Review of LITTLE WOMEN (2019): Sisterhood with Substance

February 10, 2020

I knew the story of Louisa Mae Alcott's "Little Women" -- the coming-of-age adventures of the four March sisters, namely the pretty Meg, the feisty Jo, the sickly Beth and artistic Amy -- from the original book I read when I was very young. I had also seen a musical play of the same title staged as a holiday offering by Repertory Philippines 10 years ago, with music by Jason Howard, lyrics by Mindi Dickstein, starring Caisa Borromeo as Jo, Cara Barredo as Beth and Pinky Marquez as Marmee.

I was aware that there had been several adaptations of this story in the movies. The last one was in 1994 with Winona Ryder as Jo, Clare Danes as Beth and Kirsten Dunst as Amy. There was another one in 1949, with June Allyson as Jo, Janet Leigh as Meg and Elizabeth Taylor as Amy. Before that in 1933, there was black-and-white version with Katharine Hepburn as Jo. There were even two silent film versions before. Despite this, I had never seen a screen version before, until this new one.

The story was set during the American Civil War and the years immediately following. The main character was the second sister Jo March, who was telling a story about her, her sisters, and the boys who came in and out of their lives. Eldest sister Meg was a beauty who felt dreadful that they were poor, forcing her to borrow dresses to attend balls. Shy Beth was the pianist of the family, whose bout with scarlet fever gave her a weak heart. Amy was the outspoken youngest with whom Jo frequently found herself at odds with, usually about their handsome neighbor Laurie, among other things. 

Like all her previous movie roles, Saoirse Ronan is ideally cast as Jo. She is headstrong and independent-minded, a feminist before her time. She did not believe women had to be defined by matters of love. Very much like her was Amy, who despite being infatuated with Laurie and painting, also harbored serious reservations marriage because of certain law surrounding finances. Florence Pugh gave a very mature look and portrayal of Amy. Both sisters knew how to make her point and how to stand her ground. These two actresses earned acting accolades for their fine performances.

Even if she was really four years older in real life, Emma Watson felt miscast as Meg because she looked and acted younger than Ronan. Watson did not look like the oldest sister at all, mainly because Ronan strong screen presence was just so dominant. Australian actress Eliza Scanlen played the wan and mousy Beth. That part when Beth received the piano and how she reacted always got me emotional. She also felt a bit miscast because she looked much younger than Amy, and indeed Scanlen was three years younger than Pugh in real life.

In her adaptation, Greta Gerwin did not employ a linear storytelling style. Her scenes went back and forth in time, juxtaposing innocent events in childhood with corresponding sobering events in adulthood. Honestly, this may be confusing for those who were unaware of how the story went. I found it rather distracting in the viewing experience because you need to be alert context clues about their hairstyles to get the timeline right. I personally did not find any improvement in clarity or impact with this type of storytelling. 

As for her advocacy, writer-director Gerwin made sure that even if there were still scenes of romantic relationships with men, the sisters, especially Jo and Amy, made strong statements about their womanhood, including a remarkable scene between Jo and Marmee. The ending went a bit differently from the book, with an effort to merge the real-life story of author Louisa Mae Alcott to that of Jo and the release of her first book. 8/10.