The 1994 version is WAY better!

I'm not sure what drugs were being passed out before the screenings of Greta Gerwig's vision of Little Women, but I alas didn't get a chance to pop them before watching this over-inflated mess. Let's start with the fact that it's out of chronological order. Now this may have sounded like a cute idea sitting around the boardroom table, and I'm sure someone said "Yeah, because it's been done numerically the other three times." Unfortunately for my brain, I couldn't follow- or care- about what scenes were being depicted.

Let's start with the cast. Saoirse Ronan, who is the only believable actor in the movie, still feels miscast because her strong Irish accent keeps slipping from her tongue more then the gowns she twirls around in. Jo March was American. And brilliantly played by both Katharine Hepburn (1932) and Winona Ryder (1994). We can forget about who ever played her in the 40s version. That was a forgettable affair too. Ronan does have some great body language towards the beginning where she's glaringly jealous of her younger sister Amy at a dance. Amy is played by Florence Pugh, who is a bit- shall we say, mannish to play the much more mischievous and funny girl we grew to like in Kirsten Dunst's superior portrayal in the '94 version as well. Unlike the 1994 copy, which wisely cast Dunst as younger Amy, and Samantha Mathis as grown up wife to be, the 2019 budget must have been tight- because Pugh is playing BOTH versions. She's far better as the older version, since Amy does harden a bit once she moves over seas to live with her Aunt (played by Looney Toones Meryl Streep). But in the younger scenes, Pugh is unbelievable as a 12 year-old girl. She is creepily out of place. And her "funniest" line: 'Jo, you're one beauty!' (when Jo cuts her hair for money) is ruined because it's said too quickly. In fact, the WHOLE cast behaves like they're in a rushed rehearsal on stage- shouting their lines over each other, and not looking very enthused either. Timothée Chalamet, who plays Laurie aka the womanizer who wants all the little women to himself, is as stiff as one can be in those Oscar winning suits. Christian Bale, the 1994 Laurie, is much more lax, confident and gentle. And Meg. The one performance from Emma Watson I actually liked, because she at least plays her role like she's on some good Valium- unlike her costars, who have instead opted for some really strong speed.

The head of the household is played by the usually reliable Laura Dern. But she plays the character as if she's been called from an office meeting in Marriage Story to "drop by to the prop department and play someone from the 1800s." She winks at the camera a lot. Susan Sarandon was much better at playing the warm and always tolerant Marmie. In the opening scenes of Gillian Armstrong's film, Sarandon sits by the fire and reads a letter written to the girls from their father, who's fighting in the Civil War. It's real because the actors know how to become those people without forcing sentiment.

And back to Greta Gerwig. I loved her in Frances Ha! She did OK with her Lady Bird movie (also starring Ronan). But with Little Women, she takes it too far. Even the ending, where we see Jo smugly holding her published novel that "finally can be in print because a woman wrote it" is done too briskly, and of course- out of sequence. So then we wonder if her marriage to the Professor is real, or something she just wrote in the book to make sales.

The only redeeming quality from Little Women besides Ronan's adequate portrayal is the score by Alexandre Desplat- who never fails to allow his music to go swiftly with the pace- which in this case, is a dash. Still, Thomas Newman's composition in the 1994 version reigns King.

OH! And Beth. Of course because she's the sister in the shadows, even this review forgets her- and the actress who played her. That's because she seems to be doped up on morphine throughout the movie- as she doesn't do or say much. Claire Danes was also a bit plain Jane at the beginning, but (SPOILER) - her deathbed scene is one of the best farewell monologues to grace the modern silver screens of the 90s. Here, Beth's death is handled with Laura Dern at a table crying. And Jo sort of comes in, and that's that.

I think the reason the 2019 version did so well was because it was publicized exceptionally well, and has a strong cast that sadly was given poor direction and a confusing script to work with. Greta Gerwig is not a strong helmsman. I think she might be better off in the tech department, where at least her erratic need for rushing would be welcomed when the actors become irritable and need solitude (and bottled water).

Do yourself a favor- rent the 1994 version on Prime and realize that THAT is the version that should have been given all the Oscar attention (note- it did thankfully, receive nominations for Ryder, Thomas Newman's score, and the costumes).

FINAL GRADE: D