love how the 2019 one was filmed entirely in the story's home state of Massachusetts. My only issue was there was no one who looked like me in the 2019 version so it was harder to relate to!
Guess it’s not about you
The only Little Women adaption I've seen is the one from the nineties with Winona Ryder. I liked it and thought it was very accurate for the amount of time they had to work with.
The thing that is most difficult about adapting this extensive, two-part novel is portraying every character with the exact same amount of screen time. Although the clear protagonist is Jo, Little Women has a slew of characters with wholly fleshed-out personalities and stories of their own. My personal favorites are the 1994 and 2019 versions, but they are imperfect. There will never be a perfect adaption of Little Women. It just isn’t feasible.
That's true. But if you haven't seen the 2017 miniseries, I recomend you do. It's the one most truthful to the book, its characters (for the most part) and its spirit.
1994 is favorite “Little Women”❣️👏❤️
I was not very fond of the 2019 version but Amy March's portrayal really elevated it. The version really tried to give all the sisters a good arc.
I have a hard job picking a favourite. I haven't seen the oldest version you mentioned since it's hard to get a DVD copy where I live. But in my opinion all other versions do a good job of highlighting aspects of the story. While I think the Winona Ryder and the 2017 version are most faithful to the original text, the 2020 version includes some of the background story of Alcott's life and highlights a lot of the subtext. I love the different interpretations and will choose either according to my mood. I know a lot of people don't like the 40s version as much but I find June Allyson charming and will pick this version of LW whenever I'm in the mood for something whimsical and sweet ❤
1994 version will always be my favorite. The 2019 version made me want to throw things.
lmfao that’s how i feel!! i really do love most of the actors cast in the 2019 version, i think they are all very talented, but really poorly cast. none of them fit their characters. i feel like half the reason people like the movie is just because greta gerwig directed, and timothee, saorise, and florence were in it tbh.
Cause it SUCKED
Neither one is better than the other.
1994 ALL THE WAY! It’s a masterpiece! Love everything about it and will always be dear to my heart.
Meg's storyline is very often left out which is sad because it portrays married life, but it makes sense because it's less exciting than Amy's and Jo's.
1994 film is always my favourite. Nothing can be better. All cast members are great, music is charming and when I read the book I imagined everything very similar. I like other versions, but have some struggles with 2019, despite it is good too.
Kirsten Dunst was the best Amy for me.
I like the 1949 version best; I think Margaret O'Brien was excellent as Beth!
1949 was always my favorite growing up, but I will have to reconsider for the 1994 version.
What about Austen's Sense and Sensibility?! Would love to see one essay about this, please!
Do you have a favorite adaptation ?
@@gregedgerton3390 the 1995 one, to me it's perfect. I watched the BBC tv series (2008), but I didn't care much for it.
@@ImSandyRubi I'm not asking about Pride & Perdudice, - I know. But I hope you read the book.
@@gregedgerton3390 I'm not talking about Pride and Prejudice. Sense and Sensibility film 1995 with Emma Thompson, Kate Winslet, Alan Rickman and Hugh Grant, directed by Ang Lee. And yes, I have read all 6 novels by Jane Austen.
@@ImSandyRubi I know. I was changing the subject. Perhaps that might have been a bit rude.
I’ll sit to read the book I was given as a girl every year. My imagination from the book is the best… no film can match. As a woman in her 70’s it’s an annual read of my favorite story.
my fave is always gonna be the 1994 version but the 2017 miniseries is a close second
I was so excited when I saw that you uploaded this, Little Women will always be my favorite 💕 thank you for covering this one, can’t wait for more!
My favorite is 1949 version and I love June Allyson as Jo March. She's simply the best.
As much as I love the 2019 version I feel like the 2017 one is my favorite (and I really like the 1994 one too).
Much as I liked the 2019 adaption, Saoirse Ronan was playing Louisa May Alcott rather than Jo and they should have cast someone else for young Amy cause that just didn't work at all.
The 2019 adaptation is my favorite. It is the only one that does justice to Amy, Meg, and Beth at once. For once we don't lose sight of Meg after her marriage. The dialogue is extremely--painfully--faithful to Alcott, borrowing from other books like Rose in Bloom when it goes beyond the text of Little Women. Since we're unlikely to get silver screen adaptations of other Alcott novels, I'm grateful that Greta Gerwig used this opportunity to explore all of Alcott's writings. The dialogue in the 2019 adaptation is vastly more period-appropriate than any other adaptation since it is, for the most part, taken straight from the pages of Alcott's writings. The delivery may be perceived as more modern, but the words are not. However, I do wish there was an adaptation that included the storyline of Jo's first novel, that rounded out Laurie's musical talents in contrast to Jo's writing and Amy's painting, and that portrayed the chapter of Amy at the benefit and her speech afterward.
Yes I believe one of the downsides of the Gerwig version is the lack of exploration of Laurie's character and his personal life, but I guess something's got to go in exchange for more characterization of the March Sisters
Honestly, I thought the 2019 version was just for Amy and Jo. 75% of the movie was about them. Beth had very little to do in the film and Meg only had 2 minute scenes cut between the others' drama. The 2017 version does an amazing job at fleshing out Beth and portraying Meg's personality well. It has more time, so maybe that's why they could do it. No hate, but I really think the 2019 version didn't do justice to Beth or Meg.
And the 2017 version does tell about Jo's first novel, so please give it a watch!
@hammertapping yes!! The book is all about self improvement- the pilgrim's progress. So many people wanna love Jo for being untamable but that wasn't what Alcott wrote!
Thank you for all the time you dedicate to making your videos.
Great content, as usual
My favorite is the 2017 version 🙂
My fave version is Little Women 1978 mini series staring Susan Dey as Jo March
Great cast all around love this tv version.
Thank you!!!
I've been waiting for this video with such anticipation!
I haven't seen any movie adaptation of this book, but once I finish reading, I'll definitely watch two or three last ones.
The book is so good! I'd say the 2017 version follows it most closely and is still beautiful. It's on Amazon prime if you have that.
I LOVE the 1994 version, and watch it at least once a year. I didnt mind the 2017 and found the 2019 version ok, but hated that Amy was too old for the younger, and found Laurie too young for the older... so had a hard time with that... but REALLY hated the costumes, hair, and look of the women. But overall, would not say no if someone wanted to watch them as I do LOVE the story itself.
Favourite Jo: Katharine Hepburn (1933) or Winona Ryder (1994) - though Maya Hawke (2017) is also excellent
Favourite Meg: Willa Fitzgerald (2017)
Favourite Amy: Florence Pugh (2019) - the ONLY thing I truly love about this adaptation tbh - or Kathryn Newton (2017)
Favourite Beth: Annes Elwy (2017)
Favourite Fritz: Gabriel Byrne (1994)
Favourite Laurie: Christian Bale (1994)
Favourite Marmee: Emily Watson (2017)
Overall, I think the 2017 version is truer to the original novel, but the 1994 film is the best cinematic adaptation (and has by far the best depiction of the Fritz/Jo relationship despite the liberties taken with the source material), though for sentimental reasons I think the 1933 film will always be particularly close to my heart.
Annes Elwy did an amazing job as Beth. Seriously so much love for the 2017 version for bringing Beth and Meg to life even though they are the softer sisters. I think the writing really brought out the depth of all the characters.
I hope you are joking about Amy. As I said in my comment, she looks, sounds, moves and has the grace of a 250 lbs lumberjack!
@@msinvincible2000 every actress in the 2019 version moved and behaved as if they were modern girls. None of them were graceful. None of them held themselves as a woman of that era would have. I think it was intentional by Great Gerwig to make them more relatable to the modern audience. Imo it just made them look uncomfortable in their period clothing. I will say that I think Florence Pugh brought a lot of depth and emotion to Amy when she is usually just petulant and proud. This isn't in how she moved but more her inflection in her voice.
@@msinvincible2000 You seem nice. /s Go away, troll.
2019 is my favorite and the one I think captures better Louise feelings about her books.
Truly love your videos, and love little women, so this is an extra bonus video!
I love the Katherine Hepburn and Winona Ryder versions best.
Love these. Please keep posting! May I suggest Wuthering Heights? :)
The 2017 version is so underrated. Although I like 2019 better
can I pick you r brain ? :D im happy to find someone who also likes both versions, but my preference has to be for the pbs version. My friends get sensitive when I compare the two, in defense of Gerwig’s, but I haven’t heard much reasoning. I’d love to hear yours
Hi like the 1933 & 1994 versions ,they were very much like the book and the most autentic ,
I saw 1994, 2017 and 2019. 1994 is my favorite. And Beth is my favorite March sister.
My favorite adaption is the 1978 mini series with Susan Dey as Joe.
BryttTheLegit I never knew of that adaptation. I would be so excited to see it.
@@mybabba You can watch it here on UA-cam. That's how I stumbled upon it. ua-cam.com/video/7GBqgNYgkkU/v-deo.html
Mine, too.
I had to stop watching after 10 minutes. It is terrible
I also enjoyed this miniseries, and it has scenes I liked that contributed to a better version of adult Amy .
*Aunt March confronting Meg about John and then removing Meg from her will (and later reinstating her. I don't think that was in the book).
*"Young" Amy gives Jo some praise for cutting her hair. Little girl Amy would probably not have done that, but I would like to think that it helped towards her later maturing.
*Adult Amy's scolding of Laurie and his lack of goals. It's different than 2019, but it's also well done.
*Amy and Laurie's return home from overseas. They spot Jo walking in a nearby field. Amy is the one to encourage Laurie to go talk to Jo because she knows that Jo must have felt like she lost her best friend when they had their big argument, and that they needed to talk it out.
*William Shatner as Professor Bhaer. An unexpected casting choice, but I liked seeing him in this different role.
My favorite is the 2019 version. For the record, just because it's done differently doesn't mean it's bad. I think that the way Amy was portrayed in the 2019 version is the best portrayal of her character thus far. As well as the fact that you see her and Laurie as adults first, so their love makes a lot more sense. Pugh's portrayal of Amy made me actually relate to her. She seemed less manipulative and more young and childish, you actually see her grow. And her monologue about the truth of why she must marry was touching and true. I think it was incredibly well done and not forced at all. I think that the friendship between Laurie and Jo felt real because Ronan and Chalamet have fantastic chemistry. But, they are dond well as friends, where as you get to see Amy crush on Laurie from a young age. Also, you get to see Laurie rebound and make bad decisions, showing that Amy isn't the rebound, she's the obvious choice that he was too blind to see. I will say, I think that Marmy and Meg suffered in this adaptation, but not enough to warrant a hateful rant on it. You also get to see Laurie's grandfather portrayed as a lonely man, rather than a stern and angry guy who I would've never left alone with my child. All in all, I believe it was the best adaptation.
Hello-
i just watched the 1949 version with June Allyson as Jo. its quite a sumptuous production. in fact in its own
way is just as admirable an adaptation of Alcott's novel as the recent 2019 version.
The film versions always make the story a mixture of little women and good wives. This goes for all of the ones ive seen.
To this day the 1994 is by far the best adaptation of the book the cast the dialogues everything was perfect...
Thanks for sharing.
Recovering from corona 19, I am enjoying your analysis of the various versions out there. Please do not be shy about a novel that might appeal to a mostly male audience.
2019 and others are good, but the 2017 version is the best.
Yes.
It jumped from the pages of the book
Winona Ryder !
1994 of course
Don’t know..don’t care what people says...2019 version was te best! It did Amy's character justice..she was not a background villain who is happy with her sister's leftovers. She matured herself & made Laurie mature with her...& though it ruined Fredrick's character..it still did Jo's character really good & gave us a view of the Author's struggles...in a word it was the best in my view!!😍😍
I am so in love with this channel
i love jo and amy
1994 and 2017 are the best 👌
I enjoyed the 2017 version the most even though Amy's actress played her strange in her younger years, it was pretty great in my opinion. Though I am partial to the 90's version, it being the one I grew up on, but the 2017 still wins for me. With the 2019 version, it just gave me a headache with all the switching of time. The acting was amazing and the overall take on it was awesome, but the flipping is what made it terrible in my opinion.
Yes, I agree with you. Amy's actor and how she came across is the only major complaint I have for the 2017 version.
@Liza Johnson, I've always felt like it was portrayed how it appeared to Jo at the time, as if from her teenage emotional point of view. I myself have experienced heated moments with my younger sister when I was amazed at how can she be so cruel and yes, almost evil. But in the end, it was also my own temper, that helped paint that picture.
Wait a minute, New Dream Little Women Journals Book Collection; Meg's Dearest Wish, Jo's Troubled Heart, Beth's Snow Dancer, and Amy's True Prize.
There was one in 1978 with Susan Dey and Eve Plumb.
Love it.❤t
1994 is easily the best imo, second place going to the lovely 2017 miniseries.
Wait a minute, New Dream Portraits of Little Women Book Collection; Meg's Story, Jo's Story, Beth's Story, Amy's Story, Meg Makes a Friend, Jo Makes a Friend, Beth Makes a Friend, Amy Makes a Friend, A Gift for Meg, A Gift for Jo, A Gift for Beth, A Gift for Amy, Christmas Dreams, Birthday Wishes, and Ghostly Tales.
I loved the 2019 version, but i like the 1994 version too.
I love 2017 and 2019 version :>
Thanks!
I didnt even know there was a 2017 adaptation !! Looking it up now. (It's on youtube here in parts !!) Was always a fan of the 1994 version as it was produced so well, acted so well, and the music enhanced all of those things. The 2019 one has grown on me and Florence Pugh was ingenious.
Love little Women so much! It’s my favourite classic novel!
There are a couple more versions not covered here that are available on DVD. An earlier BBC miniseries version from 1970 has a dry, very British tone and plays almost more like a theatrical play. The Laurie in that version is a standout, however. The 1978 American miniseries is mentioned below. And then there was the 2018 cinematic version, with the story transferred to modern day.
I love these videos
Wish there was some comment on the 2005 broadway musical! I adore this version as well and it feels very akin to the 2017 and 2019 versions, just with added song and some dance
Please do videos on the movie & TV series adaptations of the following books: The Hobbit & The Lord of the Rings (Rankin/Bass, Ralph Bakshi & Peter Jackson versions), The Hardy Boys/Nancy Drew Mysteries, Nancy Drew, Alice in Wonderland (live action AND animated versions), A Christmas Carol (including The Stingiest Man in Town & The Muppet Christmas Carol), Treasure Island (including Muppet Treasure Island), The Frog Prince (including Cannon Movies Tales, Shelley Duvall's Faerie Tale Theatre, The Muppets, & Disney's The Princess and the Frog), A Wrinkle in Time, & Robin Hood (including the animated Disney version)
The versions made reflect the timeline of when they were made and the society of those times. There’s a Little Women for every generation. I own all of them, so far, though am waiting for the newest to purchase. I can tell you that my mum loves the Katherine Hepburn version, this film was her generation. In my life I have seen 4 or 5 different versions made, they have all been good productions.
Wait a minute, New Dream Louisa May Alcott's Little Women Book Collection; Little Women, Meg, Jo, Beth, and Amy, Good Wives, Little Men, Life at Plumfield with Jo's Boys, and Jo's Boys and How They Turned Out.
2019 is THE version. Grete Gerwig’s nonlinear timeline was a stroke of artistic genius. The way it established Laurie and Amy from the moment you meet both as well as having tell the audience right away and in no uncertain terms he wasn’t sorry Jo turned him down leaves no room for doubt or question that she is not just the right March for him but the right woman for him. It beautifully told Amy’s story in the right way because she is so strong, just as determined, and clearly the realist of the family but a line that made it clear Jo’s idealism is dependent upon Amy marrying rich is in Jo’s first speech about selling her story to support her family so she had to sacrifice her artistic talents to conform to what sells is only until Amy married rich. It’s told Amy as not a villain, simply immature, so expertly. It makes the romance between she and Laurie not as second choice, consolation prize, simply wanting any sister to be in the family, and not even getting your girlhood choice of husband as any of the above instead two people who (re)meet, matured, fall in love, and belong together because they’re complimentary, push yet support each other’s personality in a romantic relationship beautifully. It shows why he and Jo are a terrible romantic match, are best friends even brother/sister, and alike in many ways good and bad which is another way it does well by showing Jo’s flaws and imperfections in ways the others don’t or failed to do. Finally, it shows each sister’s dreams are important and the real strength is going after them without shame or fear no matter what anyone says.
I never knew they made another one after claire danes and wyonna 😮
What about the 1978 version, it was pretty good, yet I have always loved Katherine Hepburn version. And June Allyson too.
I love the 1994 version 🙂
They didn't include the tv miniseries of 1978 on NBC
One of my faves.
my favorite is the one with june allison!
I love Katherine Hepburn. Her Jo is iconic.
1949 and 1994✨✨✨
The one from 2019 is the superior adaptation for me.
Why did you skip the 1978 version, with Susan Dey as Jo and William Shatner as Professor Bhaer? It's great fun, although possibly a bit campy.
William Shatner?!
@@stargirl7646 The same! I think there are even clips of him in that role that you can watch.
Beth .Garfinkel oh man I’m gonna have to look that up haha
I despise modernization of fiction of previous eras. It is simply dishonest to assign modern ideology and customs to a time when these things had no relevance.
Thank you. I'm thinking that's partly why I'm partial to the 1933 Katherine Hepburn version as it was closer in time to when the events, although fictitious, were supposed to have taken place. They were able to capture the spirit more.
I love the 1994, 2017 and 2019 versions in different ways. For me though, it really comes down to favourite portrayals of the characters:
*1994* - My favourite Jo and best young Amy (Kirsten Dunst is flawless). Beth is tied with 2019 for winner.
*2017* - By far my favourite Meg (with whom I've always identified most. Definitely the version that does her story most justice IMO). Mr Baher is also my top pick. I could see why Jo might be attracted to him but he wasn't as blatantly sexy as the 2019 Baher.
*2019* - Best old Amy (and Florence also does an excellent job as young Amy considering how difficult it is to straddle the two ages of the character). Also features my favourite Marmee, Laurie, Mr Laurence and joint winner for best Beth.
I agree whole heartedly
My favorite
49, 94, 17 are all great versions.
Me from Turkey i love western literature
1933 LW - overly theatrical
1949 - the funniest adaptation. Has the best Meg and Marmee. Has the most book accurate Amy but she disappears near the end. Beth is rather intense
1994 - Susan Sarandon has strong presence but lacks warmth or wisdom. She seems more like a coach or a den mother. Winona should have been Meg.
2019 - The March sister's need for financial security is clearly defined which makes for a satisfying ending. Imagine if Florence and Saoirse switched roles.
1994 is the quintessential version and is my favorite.,.
I thought there was a 1950 version as well? I love the 1994 version