The Little Women Face-Off , Part 1

It is time my friends, time for me to write my most requested blog post of all time. I have sat down to work on this again and again, and never really wrote it. 
​
What is this you may be asking? A Little Women film analysis.

It's no secret that Little Women is my favorite book (for more about that read this post). I love movies, and the Little Women movies are no exception.

For so long a project like this has seemed overwhelming, there is so much to go into, there are over 19 filmed adaptations of Little Women, and it is a life goal of mine to watch them all. But honestly, doing that for a blog post or two is a bit much. I also considered analyzing the four films that are major motion pictures, but even that seems overwhelming. So I decided to focus on the ones that people argue about the most, 1994 and 2019.

*WARNING*
THERE WILL BE SPOILERS!
You've been warned. 

About Little Women as a Book

Let’s start at the beginning. 
    
Louisa May Alcott was a daughter of the revolutionary school teacher and transcendentalist Amos Bronson Alcott. She had a passion for writing and a need to support her family. She was a single woman, a war veteran, and was living on the charity of Ralph Waldo Emerson. She had written a few books (Flower Fables, Hospital Sketches and Moods) prior to Little Women with much success, but in 1868, her publisher asked her to write a story for girls. She famously said that she didn’t like girls and never knew many. But despite that, she needed money, so she set to writing a story based on her childhood. 

I want to be clear that Little Women is only semi-autobiographical. Much of what happens in the novel is fictional, though there are parallels to her life. The biggest parallel being the personalities of her sisters - Anna turned into Meg, Lizzie into Beth, May into Amy, and Louisa turned herself into Jo. 

The novel was met with great success and Louisa wrote a second part (called Good Wives) the following year. 
    
Little Women was revolutionary for it’s time, it showed girls as people and in roles that weren’t just about being wives and mothers. But it many ways,  it does conform to Victorian ideals when it comes to religion and morals. 

A Short History of Little Women Film Adaptations

Louisa died in 1888, 30 years before her book was first adapted for the big screen. "Only thirty years later?"  I hear you asking. Yes, only thirty years. The first adaptation of Little Women came in 1918 and was a silent film made by a British film company, it is sadly considered lost. Hopefully someday it will be recovered and the world will get to experience the vision for the first Little Women.

The next Little Women adaptation (which many consider to be the definitive adaptation) came out in 1933 and starred Katherine Hepburn. I started watching this a while ago and it didn’t hold my interest.
    
There were three other various adaptations that followed, but Hollywood presented its next major motion picture adaptation in 1949, it followed the same script as the Hepburn adaptation but starred June Allyson as Jo.
  
The world went a long time without a good adaptation of Little Women, from the time of the 1949 film until 1994, the only adaptations were mini-series of various forms (many of which are considered lost, and if they aren't lost, are regarded as pretty awful.) 
    
Of course, as we all know, 1994 was the year that Little Women came back. We will talk much, much more about this adaptation later. 
    
In 1998 there was for some reason a Little Women opera, which is absolutely ridiculous, you can find clips from it on YouTube, highly recommend checking it out, you might just loose all that's left of your mind, (yes it's that bad.)

Little Women didn’t get adapted again until the 2010s where it got two modern adaptations (modern day setting), a decent BBC adaptation (I can do a post on this later), and in 2019 was adapted into yet another major motion picture. 
    
It’s safe to say that Little Women has been capturing audiences for decades upon decades, and each adaptation has it’s fans. Generally though, the book community focuses on the ‘94 adaptation and the 2019 adaptation. So that’s what I am going to be focusing on today.
  
I want this analysis to be considerate and honest. So I have a very scientific approach. I will be analyzing each piece of these films and ranking them on a scale of one to five. The one with the most added up points in the end will be declared the winner. And if you wait until the very end of this blog post series, I will share my personal favorite adaptation. I want to be clear going into this though, I love both of these films dearly. They are both in my top ten favorite movies of all time, but one definitely ranks higher for me.

{painting by Jessie Wilcox Smith}

Treating Art With Respect

But first, a little soapbox, Little Women is such a dearly loved classic. It of course is my favorite book, but it also holds a lot of significance for the people involved with both productions. Winona Ryder had a deeply personal connection with the story, as did Greta Gerwig. Amy Pascal who was a producer on both films was actually named for characters in the book.

This love of the story shines through in both adaptations, and from an honest standpoint, I think both films treat Little Women as a whole with respect.

I don't think it’s fair to call either adaptation an abomination or anything like that, because the movies showcase such a love for Little Women which is very inspiring and important.

​Although both productions treat the source material differently, they both show deep respect to Alcott's book, so in the same way, no matter which adaptation is your favorite, I think it's our duty to treat these adaptations with respect as well.

My Thoughts On Adapting a Classic

Every generation needs a Little Women. This is a phrase I hear thrown around a lot when talking about Little Women adaptations of every kind, from film, to books, to the musicals. I'm not sure who first said it, I’ve found credits to Winona Ryder, and I’m also pretty sure I’ve heard Greta Gerwig say it. 

But why? Why is this so important to so many people? I think that to so many of of us Little Women means girlhood, Little Women means childhood, Little Women means spending time with our mothers, sisters, and grandmothers. And we all relate to the March sisters. So I think that people want to see themselves even deeper in the story, which is why people keep adapting this story. 
    
But honestly, I’m not so sure that every generation needs it’s own Little Women. Because ultimately we all go back to the novel. And the novel doesn't change, the novel is timeless. It holds up, and I don’t think we always need Hollywood filmmakers to adapt it for us, and tell us what message to get out of it.
    
But then again I don’t mind. I’ll keep watching them and keep talking about them.

Rating Criteria

Let's get into the real face-off. I have seven categories to rank these two movies on. This will not be all happening today!

1. Storytelling  - how does the film tell the story of Little Women. How do they show emotion and depth and honestly, turn a story out of a slice-of-life book.
2. Book Accuracy - how does the film handle the source text, what do they keep out and what do they keep in, and does it make a difference.
3. Historical Accuracy -  primarily referring to props and dialogue and their historical accuracy.
4. Characters - the casting, the dialogue, and the source material. How are our characters treated and which film does which characters best. Is there room for improvement?​
5. Cinematography, Setting, Costuming and Music- how do the shots look, how is the editing, does it change the way the story is perceived. How is the fashion from a historical and an aesthetic view point. Which score best encapsulates Little Women?
6. Message and Morals - what is the message of this adaptation and how do they treat the message and the morals of Louisa’s work?
7. Overall experience and feels - how do all of these elements combine to make the film.​

Understanding The Adaptations

Before we get into the mudslinging over whether we like Christian Bale or Timothee Chalamet better as Laurie (I promise you, mud will be slung), I want to tell you a little bit about the background for both of these adaptations and what they were trying to do.

1994 - This adaptation was directed by Gillian Armstrong (known for My Brilliant Career). The film had been in the works for a long time and started with the writers and producers. The team shopped around for 12 years looking for a film studio to take the movie. Columbia Pictures agreed, but only if Winona Ryder could play Jo. 
    
The film also starred Christian Bale, Kirsten Dunst, Trini Alvado, Claire Danes, and Susan Sarandon. The majority of the movie was shot in Canada, with select scenes in Massachusetts. 

2019 - This film was also a long time in the making. Discussions of making another adaptation began in 2013 with three producers from the 90’s adaptation (there’s a theme here). Greta Gerwig (who at the time had never directed a film solo) approached them asking if she could write the film. Gerwig (known for Lady Bird and Barbie) gained the opportunity to direct as well. This movie was made by Sony Pictures. 
    
​The movie was filmed on location in Concord, Massachusetts and surrounding towns in only a few months and starred Saiorse Ronan, Florence Pugh, Eliza Scanlen, Laura Dern, Timothee Chalamet, and Emma Watson.

Both films were released on Christmas day in their respective years.

Which Film Tells The Story Better? (criteria #1)

Alright, thats enough of setting the scene, lets get into the meat of this discussion. First we need to talk about story.

Story is the reason we watch movies, we want to be transported to another place, we want to live an adventure that isn’t ours to live. Little Women is quite a long story, it spans over ten years and 700 pages. The novel begins when the girls are in their teens, and it spans their early adult lives. Little Women is considered a domestic drama, so there isn't much action making creating a compelling film even more difficult. So to condense this book into a two hour film, and to pull an exciting and meaningful story out of it is quite the feat.

Both movies focus on certain more vital and exciting elements of the novel, including, Jo and Laurie meeting, Amy falling into the ice, Father getting injured at war, Jo cutting her hair, Beth getting sick, Jo not being asked to go to Europe and subsequently running off to New York, Laurie Proposing and being rejected, Beth’s death, and finally Jo falling in love with Professor Bhaer. 

1994 - Little Women 1994 is a linear story. We follow the characters in their growth, and as they come of age.

One thing I have noticed about this film is that it frames Jo as the main character, we see everything through her eyes, we understand it as she would have understood it. You might be thinking, "Well of course Jo is the main character of Little Women." But I might argue otherwise. In the book, there are chapters dedicated to each character. We get whole chapters about Meg, chapters about Amy in Europe, Beth’s struggles, and even chapters solely devoted to Laurie. Yes, the character that we see the most things happen to, and the character who develops the most is Jo, but I think a film could be created framing any of the other characters as the main protagonist. 
  
Anyways, with that being said, 1994 really does focus on Jo. I consider this film to be about the world as it relates to Jo. The movie is really about her relationships, her connection to her mother, sisters, Laurie, herself, and her writing. 
    
The chronology of the movie definitely gives us a beautiful window for understanding Jo and how she grows and transforms. 
    
While Little Women is about sisterhood, I think this adaptation focuses a lot more on romance than the novel and some other adaptations. A huge part of this movie is the relationship between Jo and Laurie. For 75% of the movie, most of what we are seeing is the romantic tension between the two. 
    
I also think that more than other adaptations, this film is about Laurie loving Jo. We see his strong desire to be a part of the March family and to marry in no matter the cost. They quite literally become his world, they are all he knows, so when Jo cuts him off, it feels like the end of the end. 
    
The story is told through a compassionate lens, a lens that truly desires to share this timeless story with someone unfamiliar with Little Women. That’s what I feel 1994 does well. 
    
​I give this film 4 / 5  possible points for storytelling.

2019 - Greta Gerwig pointedly took a very different approach to the storytelling in this film. The first major difference we notice is that the story is told non-linearly. The story primarily is taking place in the girl's adulthood, and shots that go back to childhood are these recollections of what once was. This leads to a very touching and beautiful analysis of the story. At the same time, I think it does make it hard to keep track of what's happening, especially for viewers who have no prior knowledge of Little Women. (My advice with this adaptation is that when the girl’s hair is up they’re adults, and when it’s down they are children.)
    
While 1994 focuses mainly on Jo, 2019 places more of a focus on each individual sister, we see more of each of their sides of the story. I personally think that the continual telling of Meg’s story past marriage is very beautiful and important. Although at the end of the day, Jo is still our main protagonist.
    
This movie feels very different from the 90’s version. Instead of the focus of the movie being romance, it’s an examination of womanhood. We see each sister being a woman and discovering what that means for her in the midst of the Victorian period. Because of this the story does take a more feminist approach which I’ll get into more later. 
    
One thing that this movie does really well is it helps us get over Jo turning Laurie down. We see the genuine connection between him and Amy and we understand Amy’s character much better.
    
Despite these positive changes, I think that changing timeline makes us loose some of what is beautiful and idyllic about the first half of Little Women, and it makes it more confusing and doesn't feel like it was communicated as well as it could have been. 
    
So for that I give this 3 / 5 possible points. 
​
​Ultimately I think that as far as a compelling and interesting story, 1994 is better.

This post is getting incredibly long, so I am going to leave you here, and I'll be back in  a couple of weeks with more thoughts! For now, let me know what YOU think!

resources -
many general sources from years of Little Women knowledge, and a year or more of research, but specifically,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Women_(1994_film)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Women_(2019_film)
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/31/movies/greta-gerwig-little-women.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article
​https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/12/movies/little-women.html
Little Women: The Offical Movie Companion by Gina Mcintyre

Belle Thomas

​Belle is the writer behind An Old Fashioned Girl. She is passionate about Jesus, good books, and living a beautiful life.