Books vs. Movies
In this podcast we set out to answer the age old question: is the book really always better than the movie?
Books vs. Movies
Ep. 29 Little Women by Louisa May Alcott vs. Little Women (2019)
Have you ever felt an unexpected spark of joy while revisiting a story from your past? Join me, Lluvia, as I recount my journey with Louisa May Alcott's "Little Women." Initially hesitant to dive back into the classic, a reading challenge rekindled my appreciation for the book, and I found myself enjoying it far more than I anticipated. This episode takes you through my personal history with "Little Women," its myriad adaptations, and why it continues to resonate with audiences across generations. Whether you've read the book once or watched every film adaptation, there's a nostalgic charm that keeps us coming back.
In this episode, we dissect Greta Gerwig's 2019 adaptation, analyzing its artistic choices and how they contrast with the original novel. From the non-linear storytelling to the modernized portrayals of Amy and Mr. Bhaer, we scrutinize the film's impact on the narrative. We also discuss Jo's character, closely aligned with Louisa May Alcott's own life, and explore how the movie integrates historical accuracies and deviates in fascinating ways. If you’ve ever been curious about the differences between the beloved 1994 film and Gerwig's take, this discussion offers a comprehensive look into both versions and their unique contributions to the story.
Lastly, I share my mixed feelings about Gerwig's adaptation compared to the 1994 classic. With standout performances by Florence Pugh and Saoirse Ronan, and Timothée Chalamet's Laurie juxtaposed against Christian Bale's unforgettable portrayal, there's much to unpack. Despite some minor flaws, like Emma Watson’s accent, the film's compelling monologues and commitment to Alcott's vision breathe new life into the timeless tale. Whether you're a long-time fan or discovering "Little Women" for the first time, this episode offers a thoughtful exploration of why this story remains a beloved classic and an examination of its enduring impact.
Micarah Trewers' thoughts on the Little Women Costumes: https://youtu.be/_sBqqERMblo?si=K2K-pF7Nh511IQlQ
All episodes of the podcast can be found on our website: https://booksvsmovies.buzzsprout.com/share
Connect with me: Instagram | Threads | Bookshop | Goodreads | Blog
Welcome to Books vs Movies, the podcast where I set out to answer the age-old question is the book really always better than the movie?
Speaker 1:I'm Yuvia, an actress and book lover based out of New York City, and today I will be talking about Little Women by Louisa May Alcott and its 2019 adaptation, little Women starring Saoirse Ronan and directed by Greta Gerwig. Hi everyone, so I was fully expecting to come on here and say that I had read this book like three or four times. Before reading it for the podcast and being excited because I was like I've read it three or four times before and I have not enjoyed it. I swore I was never going to read it again. But then the fourth prompt of my pop sugar reading challenge is a book about a writer, and Little Women was at the top of the recommended list and I was like no, I refuse, I am not reading this book a fifth time. And then I was like but there's so many adaptations to choose from and it feels like a disservice to not talk about Little Women because it is such a beloved book and there's so many adaptations to choose from. So fine, I will suck it up and do it. And I found myself not hating the book this time around. It's still not a favorite. I think this is the last time I'm going to talk about it. I do feel ready to lay this to rest.
Speaker 1:But imagine my surprise when I log into Goodreads and I see that I have not read this book three or four times before. I've only read it once before and it makes me laugh because clearly I hated it that much just after one read. But in my mind I read it three or four times. To be fair, it is a very long book. It is 700 and something pages and it's closer to the 800 mark than it is to the 700 mark. So it is a very long book. It's split into two parts, so I guess that's why it felt like I had read it three or four times before this. But no, I stand corrected. I've only read it once before and I was like I could have sworn. I read this three or four times and I think it's just with the amount of adaptations. It felt like I read it so many more times and after I read it the first time, because I was trying to remember, I was like but I feel like I know this story so well and I think it's just that I've seen two of the adaptations now and they're both very faithful adaptations as faithful as you can be to a 700 page book, but yes. So I think that's why I feel like I'm so familiar with it, because both of them are pretty faithful.
Speaker 1:The one I'm going to be talking about 2019, definitely took a lot more liberties, and I am a little bit more familiar with liberties that were taken with this version. But so, after I read the book the first time and first and only time before this, I saw the 1994 adaptation, because at the time it was on Netflix. It's not on Netflix anymore, but that that one seems to be like, if anyone talks about their favorite Little Women adaptation, that seems to be the one that people gravitate towards and love and have a lot of fond feelings for. As I said, it came out in 1994. It's directed by Gillian Armstrong and it has a packed cast. We have Winona Ryder as Jo, kirsten Dunst as young Amy and Claire Danes as Beth, and that film actually received three Academy Award nominations, including a Best Actress nomination for Winona Ryder. So, yeah, it turns out this is only the second time in my life that I have read this book, and while I did enjoy it a lot more this time around, I still don't think I want to read it again.
Speaker 1:I'm interested in checking out the adaptations or checking out other adaptations, but I think I'm okay to like have this be the only time I talk about it on the podcast and, to be fair, if I were to talk about this book every year, I would get at least 10 years worth of material out of this. Yeah, that is how many adaptations exist. I knew there was a lot, but I wasn't aware that there were this many adaptations. So Little Women has been adapted to film seven times Seven. That's just film.
Speaker 1:I am not including TV adaptations, stage adaptations, musicals and opera adaptations. There's audio dramas I'm considering maybe expanding to maybe like books versus stage adaptation in the future. But yeah, I definitely probably wouldn't talk about like the operatic adaptations or the audio dramas. But there's three stage adaptations, adaptations or the audio dramas. But there's three stage adaptations, seven film adaptations, and I haven't even gotten to the amount of TV adaptations. There are so many adaptations of Little Women. It's just one of those things that's like what is it about this book that is so popular that people want to adapt it over and over and over again, and I don't know that I have the answer to that, but I will see. I will try my best. But yes, so I have 10 years worth of material in just adaptation. So I think one and done for Little Women.
Speaker 1:As I said, I don't necessarily want to read this again, and if I do, I might just stop at part one ends, because part one, I feel, is definitely stronger than part two. But, yeah, it's been adapted a lot of times and so when thinking about this, I knew that there were other adaptations other than the 1984 and the 2019 version. So, yes, again, as to why I feel like I had read it so many times before, is because I also saw the 2019 adaptation. I think I might have read Little Women in 2019, or either 2019 or 2018. So I had just read the book that year, or a few months before the 2019 version came out, so I had read it, I had seen the 1984 adaptation, and so now I was watching the 2019 adaptation. So I think that's why I felt like I read it so many times. But no, this was only my second time reading it.
Speaker 1:All right, so apparently the correct way to pronounce Timothee Chalamet is Timothee Chalamet, but he himself is like obviously I don't pronounce it that way because it sounds so pretentious, but ever since I found that out, I've been calling him Timothee Chalamet, to the point where it feels wrong to call him Timothy. And I just like it because that means that Timotei and Chalamet rhyme. Just in case you're wondering why, if it slips out, I will try to call him Timothy, but if it comes out as Timotei, that is what's going on. So ultimately, knowing that there were that many adaptations, I ended up choosing the 2019 version for one reason it was the one that I could watch for free. It's currently streaming on Hulu. We have a Hulu subscription. Everything else would require me to either get a whole new subscription to watch it or I would have to pay to buy it. So I don't like to buy or rent movies if I don't have to. So that is why today we're talking about the 2019 version. That is literally the only reason. All right, so let's go ahead and get started.
Speaker 1:Little Women by Louisa May Alcott was first published in 1868, and it follows the March sisters Jo, the tomboy who dreams of being an author, beth, who is very frail, the beautiful and kind of bougie sister, meg, and the youngest sister, who's incredibly spoiled, amy. This takes place in New England during the Civil War, or it starts off that way. It does go through a 10-year time period, although the book ends when it's been like 10 years. We only get that last chapter 10 years in the future, but we do still go from them being teenagers to adults. This is a semi-autobiographical book. Louisa May Alcott did base the March sisters on her and her own sisters. The parents are inspired by her parents and Louisa May Alcott also had a talent for writing, which is the talent she passed on to her heroine, jo. But yeah, there is a lot of things that I can see why this would make it a classic. There is a lot of love between the sisters and tragedy, and there's a lot of growing up between them.
Speaker 1:The 2019 adaptation is directed by Greta Gerwig and stars Florence Pugh, saoirse Ronan, eliza Scanlon and Emma Watson. It follows the four March sisters and this film actually is told in flashbacks, as we see Jo and her sisters Meg, beth and Amy welcome their new neighbor, lori, and they help their mother while their father is away during the Civil War. So, as I said, the 1994 adaptation I feel like I'm going to slip in talking about the 1984 adaptation and this one, but the main focus will be the 2019 adaptation. But, as I said, the 1984 adaptation and the 2019 adaptation are pretty faithful. The 2019 adaptation took some creative liberties and most of the creative liberties came in at the end, which I will talk about in a little bit more detail in a minute.
Speaker 1:So, as I mentioned starting off, a major difference is that the book is told in chronological order. We start when Amy is 12, beth is 13, joe is 15, and Meg is 16. And it ends when, as I said, 10 years later or 15 years later, because I think actually we find out in the last chapter that Amy is now 27. So there is a 15 year time span in the books. As I said, it is 700 pages, so there's kind of a lot of time to allow this and there's a tiny bit of a jump. I want to say that like it ends, like the second to last chapter, we've gone from that age to 10 years in the future and then we time jump in the last chapter to five years after that. But it is told in chronological order. The film is told in flashbacks. It starts us off with Jo in New York and then it flashes back to her meeting Laurie.
Speaker 1:Mr Bear, I think it's a German pronunciation, and Jo or Louisa May Alcott does say in the book that it's a German pronunciation. That isn't pronounced either Mr Beer nor Mr Bear, but something in the middle. I'm just going to call him Mr Bear because that's what they call him in the film, but he is in his 20s in the film, so he's definitely a lot closer to Joe's age in the film than he is in the book. In the book he is quite a bit older than her. I want to say he's in his 40s. So yeah, he is a lot closer to her in age and I think that's just a change that Greta Gerwig made, since he is the love interest to Joe, possibly potentially. What does that mean? I will let you know later. And I feel like age gap relations are just a lot more scrutinized now than they were when this was written. So yeah, it makes a little bit more sense to have him be in his 20s. He does look a lot closer to Saoirse Ronan's age than Mr Bear was in the book to Joe. But the book actually opens on Christmas Day and this is the first glimpse we get of the happy little family is that it's Christmas Day, they're getting ready for the festivities, they miss their father, their mom is out and visiting one of their neighbors who lives in poverty. So yeah, in the film the first thing we see when we flash back is actually the date that Meg and Joe meet Lori at a dance that someone's hosting, and then the next flashback is Christmas. So that is a little bit out of order in the adaptation.
Speaker 1:Another interesting thing that this adaptation did, which is different from all the other adaptations, to my knowledge because I remember this being a big deal is that Florence Pugh is cast as Amy, and the reason that's unusual is because most or, as I said, to my knowledge, all the other adaptations that exist have two actresses that play Amy. They have the Amy that is 12 years old. So that's why earlier, when I said Kirsten Dunst is young Amy, she was cast as, like, the 12 year old Amy, and then, when she's grown up, they cast an adult woman to play Amy. So it's really unusual that they went for Florence Pugh to play Amy from the age of 12 until she's an adult. That was a new kind of concept for Amy, the only time it really bugged me is just I feel like, if you don't know that this film is told through flashbacks, it's not really clear that these are flashbacks and I feel like it would definitely help if we had a younger actress play Amy.
Speaker 1:But also which I understand why they did this but there's a scene that takes place at the school and they cast actual like. They look like actual 12-year-olds in this scene. So Florence Pugh just looks, it's just so obvious that she is not their age, so she just stands out in that scene. But it is just that one scene and Florence Pugh does a. I mean, florence Pugh's fantastic, she's fantastic. So she does a great job of playing the different maturity levels of Amy very, very well. So we do see Florence Pugh as 12-year-old Amy. She does have that distinction between her playing a 12-year-old and it doesn't come off as like cartoony or not genuine or anything like that. So it isn't a very unusual choice and I love Florence Pugh, so I don't necessarily mind that they did this. But yeah, that scene in the school room, she just does stick out like a sore thumb because it's like you see her with, like all these other actresses that are actually like 12 years old. So, yeah, that was a bit of an unusual casting choice. Like I said, this has never been done before. Usually there's two different actresses that carry on the role of Amy.
Speaker 1:I do want to say there's something that I definitely noticed a lot more this time around, and I think it's because I watched this YouTuber. Her name is Makara Truers and she posted a rant on YouTube. Don't like watch her religiously, I've really only watched this, this video of hers and then like a few others. But she's very into fashion and costuming and like time period costumes and like. She has videos where she has made some of like famous movies costumes or reimagined famous movie costumes to make them more accurate to the time period. So she's like made these dresses on camera and so she's very, very talented at that. But she made a video that was titled why Little Women Should Not have Won the Oscar for Best Costumes and it is just this less than 10 minute rant about why she thought that, exactly what the title says why little women should not have won the Oscars and her complaints, and she has very valid points. And so I had just watched that video because I remember finding it really funny when my friend initially shared it so I wanted to watch it now that I was reading the book and about to see the adaptation again.
Speaker 1:And one of the things she talks about is Meg. So Meg is the eldest sister. She's very beautiful, but she's definitely the one that cares the most. Since she is the eldest, she's definitely the one that cares the most about her appearance, about what society thinks of her, what society thinks of her family. So sometimes she's irresponsible with her choices, sometimes so like she spends way more money than she should on fabric, this beautiful fabric that her rich friends kind of make her feel bad for not buying once this is once she's married and she knows that she and her husband need the money for other things like necessities. But her rich friend is just like, oh, that would look so good on you and so, knowing that she doesn't have the money, she buys it and then she ends up feeling really, really bad. So that's kind of who Meg is, so she's very like into what a proper woman should be and all this stuff.
Speaker 1:So something I noticed for sure one of the things that Mikara like rants about is that they never wear bonnets, and bonnets are, first of all, really easy and cheap to make and she actually makes a bonnet out of a cereal box in rage to prove how simple it is to make bonnets. But bonnets were just an essential style and it is mentioned several times in the book how they're wearing their bonnets when they're out. But bonnets were just such an essential trend I mean it was a fashion trend, but it was also just like an essential thing to wear on your head during that time period. And at no point do they ever wear bonnets. And to her it's like the other sisters could kind of get away with it, but Meg would not go out in public without her bonnet. Like bonnets were just that important to status and society and women and all of that in that time period. So that was one thing she noticed that she goes on a rant about.
Speaker 1:So I was watching this. There's this scene in which Joe, meg and Lori and the man who becomes Meg's husband go to the theater and Meg is wearing pigtails. And I'm just watching this and I'm like why is the eldest daughter wearing pigtails to go out to the theater with a man that she finds attractive? And I'm just looking at these pigtails and they're really bugging me. Now this is not something that I noticed the first time I watched it, obviously, but this time around I'm just like, as far as I know, pigtails are not really time period, but if they are, they're definitely not for young ladies of her age. They're like Amy wearing pigtails can get away with it, but not Meg, especially when she's going on a date. So yeah, that was something that I noticed and it's all because Makara Chorup pointed it out to me. I will be sure to include the link to her video in the show notes so that you can watch it. Take some time and watch it. I think it's enlightening and very engaging.
Speaker 1:Anyway, one thing I really appreciated about this adaptation is how much more they based Jo like off of Louisa May Alcott. As I said, jo's already based on her. Jo is her semi-autobiographical counterpart. But one thing I really loved is that there's this point in which Meg has already accepted the proposal and she's going to get married and Joe is trying to tell her like no, don't get married, let's go off somewhere, please don't do this. And Meg says, well, I want to. And just because you have different goals and aspirations than I do, it doesn't mean that my dreams don't matter and Meg's like. I mean, you'll understand one day when you want to get married and Jo says a line. She says I'd rather be a free spinster and paddle my own canoe. That's actually a quote Louisa May Alcott stated as to why she didn't want to get married, so I enjoyed that little Easter egg In the book.
Speaker 1:So Aunt March, played by Meryl Streep in the film, is the one that goes to Europe and she takes Amy with her. This kind of comes out of nowhere. So in the film Beth gets scarlet fever which does happen in the book and Amy, since she's never had scarlet fever before, is sent to stay with Aunt March until it's safe to her because she's very sweet and kind of like everything that she's wanted her nieces to be. Amy is fat, despite being like 12, she sees the opportunity for her to grow into the kind of women that she wishes Beth, joe and Meg had grown up to be. Meg does fit that mold, but she's aware that Meg would marry at point. Meg isn't married in the book, but she's aware that Meg would probably not marry for money, she would marry for love and that she does not agree with that. Like. She believes very much in extending your status and in this time period, a woman would extend her status by marrying a rich man. So this does happen in the film.
Speaker 1:And so Amy goes to stay with Aunt Marge and then after Meg's wedding, she's like do you want to come to Europe with me? And Amy's like hell, yeah, I'll go to Europe with you. And then that's what I mean by it comes out of nowhere, because in the book it's actually a different family member. It's an aunt and an uncle. I don't remember their names, but they're the ones that are going to Europe and they originally plan on taking Jo. But Jo kind of screws up her chances. So she says something like oh, they ask her what do you think of the French language? And she's like I don't like the French language, I don't want to learn the French language. And then I forget what else they ask her. But she's also kind of like flippant with her remark like I don't want to do that. And because of those answers they end up inviting Amy to go with them instead. And Joe's like what? Like you said you were gonna take me. And they said, well, we were. But then you said you don't like the French language and you didn't like this other thing. So we said what's the point in taking her? She's not gonna enjoy herself. But, like, this trip to Europe was something that Joe had been looking forward to. So it's one of those things where she was like, curse me, I should have held my tongue, curse my tongue for ruining things for me. So Jo does screw up her chances to go to Europe and in the film that doesn't happen. Aunt Marge is just so happy with Amy that she invites her and forgets about Jo.
Speaker 1:There's some really, really, really good monologues in this film, and the best monologues come from Jo and Amy. Amy has the first great monologue and it's when she's talking to Lori and Lori says like, oh, you know, you can become an artist. Because Amy says like she's going to give up on being an artist and she's going to accept the proposal of this rich guy that she doesn't love. And Lori's kind of like, well, you can be an artist and you don't have to marry that guy, like you can marry for love. And she says this monologue that's like it's easy for you to say that because you're a man and you're a rich man. She's like as a woman, the only way that I can raise my status is by marrying a rich man because I'm not allowed to work. If I have kids, they belong more to my husband, like they have to do what he wants. Essentially it's this great monologue and I'm paraphrasing it very, very, very badly. It's this great monologue.
Speaker 1:But then Jo has a other great monologue in which she talks about like again, this is very Louisa May Alcott coded, but she talks about how she's sick of society and how she has to live this way, that she doesn't want to live, she doesn't want to get married, she would rather not get married, she wants to be an author and she wants to focus on her writing and she wants to make money that way and she doesn't want to get married. But she's just so, so lonely and I think that's it just speaks so much to how I think a lot of people feel. A lot of people are sure they don't want to get married and they're happy being single, but that doesn't mean that there aren't moments in which they don't feel lonely and it doesn't mean that they're not happy with their lives, but there are just moments in which they're just so, so lonely. And this is kind of what Joe does turn down Lori. Lori asks for her hand in marriage and Joe turns him down and that's why she runs to New York, because she's like, if I go to New York and put some distance between us, you'll forget about me. And then, to get his mind off of Joe, lori's grandpa takes him to Europe and that's where he runs into Amy again. And when Joe does return from New York and spoiler alert Beth dies After Beth dies, that's when Joe was like you know what?
Speaker 1:Amy I mean Beth was the best friend I ever had and like now that she's gone, I feel like I'm. The monologue isn't as beautiful as it is in the film, but it's essentially also like well, beth died, so I feel like I need to find a companion of my own. So I think if Lori asks me again, I am going to marry him and she just has this conversation with her mother and then they find out that Lori and Amy are actually married. So that doesn't happen. But in the film, like she has this monologue and she delivers this monologue to her mother and that's you know. After she says I'm so lonely, she writes a letter to Lori and she puts it in like the mailbox that they used to, like Lori and the sisters would put things in there when they were little and write little messages to each other. And so she writes the letter and puts it in there. And after she does that, laurie and Amy come home and they're like we're married. And she's like, oh, okay. And then she takes the letter out of the mailbox and no one has read it. So it's okay. But yeah, she doesn't write that letter in the book, she just says I'm going to marry him if he asks me again and then it's like, oh, nevermind, can't do that In the film as well.
Speaker 1:There in that scene that I was talking about, where Florence Pugh sticks out like a sore thumb because she's surrounded by little 12 year old girls, she gets in trouble. So Amy's the artist and one of the little girls for some reason. I mean this was the 1860s. So I mean I don't know, but like, apparently in this time period they would. Lemons were a thing I don't know. They would bring like lemons to school and this was the same thing as like currency. So like the more lemons you had, the more popular you were in school. Like I don't know, this is the 1860s.
Speaker 1:And so Amy in the book gets in trouble for bringing all these lemons to school because they're causing such an issue. I don't know. This kind of reminds me of when I was in elementary school and Pokemon cards were the thing and they actually had to ban Pokemon cards at my school because they were causing like other kids were stealing other kids Pokemon cards and there was like fights over Pokemon cards. So it was becoming such an issue that they had to ban Pokemon cards from school. And so I feel like the lemons are the equivalent of Pokemon cards. So these lemons are causing all these issues at school and the teachers like they're banned. But Amy, once she gets enough money to bring a lot of lemons, she brings them and the teacher catches her with all these contraband lemon and so she gets in trouble. But in the film she gets in trouble because one of the girls is like I'll give you all my lemons if you draw a picture of him, and so she draws this really unflattering picture of the teacher and he catches her Jo additionally in the film. So in the book, after Aunt March dies, she leaves her estate to Jo, which kind of catches everyone by surprise, because this old woman like made it quite clear that she did not approve of Joe in any shape, wear or form. But I guess it shows that deep down Aunt March was fond of Joe and Joe was the one that was, like, tasked with visiting her and reading to her, and so she was probably closest to Joe out of all the sisters. So I feel like it does kind of make sense for her to leave the estate to Joe.
Speaker 1:But in the book Joe decides to open a school. That's how she decides. She's going to make her income, she's going to be a teacher, she's going to start the school and it's going to start off with just the rich little boys. So this is going to be an all boys school and it's going to start off with just little boys, like the rich little boys and her nephew that can afford going to this school. And then, as money starts coming in, she'll start incorporating like orphans and teaching the orphans and giving them an education. And in the film she starts a co-ed school, so she teaches both little boys and little girls. There's no discrimination in this school, which we love that. We love that, anyway.
Speaker 1:So those are, like the like, the changes that I mainly wanted to talk about. Obviously, it is still, at the end of the day, a 700 page book and not everything that happens in the 700 and something pages is necessary to include in any adaptation. So there is a lot that's left out and it's really just like the major, major events that happened to Joe and Amy. That seems to be the main focus of both adaptations that I've seen. Joe is obviously like the main protagonist and then Amy is like the secondary protagonist. But yeah, those are like the main changes that I wanted to talk about that I felt like I needed to talk about Again. If I went through everything that happened in the 700 page book that was not included in the adaptations, you would be here all night, so not going to do that. But yeah, there is one more change that I wanted to talk about and the reason I wanted to talk about it is because, like I said, greta Gerwig made Jo a lot more Louisa May Alcott coded than any other adaptation. She really said this is based on Louisa May Alcott and we're going to make sure people know that she's based on Louisa May Alcott.
Speaker 1:So Louisa May Alcott hated, absolutely hated, the ending of Little Women. In the end Joe gets married to Mr Bear and Louisa May Alcott wishes that she hadn't married Joe off Again. Louisa May Alcott was not interested in marriage and so she hates that she married Joe off. Like if it had been up to her, joe never would have gotten married. In the book Like this is included in the film the publisher says many times to Joe we don't care about female characters unless they get married or they die. That's the only way your book is going to get published. So that's very much what happened to Louisa May Alcott when she was writing this book. She didn't want to marry Joe off. She was very happy not marrying Joe off because, again, joe was based on her, but in order to, you know, get this book off the ground. That was the ending that needed to happen. But she hated it and she regretted giving in to that demand and that request.
Speaker 1:So the way the film ends is that we have a sort of meta moment in which Mr Bear shows up and then, as he's leaving, all the sisters are like I've never seen you like this. You need to go get him. And like Meg and Lori and Amy like push Joe into a carriage and they all go after him. And then she meets up at the train station and she's like I don't want you to leave and he's like I'm glad you said that. And then they kiss and it starts to rain and it's very cheesy and corny. And then we get a glimpse into Joe talking to the publisher and him saying you have to marry her off. And Joe says, fine, but if I'm going to marry her off, you need to pay me this much. And she negotiates a better book deal for herself. And so it ends with Jo teaching at the school and little women being out in the world and she's not married. The only Jo that gets married is the fictionalized version that's in the book. So that's how the film ends. We see a glimpse of Jo getting married, but she's actually not. It's just the ending to the book that she's publishing so she can get her school off the ground. So that was really interesting to me and, knowing what I know about Louisa May Alcott, I definitely appreciate that ending. It doesn't bother me at all that they made that change for the film. I'm glad they gave Louisa May Alcott the ending that she wanted, since she never got to have it. So, yeah, that is.
Speaker 1:Another thing I really wanted to talk about is Louisa May Alcott, and just how awesome she was. She was an abolitionist, she was very progressive, she hated like traditional gender norms and really did what she could as much as society would allow her to at that time to really fight against them. And I remember after Greta Gerwig's adaptation came out, there was actually I want to say it was an op-ed that was released in the New York Times and I read it and I was like that's actually pretty cool. And then, in doing more research for this episode, I came across a different article that kind of refutes it. And so what the New York Times op-ed said was basically like the best way to picture Louisa May Alcott is to picture her as a trans man. It was basically saying that they saw Louisa May Alcott as a trans man because she hated being called Louisa, like she wanted to go by Lou or Louie, which are traditionally male names. She refused to get married and she said several times like I don't like other women, I want to play like with the boys and I like growing up. She wanted to do what the boys were doing and not what the girls were doing. She hated the expectations that came with being a woman, and especially in that day and age. And so this was the evidence that was given as to why Louisa May Alcott was a transgender man.
Speaker 1:The evidence that was given as to why Louisa May Alcott was a transgender man, the article that I read this time around kind of saying, well, that's not fair to Louisa May Alcott because obviously the author isn't saying and I'm not saying that transgender people just started existing recently obviously not. But to label Louisa May Alcott is something that she may not have been. Like putting our knowledge of what we know about gender and everything and forcing that on someone that didn't have that language during that time period is a little unfair, especially because, like, at the end of the day, it is a little heteronormative to say she's a trans man because she wanted to go by a more masculine name or she was more interested in the more masculine activities as the more feminine activities. So, like, louisa May Alcott is not here to speak for herself and it's unfair to just label her as a transgender man when our knowledge of gender and sexuality is way, way different now than it was back then. And it's just one of those things that's like was she a trans man or was she just a very progressive woman, incredibly frustrated by the societal expectations of women of her time period. So after reading that article, it definitely makes a lot more sense to me to say I mean, was she a trans man? Maybe, but that's not for us to say and it's not fair of us to say. But what we do know and what we do have a lot of evidence, is exactly that that she was progressive. She hated that she had to do certain things and that she was forbidden from doing other things just because she was born a woman. She hated that and she fought to change that. There were limitations, yes, but she fought to change that and she was incredibly progressive and, just you know, she had her own way of thinking and just very, very likely that she was frustrated with the societal norms that were kind of forced upon her, as I sometimes am. Mind you, things are very, very different and I'm very, very grateful for everything that I have now, but obviously there are still some things that are very frustrating as a woman.
Speaker 1:Now listen to another fantastic monologue by Greta Gerwig from the Barbie movie delivered by America Ferreira. I will say I was not a huge fan of Barbie. I know a lot of people are going to hate me for that, but I was not a fan, but I did love that monologue. That monologue felt it in my soul. But, yes, I just really wanted to say that Because, like I said, initially when I read the article I was like that's kind of cool. But we do know that she was a remarkable and she was pretty darn cool, if I do say so myself. But anyway, that is all that I want to talk about this episode. Thank you for tuning in.
Speaker 1:I should probably talk about the adaptation, because I haven't really talked about the adaptation that much. So I will say Greta Gerwig's films are kind of hit or miss for me. That much so I will say Greta Gerwig's films are kind of hit or miss for me. I did like Little Women, like this adaptation when I first saw it back in 2019, I did really, really like it, but, like I didn't like Lady Bird and I didn't like Barbie, so there's that. But I did like this one when I saw it and even reading, watching it again after reading the adaptation, I still like it. There's just something about the 1994 version, though. I really, really like this version. I think Florence Pugh and Saoirse Ronan are just like they're so great, they're so great. But yeah, I thought Saoirse Ronan was also great. Yes, emma Watson's American dialect is something to. It's not that great something to be desired, but I mean she doesn't have that big of a role. Neither does Eliza Scanlon as Beth, but like, the main ones are Saoirse Ronan, florence Pugh.
Speaker 1:I don't know that I like Timothée Chalamet as Laurie. I don't think he did a bad job by any means, but there was. He definitely gets the like lovesick teenager vibes down and he was not bad by any means. But there wasn't necessarily anything that stood out to me, and y'all you know how I feel about Christian Bale. Christian Bale plays Laurie in the 1984 adaptation. You know how I feel about Christian Bale, but I think I actually have to give the Laurie Award to Christian Bale. I know it's kind of shocking for me to say so that, yeah, I did not by any means hate Timothée Chalamet as Laurie, but I think Christian Bale definitely had more of the ups and downs of Laurie's emotions, a little bit more than Timothée Chalamet did. I feel like, like I said, his Laurie was definitely a lot more lovesick than Christian Bale's version. From what I remember, he had that lovesickness but then he had the anger down when he gets insulted. I felt like we saw more of an arc. There we we go. We saw more of an arc with Christian Bale's version than we did with with Timothée Chalamet's version. Yeah, that is I really. Maybe the costumes weren't great, according to Makara Tours watch her video to know what I'm talking about but yeah, I really really enjoyed this adaptation and what I really really loved about this adaptation was just how Louisa May Alcott coded this one was and how we were able to give her the ending that she wanted. So that's something that I think both of them are worth watching, both adaptations. But yes, I definitely think that there's just something about this one and those monologues, like you said the Florence Pugh monologue, the Saoirse Ronan monologue they're just incredible monologues. Gerda Gerwig knows how to write a good monologue and I just love, I just love the ending. So let's get into it.
Speaker 1:I rated the book, so when I first read the book, I rated it three stars. As I said, it did grow on me. The second time that I read it, I was finding myself not so bored with it, I was finding myself really into the story, at least for part one. Once we got to part two, I was like, okay, we can end any moment now. We can end now, please, please, end now. So when I first read it, I rated it three stars because I did not like it from beginning to end. I did not like it this second time around. I really liked the first half and the second half is still a little boring to me. So I rated it. The first time I read it was three stars. This time around I am going to grow it by half a point. I now rate it 3.5 stars. As I said, I really enjoyed that first half. So that first half is what bumps it up to 3.5 stars. Can still do without the second part.
Speaker 1:Personally, the film, I rated four stars. So, yes, that means that in this case, the book I mean the movie is the winner, and I know this is probably going to be a very divisive episode and a lot of people are going to hate me for choosing the film over the book. As I said, this is such a beloved book we have more than 20 adaptations. I want to say just estimating here, but I want to say we have more than 20 adaptations here. So there is something about this book that just continues to speak to people through the generations and it's going to continue being a beloved book. That being said, it's just a little boring for me. That's why I can't pick the book over the film, but I do know that there's probably going to be a lot of people as well that would choose the 1994 version over the 2019 version. The 1994 version is great as well. I do recommend that one, but, as I said, what I really love about the 2019 version is that we're giving Louisa the ending that she wanted. So that's the ode to Louisa.
Speaker 1:Thank you for tuning in to this week's episode of Books vs Movies. Be sure to tune in next time when I it'll be a surprise what I'm discussing. But if you really enjoy this podcast, please leave it a rating, a review, share it with your friends, let them know all about it so that you can help my podcast to grow and we can help find more listeners that enjoy it just as much as you do. Thank you, I do everything with this podcast. I record it, I edit it, I do everything all by myself. So it really means a lot that you're tuning in. Thank you, and see you next time.