LITTLE WOMEN (1994) * Where the 1949 version is winsome and soulful, this production is manipulative and contrived. Winona Ryder is absolutely brilliant on rare and very brief occasions with the perfect glance or expression, but it's all dressing on a performance that refuses to stay in character, and a rendering that makes that character appear to be one not worth staying in anyway. There's no sense of the time whatsoever, it would have all been more realistic and empathetic and effective if it took place on one of Saturn's moons in the year 2973. I'm not only saying that it lacks the spirit of Louisa May Alcott's book, I'm saying that it lacks commonality with human experience period. It's like listening to a junior high class read the script for the first time, even Susan Sarandon sounds like she can't figure out what the point of any of it is, or like she's reading the ingredients off of a cereal box. You'd think that Gabriel Byrne would add pizzaz as a violin-playing philosopher, but instead he seems determined to convince you (as if any convincing was needed at the point of his late arrival) that no characters anywhere do anything of interest. Eric Stoltz is probably the most convincing of the lot, and when it's understood that his role is to be dull and witless the indictment of the production is complete.
back to Brilliant Observations on 1776 Films home
go back home, or send me email
no more reviews! I want to buy your novel!