For the Record

Since I can see that it was an incredibly popular subject, I am sure that everyone is desperate to hear more about Little Women. So....this is maybe only for you Sheena.

Scott watched the movie with me (because he is cool like that) the other night. I must say that I was very pleasantly surprised. I actually thought that the movie was much better than the book. I almost never think that but in this case it was a big improvement.

I thought that the casting was great, possibly my favorite role for Winona Rider (except Edward Scissorhands) as the perfect Jo and that Claire Danes really was a great Beth. I actually liked "Marmee" way more and didn't get bugged when they called her Marmee all the time. Most importantly I thought they made the Professor way better looking and charming than I had imagined him or than I felt the book had explained him. However, I have NEVER liked Kirsten Dunst and although I like Christian Bale I pictured Laurie to be much more handsome in a classic kind of way. Didn't the book say he was tall and dark like an Italian? But whatever. And what were they thinking for Mr. Brookes? That was all wrong!

The movie did a really great job at staying true to the theme of the book and highlighting the good parts. At the same they were great about leaving out or improving on some things. For example, I thought the shorter time line worked much better. I liked how they included more of Louisa Alcott's actual story like having Transcendentalist parents, talking about women's rights/equality and political opinions, and actually writing Little Women and publishing as a women. Those were the things that were progressive about Allcott and that I felt she wholely left out of the book.

I thought it was very smart they developed Jo and the Professor's realationship much more and showed why they fell in love with each other. I liked that it was the Professor that helped her find her direction in writing and eventually helped her publish, not her dad. I am also ok that they totally skipped the ending of a crazy school at Plumfield.

They also foreshadowed Amy and Laurie more than the book so it didn't feel quite as creepy. I didn't like that Laurie was all " I knew I was going to marry one of the March girl, so you will work" rather than falling in love because they have such a history or bond. I didn't like how they broke the news that they were married, it was much better in the book.

I still stand by my orignal opinion that I wished it had worked out with Jo and Laurie. I thought that when Amy told Laurie to "make her love you" he was going to go off and work hard and be honorable. Then when he showed everything that he had accomplished, Jo would realize that she always loved him and now was proud of his efforts and integrity. Then Jo and Laurie could have started a school for boys with all his money and even though Jo wasn't the perfect match for his "world" they would balk at society and marry for love. And Jo could grow and learn to be proper and polite for Laurie's world. I think that would be a more progressive ending rather than a "match of worlds" wrap up which kept all those inept and discriminating social rules intact. Yep, I still think that Jo and Laurie is the better ending.

Well, now that I have given you a movie review that no one cares about and an alternate ending to a book that obviously no one wants to read about, I hope you will still visit my blog. And thanks for (hopefully) not liking me less for boring you to death if you read the whole post.