BIG LITTLE LIVES
Looking for a feel-good movie that all the family can enjoy? The latest version of Louisa May Alcott’s classic will leave you with a New Year glow
As befits this festive season, here’s a quiz question: beyond the fact that they are or were all female writers, what do Margaret Atwood, Doris Lessing, Anne tyler, Nora ephron and simone de beauvoir have in common?
One answer is that at one time or another they all cited Louisa May Alcott’s autobiographical 1860s novel Little Women as a major influence on their own work.
i like to think that they would all heartily approve of this delightful screen version, written and directed by the prodigiously talented Greta Gerwig.
i watched it with my wife who, as it happens, is also a novelist, and 20 minutes in she whispered in my ear: ‘isn’t it wonderful?’ that’s the kind of film this is; you want to share its charms with loved ones.
At the same time, i expect some of the menfolk out there will be put off by its very title, and perhaps hazy memories of Christmases past when their mothers or sisters dabbed their eyes in front of the 1949 version with elizabeth taylor.
Don’t let them cry off. this Little Women is a bona fide treat for the whole family.
More than 100 years have passed since the book was first adapted for the screen. there was a silent version in 1917, and there’s been another one just about every generation since, with Katharine hepburn, June Allyson and Winona ryder among those breathing life into Alcott’s spirited alter ego, Jo March.
but it will be a brave filmmaker who has another go at it now we have Gerwig’s supremely clever and enormously engaging adaptation, this time with saoirse ronan as Jo, and emma Watson, florence Pugh and eliza scanlen playing her sisters Meg, Amy and beth.
it is a quirk of the casting, by the way, that the four young women at the heart of this quintessentially American coming-of-age tale, about a genteelly impoverished New england family during and shortly after the U.s. Civil War, are played by two actresses from old england, one from ireland and one from Australia.
Another brit, James Norton, pops up as John brooke, the kind but hard-up tutor who marries Meg.
still, North America is well enough represented, with Meryl streep on fine form as wealthy, waspish spinster Aunt March, dropping her one-liners — ‘i may not always be right, but i’m never wrong’ — just as acidly, but with the same tiny hint that her heart might not be made entirely of stone, as Dame Maggie smith in Downton Abbey.
Laura Dern, too, is pitch-perfect as the girls’ warm-hearted mother. for anyone who recoiled from her character’s bitchiness in tV drama big Little Lies, or quailed before her cut-throat divorce lawyer in Marriage story, it’s uplifting to see Dern playing such a paragon of goodness. Little Women is by definition a female story, with men only in supporting roles, but timo thee Chalamet is exactly right as ‘Laurie’ Laurence, whose love for the March sisters, his dearest childhood friends, turns to romantic longing.
i seem to be alone in thinking him miscast as henry V in the recent Netflix production the King — he didn’t convince for a moment as a warrior — but he’s on much firmer ground here as fey, feckless, endearing Laurie.
Chris Cooper and tracy Letts bring further touches of class, along with bob Odenkirk, who plays the girls’ mostly absentee father, away serving the Union cause. so the performances are terrific across the board, and that includes Watson (who reportedly replaced emma stone). she’s a limited actress magicked by hermione Granger’s wand into better roles than her talent deserves, but she’s perfectly lovely as Meg, the eldest sister.
HOWEVER, this is Gerwig’s show. she has ingeniously tinkered with the book’s simple chronology, daring to move its cherished Christmas Day opening and constantly whisking us forward and backward in time. this helps us to understand how the sisters, with their contrasting
personalities and temperaments, evolve as they do through the many episodes chronicling their deep love for one another, their personal desires, petty jealousies, occasional downright antagonism and solidar ity in the face of illness and death.
the first time this happens, we are guided by a ‘seven years earlier’ caption. After that, we’re on our own, which feels like a nod of respect from the director for her audience. it’s artfully done.
if the film does have a standout star, it’s ronan, who glittered two years ago in Gerwig’s acclaimed directorial debut, Lady bird. She’s wonderful as fiercely independent and impulsive Jo, an aspiring novelist, whose ambitions and accomplishments
as a writer very aptly bookend the film. Without it feeling forced or anachronistic, there’s something unmistakeably modern about Jo: an 1860s heroine exactly in tune with #MeToo sensibilities.
But if this makes the film sound like a feminist tract, don’t be alarmed. It really isn’t. It is a ravishingly-shot, exquisitely acted emotional rollercoaster that at times didn’t just activate my tear ducts but had me gurning wildly to stop myself from blubbing audibly. Alongside me, my wife was going through similar contortions.
Don’t say you haven’t been warned. And Happy New Year.
A SHORTER version of this review ran last month.