REVIEW: Little Women (2017) Episode 1

[feather_ghyll]

Little Women (2017) BBC One
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt6853528/?ref_=ttfc_fc_tt

Episode 1 (26th of December 2017)

I mostly enjoyed the first episode of this latest adaptation of ‘Little Women’ very much. Beth already got to me, trying to conquer her shyness, as did Jo’s heart, and the girls’ love for their mother and vice-versa. Watching the very different ‘little women’ interact, I was reminded of how important this book is for girls and women, to see a variety of girls, with virtues and failings, be at the heart of the story. It’s about their struggles to improve themselves and how they grow up along the way.

Occasionally, I felt that a few decisions had been made just to veer away from the 1990s adaptation. Despite being longer than a feature film, they cut the Pickwick Papers bit, and you’d only know the girls received copies of Pilgrim’s Progress if you knew the book. But I can’t fault them for casting an actress who will play Amy throughout, even though my knee-jerk reaction was that she should have looked younger.

My initial impression was not good thanks to the opening scene. Although the locks tied into the importance of hair throughout and took us to Mr/Reverend March and the battlefield, why did we have to see the girls in their undies? I’m not saying it was sexualised, exactly, but I thought it unnecessary in that scene, whereas later, they are getting dressed for going out so there’s more point to it. I didn’t much like the titles, either.

But most of it, I liked. I loved the setting and the natural insets; that they went to Walden Pond. The casting is very good, the adults are all class acts, and I have been squawking with joy every time I have seen Angela Lansbury in adverts for this adaptation – she was wonderful as Aunt March. I thought their Laurie looked perfect, Meg and Beth especially looked like sisters, their Amy is sparky and Maya Thurman-Hawke – who looks so like her mother – is great as Jo, vital, restless and trying so hard.

We had many of the key scenes – going to see the Hummels and seeing what poverty is (was Mr Hummel caught up in the war or a ne’erdowell, I suddenly wondered) as opposed to the Marches’ shabby gentility. Even if the older girls work – to the horror of Miss Vaughn - they have a maid. The building tension between Jo and Amy, the two strongest characters among the sisters, was managed well, and I think there were a few minor additions to prepare for the eventual romance between Laurie and Amy.

But mainly it was about the sisters – possibly Jo’s closeness with Beth got the shortest shrift. There was a good job of showing lonely Laurie on the periphery of that sisterhood, idealising it, envying it. The additional scenes between him and his grandfather helped to set that up. The American civil war was brought in effectively as part of the background, as were the constrictions of a time when girls were expected to be ladylike – easier for Meg, although she has enough steel in her, and not at all easy for Jo, whose energy with her ability ought to put Harvard-headed Laurie to shame. Contrast those expectations with the scenes of the girls running and playing, as well as the quieter scenes.


As you can see, my posting schedule is a little behind the airing schedule.