IMDb user comments for
Little Women (1994)

advertisement

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 11:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Index

105 comments in total

---

37 out of 38 people found the following comment useful :-
"Little Women" in it's own right, 11 septiembre 2002

Author: Mercy Bell (mercybell) de MA

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.

---

21 out of 21 people found the following comment useful :-
Heartwarming and true to the book, 12 febrero 2006

Author: LeadingLadybug de United States

"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

---

17 out of 18 people found the following comment useful :-
Watching This Yields 'Rich' Results - A Wonderful Re-Make, 12 enero 2007

Author: ccthemovieman-1 de Lockport, NY, United States

"Rich" is the word I would best use to describe this movie. It's rich in cinematography with gorgeous scenery and interiors; rich in characters with all good-hearted men and women of character; rich in love for each whether its for family or for suitors and rich in storytelling. Yes, it's definitely more of a woman's movie than a man's, and not the sort of thing I would normally enjoy, but this movie was so well-done that I cannot say anything negative about it. In the modern-era of film-making (late '60s to today), it is always a pleasure to see a totally clean and nice movie. The cast is excellent. It's nice to see Winona Ryder and Susan Sarandon play "wholesome" roles, something they don't always do, but they do it well here. Ryder is the star of this story although everyone gets decent screen time. Ryder's character - the more independent, feminist-type thinker - will always get preference anyway in a Hollywood film. My favorite of the "Little Women" was "Beth," the most kind and compassionate one. Claire Danes' innocent face won me over. The real beauty was the grown-up "Amy," played by Samantha Mathis. Most of her role, however, is seen as a young girl and played by Kirsten Dunst, who has gone on to become a pretty famous actress. The other sister is "Meg," who is a solid, conservative woman and is played by Trini Alvarado. Her role is the smallest of the four girls. Sarandon's "Mrs. Abagail 'Marmee' March," holds everyone together as the mother and head of the household while her husband is off fighting at War. She looks more like an older sister. I liked the March daughters' suitors in here, too. First there was "Laurie" or "Teddy" as he also was called by the girls. A young Christian Bale played him. Then there was Gabriel Byrne as "Friedrich Bhaer." It was a bit strange hearing this Irishman play a part that required a German accent. Eric Stoltz plays Meg's future husband, "John Brooke." He starts off as someone with a very stiff personality but soon changes into a warm and good husband. If this film appears slow in the first 20-30 minutes, hang in there because it gets better and better as it goes along. This is just a beautiful film with fantastic visuals and memorable story that should bring a tear or two to your eyes by the end. Great storytelling usually wins out, and that's the case with this movie.

---

17 out of 18 people found the following comment useful :-
I have always loved "Little Women" this is a wonderful rendition., 5 septiembre 2002

Author: LightAlpha0 de New Jersey, USA

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!!!

---

14 out of 15 people found the following comment useful :-
Wow, what do you know? A worthy remake!, 14 enero 2002

Author: Boyo-2

I've seen the original, starring Katherine Hepburn as Jo which was directed by George Cukor in (what seems to be) 1901. That's an excellent version of this story, a real classic.

Maybe the story just needed a 'new coat of paint' to spruce it up a bit because it sure does seem new and worth telling again.

Winona Ryder has to carry the movie, more or less, and gives a confident performance as the independent Jo. Susan Sarandon is not around that much but makes a good Marmee. Christian Bale is great, as always, and Trini Alvarado and Eric Stoltz round out the cast.

You don't see Claire Danes that much, but then it becomes about her quite a bit as the story moves on. A gift she receives for Christmas from a kindly neighbor could give your tearducts a workout, at the very least.

Beautiful movie. Could even be longer, and how many times can you say that about anything?

---

14 out of 17 people found the following comment useful :-
Perfectly cast, lovely, 12 abril 2001
Author: (rachel.near@usa.net) de Ironton, OH

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). :)

---

13 out of 16 people found the following comment useful :-
a triumph, 4 abril 2003

Author: Mercy Bell (mercybell) de MA

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.

---

12 out of 18 people found the following comment useful :-
Fantastic, 21 diciembre 2005

Author: jpschapira de Argentina

Mrs. March (Susan Sarandon) sits down on the floor during Christmas to read a letter and to light candles with her four children. Then they sit around the piano and play Christmas' songs. Outside is snowing as a beautiful music plays (Thomas Newman). And there's a lot of snow in "Little Women", but it is not a film about Christmas or snowy weathers; it is about five women and how each of them face that exhilarating journey called life.

The letter mentioned above comes from the girls' father, who is in War. At that time, daughters weren't used to say "dad"; "father", they called him. They gathered in a big room and shared their illusions: "It's not the same without the presents", Meg (Trini Alvarado) explained. "I'm desperate for drawing pencils", the little Amy (Kirsten Dust) said. "I wish I didn't have to work for great aunt March", Jo (Winona Ryder) complained.

Beth (Claire Danes), talented, quiet and always uninspiring, is asked: "What is your wish for Christmas?". "I would like the War to end so father could come home", she replies; and all of the daughters want that too. "They do have a nice piano", Beth adds, looking over the window where Laurie (Christian Bale) is playing. Laurie ("the captive" according to the girls) will be a dear friend of the family and the girls.

They will all play together in a secret society that writes articles and carries on plays; they will all listen to Jo's stories waiting for the newest chapter, they will all have a constant smile on their faces, because they are nice persons. The girls, for example, know that they're not classy, but it doesn't bother them. However, they need to be presented in society, and find a man that wants them.

A friend of Mrs. March comes one day and they're talking about the girls: "Meg needs to find a good man, she could; she has to attend to the events". Instantly, Jo runs down the stairs enthusiastically and tells something to her mom. Her friend interrupts: "And this one is getting wasted with so much reading". In fact, Jo is very intelligent and wise, destined for big things; and knows it and is proud of it.

One day she and Meg go to an event and Jo tries to hide from classy boys and finds Laurie. They laugh, they dance, and years later when Laurie goes to college, Jo tells him: "I wish you didn't have to go". They look at each other and you could swear they are in love, but they haven't even kissed. Again, years later, he asks her to marry him, and she rejects him generating misunderstanding in the family. Life doesn't always go as it is supposed to.

So Jo seeks for independence, going to New York, where she meets Friedrich (Gabriel Byrne), an old, humble German teacher. They both share the same interests, and he wishes to protect her. He advises her grandly about her story writing: "Write from life; from the deepness of your soul". When they first kiss, you can tell that Jo wants it, and you instantly feel bad for Laurie, because you think he is Jo's fate; but many of the girls' fate is betrayed and things don't always turn out right at the end of the road.

Tragedies and moments of great happiness follow in the life of the Marches; uncertainties and twists. Mrs. March tries to be the core she always was and keep the family together, and it is Susan Sarandon's task fulfilled in this great portrayal of hers. With very little words spoken and a bunch of understanding looks, we know her character is a woman we should admire and look up to.

Personally, I would also admire all of the girls, that fought for the life they wanted; restlessly. Trini Alvarado's Meg is determinedly confident in her decisions and not a quitter at all. Now look at 12-year-old Kirsten Dunst's Amy and 15-year-old Claire Danes' Beth, two performances that clearly show the gifted actresses they are now and what they will be. Same to be said of Christian Bale's Laurie.

But it is, without question, Jo's life that was a little more detailed in Luisa May Alcott's novel. However, screenwriter Robin Swicord adapted the story so it could look general and Gillian Armstrong directed it with no focus on any specified character in this wonderful, marvelous movie.

Nevertheless, it was Winona Ryder's name the only one before the film's title in the credits, and it was her performance the one that shocked everyone the most. The beautiful 23-year-old (she's still beautiful now) takes the responsibility of an adult and delivers an Oscar-caliber portrayal that will stay in my head for the rest of my life. Brilliant acting for an actress that still deserves an award she never got.

The Marches' life is not the happiest of all. They make mistakes, they fall short, they suffer; but don't we all?

---

8 out of 11 people found the following comment useful :-
This timeless classic pulls at the heart strings., 11 octubre 1998

Author: pied de Ohio

A film so beautiful, lovely, and true that it will remain in your heart long after. All the parts played flawlessly, a location which is evocative of Alcott's beloved Concord, Massachusetts. Family life at its best. I highly recommend this film and the book written by Louisa May Alcott. They are timeless classics.

---

5 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :-
all time favorite, 16 agosto 2005

Author: yenerowitz de Netherlands

I had to give this one a 10 rating. It is the best film of all time. I really love this one. It is extremely well casted. All the young actresses and actors are now megastars. All the colours are great the costumes and the lights and production designs. The PD is a dutchman!!! I listened to the directors commentary and I really learned that this was a project in which the makers put their hearts in.

This film is all heart.Warm!

To some people it may be a bit to sugarcoated. If you are a macho don't watch it. The rest of you .....don't miss it.

If there are 10 things you have to do before you die reading the book and watching the film must be on that list.

The title LITTLE WOMEN is nice but gives you the wrong idea. It's not just for little girls.

---

---

Page 1 of 11:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	sinopsis Amazon.com	Ratings
Awards	Newsgroup reviews	External reviews
Parents Guide	Plot keywords	Detalles principales
Your user comments	Your vote history