How god awful is Little Women (2019)?

[MaryAndGerryLivingInDerry]

I’m watching it today for the first time having loved little women growing up and seen the 90’s version. It’s just so bad!! and the casting of Laurie! He’s terrible.

No, the scene I’m talking about is one whole scene but the camera angle changes and you can almost hear the director shout “action” ok, it’s not that close but it’s not good.

Amy looking 10 years older than her classmates really threw me.

[quote PuppyMonkey]Here is my thread in it from back in January 2020.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/films/3805696-Support-group-for-those-who-didn-t-enjoy-the-new-Little-Women-movie[/quote]
'Support group', love it 😂

I do like the one with Wynona Ryder. Very comforting

@MaryAndGerryLivingInDerry

This was my first introduction to LW as a very young child before the books. I think it’s still my fave

Oh I remember this! My cousin showed it to me after I'd seen the 90s film and I just thought she had no idea what she was missing

I love the books and then the 1959 version until the Winona Ryder film - and Gabriel Byrne just makes the film for me

I havent seen this version - but just got Now TV so may watch it

Netflix's Anne of Green Gables I loved - hope they make more series as there's enough material to go on

The 90s one is brilliant to me, and Winona Ryder is a great Jo. Agree adult Amy isn't as good as child Amy but I can live with it. Gabriel Byrne as Baer and the two of them in the rain at the end... Swoon worthy.

Haven't read the whole thread yet but I loved it!

Saw it in the cinema on boxing day 2019 with my DM, DS2 and DD. Never normally go out on Boxing Day but DH and DS1 were at a football match so we decided to go. The Elizabeth Taylor one was mine and DM's favourite when I was growing up.

I didn't think it was the best version ever but I thought visually it was beautiful and really enjoyed it. Went on a bit but otherwise OK. I thought Amy was really good. The only time I've had any sympathy for her.

Winona Ryder’s performance was good, but she’s too conventionally beautiful for Jo.

I love the 90s one too..I taught it on my first teaching practice in 99 and it was just out on video to watch when we finished reading it 😁

@BeaLola

I love the books and then the 1959 version until the Winona Ryder film - and Gabriel Byrne just makes the film for me

I havent seen this version - but just got Now TV so may watch it

Netflix's Anne of Green Gables I loved - hope they make more series as there's enough material to go on

Agreed, Anne with an E was wonderful (well, at least when it was being fairly faithful to the novels, it veered off track a bit afterwards but still great).

@Dozer

Winona Ryder’s performance was good, but she’s too conventionally beautiful for Jo.

Yes, I always laugh at the"your one beauty!!!" line when her hair is chopped. It's Winona Ryder

In fairness though, would Winona Ryder have been considered beautiful in that time period? Standards of beauty do change over time!

(That's my excuse for that bit, and I'm sticking to it! )

It's a great film but you need to know the timeline of the story for it to make sense.

I'm a big fan of LW and I really enjoyed this version.

Disagree with most posts here, I think it's the best version yet.

Finally someone does just to Amy, who is a sensational character and whilst Jo is also a great character I never understood why Amy was so overlooked. Florence Pugh has great acting chops.

Emma Watson is great as boring Meg. She can't act, is awkward on screen and 100% wooden - perfect for the tedious Meg.

Timothy C (Laurie) does have a rare charm. Not everyone's cup of tea but I get it. Aunt March, perfection and Marmie lovely.

Beth, I always sort of imagined as the youngest so this casting works.

Winona Ryder is an excellent Jo. But so is saoirse ronan.

It’s abysmal, the casting is terrible. I had to watch the 90s version as a palate cleanser afterwards!

It divides opinion, doesn't it.

I maintain that Meg is good though. Meryl Streep's Aunt March is the first to play it completely straight. Chilling and effective. She's the only character who puts a face to the dark realities (injustice, vulnerability of women, poverty, untreatable illness, slavery) underlying this novel.

The girls' mother does have that line about "Better to be happy old maids than unhappy wives..." which I guess was quite unusual for its time.

Just started it. My first thought was why is Amy so old? And also why didn’t they start it with them all young like in the books, playing together so you get a sense of who they all are.
And as we were being introduced to them all I though ok until Meg came on. She looks so out of place! EW still looks like a child! And like a rich one at that. So much overacting.

Maybe they chose her to get people watching it in the first place?

I actually liked her in beauty and the beast once I watched the film, although wasn’t sure with her casting initially. I always think she looks very young and not very feminine or beautiful. She could play a preppy 19 year old drinking a latte. Everything else feels ridiculous.

HP has been very good to her. Wish she’d focus on her other missions. He for She was brilliant.

I really didn't see Amy as old at any point until I read this thread! Now I can see what people mean, but I still am able to see her as 'young Amy' and 'older Amy' and thought she was a great character, well played.

As well as her typical on-screen charisma of a Lego brick, I felt like Emma Watson just didn't look like she cared.

She didn't look or feel in any way like a slightly hard-done-by working wife and mum. The kids dash up for a hug and she looks like a bored, slightly hungover aunt.

I don't know if it's just that she's a terrible actress or if it's because she doesn't have the life experience to be able to convey certain characters as she's only known exceptional wealth and privilege from a young age.

Either way, how out of all the actresses in the world did she get cast?

I think they should have started the film at the bit when they’re all doing the Christmas play about 20 mins in.

@MirthlessChuckle

As well as her typical on-screen charisma of a Lego brick, I felt like Emma Watson just didn't look like she cared.

She didn't look or feel in any way like a slightly hard-done-by working wife and mum. The kids dash up for a hug and she looks like a bored, slightly hungover aunt.

I don't know if it's just that she's a terrible actress or if it's because she doesn't have the life experience to be able to convey certain characters as she's only known exceptional wealth and privilege from a young age.

Either way, how out of all the actresses in the world did she get cast?

I thought she was great. Why do you think she’s only known exceptional wealth and privilege from a young age? She played a similar character in War Horse, so I do see her as a hard-working, cares-on-her-shoulders mum, so a good fit for this.