“The book was so much better,” we always say.
After all, how dare that movie intrude on our imaginations? How dare they give the character that nose or that laugh? Oh, not that laugh! Why would they cut that scene, of all things to cut. That was the best part. And where did this part come from? That wasn’t in the book, for heaven’s sake.
But every so often—once, perhaps twice in a lifetime—a movie comes along that changes your perspective of the book, the infuses new life into a beloved read. For me, that movie is Little Women
, the version with Susan Sarandon, Winona Ryder, and Christian Bale. (Of course, I’ve since come to realize I love all movies with Christian Bale.) To understand the significance of this, you must understand my love of the book Little Women.
I wanted to be Jo. No, that isn’t right. I am Jo—uncoordinated, over-imaginative, blunt Jo. I was in love with Laurie. I couldn’t stand Amy (sorry, Kirsten Dunst!), and I had a special place in my heart for Beth. On my better days, I strived to be Beth (although Jo always took over). Though I never lived in Civil War days, though I never set my dress on fire (although, yes, I did set my sneakers a-smoking, if you must know the truth), though I never read for hours on end to an elderly aunt, Little Women tells my story.
You see, I’ve dreamt of traipsing around Europe (“my Europe!” Jo exclaims). I grew up penning story after story (and even started a club with some friends to write and sell stories in my neighborhood as a girl). And one of my favorite childhood memories was taking a favorite book to a sick girl in the hospital.
So to fall in love with the movie version seems outlandish and testifies to the love that must have gone into the making of the movie. I’m sure of it.
I go through movie stages. I watch one movie over and over and over again. Every day at lunch, I’ll play the next 15 or 20 minutes. When the movie comes to the end after several days, I’ll restart it (or, in days of old, rewind it). I’ve done this with When Harry Met Sally, Steel Magnolias, Pirates of the Caribbean, and I’ve done this with Little Women. Now, rereading the book, the faces from the movie become the faces in my imagination.
But not only has this movie infiltrated my imagination in a way that Anne of Green Gables and Huck Finn never could, it’s changed my perspective.
Now, to be fair, it’s quite possible that this came with age, with a greater understanding of who Jo really is and who she needs. Or it could be Gabriel Byrne’s sexy, I mean, talented and tenderhearted portrayal of Professor Bhaer.
The movie made me realize that Jo does not, in fact, belong with Laurie. She belongs with Friedrich. In my young-at-heartness, I protested the end. What? How could she fall in love with him? What about Laurie? What about their pranks? Their mutual love? Their laughs? Obviously, there’s chemistry between them. I even rewrote the ending (a common habit I have when unhappy with books and movies). “I have a surprise for you,” Laurie says at the door. Then (instead of revealing his new wife, Amy—the man-stealing brat), he takes a velvet box from his pocket and opens it to expose a diamond ring. “Will you be my wife?” She rushes into his arms. “Yes, Laurie! Yes!” And she gets published, and they all lived happily-ever-after.
Now (in my oh-so-matureness), that ending makes me cringe. (Good thing Louisa May Alcott wasn’t taking my advice at the time she wrote the book.) No, no. Laurie and Amy, with their half-hearted shenanigans, deserve each other.
Jo needs someone to push her to greatness. She needs someone to make her see something beyond the surface. Someone to encourage her when she wants to give up. Someone who kisses her gently on the cheek, brings her an orange, and tells her to keep writing. And what would Jo do with all that wealth anyway? What has wealth got to do with writing great stories, as Jo must do?
I’m thankful for Alcott’s right ending, as the movie forced me to see, because I now have my Friedrich Bhaer, and he’s exactly who I need.
Heather A. Goodman continues to pen stories. In her spare time, she loves reading to her niece, voicing all the characters, of course, and blogging about books, movies, and all things imaginative at L’Chaim.
Wait. you can’t be Jo. I am Jo. 🙂
I agree that this movie is a perfect adaptation of the book – and that’s a RARE thing. But I can’t believe you thought Jo belonged with Laurie at the end! NOooooo! Once I “met” Freidrich I KNEW that he was supposed to be with Jo and I was so happy at the end of the book. It was perfect … and it still is. 🙂
I’m Jo too! Except my mouth isn’t quite as big as hers…
I love the movie version of the book and Bale (who doesn’t love him?) plays a great Laurie. Also, Byrne (again, who doesn’t love him?) plays a wonderful Professor. I think this movie is one of the reasons why I like both of those actors so much.
We should have an “I’m Jo” club. Or competition.
Heather–I guess you’re faster than I am. It took me a while to accept the truth 😉
Leann–sounds like we have similar tastes in actors. Christian Bale redeemed the Batman stories for me (I never cared for the Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer, or George Clooney ones. Wait. I didn’t see the Clooney one(s?).). I’m wondering if he’ll do the same for Terminator. Have you seen Rescue Dawn? That’s great acting (and has Elliot from E.T. to book!).
How odd that I checked in with your blog today, to find you discussing the movie my 12 year old daughter and I were re-enjoying last night! I was prepared, when it first came out, to hate it. Instead I loved it–no matter what was changed. It’s now up there with Gone With the Wind, Steel Magnolias, An American President and my other “memorized” movies.
Lisa at http://hopewellmomschoolreborn.blogspot.com/
[email protected]
how do you login to leave a comment? I keep getting an error
Well. I agree but the ending of the book STILL ruffles my feathers. There is so much friendship between Jo & Laurie. But I agree — she needs the Professor. He is the only thing.
Great post! I enjoyed it very much.
I must disagree. I think this is one of the worst movie adaptations of a book I’ve ever seen.
Lisa–what a funny coincidence! What does your daughter think of the movie?
Carrie–I know, girl, it’s a hard transition!
Shauna–I’d love to hear more about why you think it’s not a good adaptation. I know everyone raved about the Anne of Green Gable adaptation, and I hated it.
I remember when I was younger that I felt the same way about the ending. Now I realize that Friedrich is a better fit for Jo. I really enjoyed this movie version…but I still love the book more.
I’ve read Little Woman hundreds of times, and I thought the movie was sweet, but I don’t think it was a great adaptation.
I wish they had used unknown actors because I hate having these well known people becoming the faces of these characters in my head.
I also think there is just too much missing. You can’t boil down such a long book into only 2 hours.
Love the new site!
Okay, I’m probably the only English-speaking woman alive who hasn’t read “Little Women.” I know! *Gasp!* Don’t judge me; I’m dyslexic and until college, was far too social to take the time to read. That said, I LOVED this movie!!! And now I’m going to have to read the book. That is, once I finish Jane Eyre, another classic I’m currently reading for the first time. Have faith in me, girls! I’ll catch up eventually. 🙂
I re-read Little Women last month and have been wondering about this movie version.
Mainly, it was too politically correct and Hollywoodized for my taste. I love Alcott, I identify with Jo more than any other literary character ever, and Little Women along with Little Men and Jo’s Boys are among my favorite books. I knew nothing would ever compare to the book and tried to have reasonable expectations of the movie and appreciate it in its own right, but I was still disappointed with the liberties they took with the story and especially the characters. Winona Ryder bears almost no resemblance to Alcott’s Jo, and making the professor handsome seemed to miss the point of why Jo fell for him. Susan Sarandon also seemed to impose some of her personal views on the character of Marmee. But we all like what we like, and movie preferences are so subjective. To each her own!
Awesome Heather! Thanks for doing this.
I love your examination of the book and the movie and how they each affected you.
I haven’t read Little Women either. *blush*, but I did watch the movie. I don’t remember it completely though. Perhaps I’ll read the book (eventually – add it to my long list!) and watch the movie again. 🙂 There are a ton of classics I’ve never read. I think I was totally deprived as a child – and I say that with a straight face. Something I don’t want my children to experience. How fun it will be for us to explore these wonderful books together! 🙂
Oh Heather… what a delightful post.
I always felt the same way about Laurie (and I always wondered why they called him a girls name..tsk)
Loved the book. Thought the movie was okay but not as good as the book. But I did like that they gave the Professor a little more attention. He was so briefly mentioned in the book that I hardly realized who he was and then Jo was marring him. I wanted more details.
Yeah, Amy & Laurie deserved each other. 🙂
And I’ll be a member of the “I’m Jo” club. I always wanted a garrett.
Michelle, Catnip, and Linda–yeah, the boiled down factor always changes things. Sometimes I think they should stop making books into movies–they’re too different genres. I really don’t know why I loved this movie so much considering the fact that I usually don’t, but maybe it had been long enough since when I’d read the book. Who knows!
Shauna–I’ve read Little Men (didn’t like it nearly as much as Little Women), but I’d never heard of Jo’s Boys. I have an Alcott edition that include the two Little’s and a bunch of short stories. I don’t think I ever finished all the short stories. Hmmm. I’ll have to go back to that.
Tanya and Chrisin–You should see my list of books that somehow I made it through high school without reading. My booklist is ever growing. I think it’s impossible to actually finish!
I completely agree! This adaptation was horrible! They added unnecessary scenes that weren’t in the book including the scenes where the sisters dressed up and acted out Jo’s plays. The relationship between Meg and Mr. Brook played how very differently in the novel versus the movie. Winona Ryder is waaaaay to melodramatic as Jo. I hate how Hollywood can’t stay true to the classics.