Little Women (TV Mini Series 1970) Poster

(1970)

User Reviews

Review this title
5 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
dodgy accents don't spoil an OK drama
didi-531 January 2009
'Little Women', filmed for the BBC in 1970, is one of their rather low-budget and blandly cast dramas which are watchable, worthy, but a bit long-winded. One big mistake was having obviously English actors trying to do American accents, with mixed success.

As the four sisters, despite being too old, Angela Down (Jo), Jo Rowbottom (Meg), Janina Faye (Amy) and Sarah Craze (Beth) are adequate and watchable, while Stephen Turner is a rather more rounded Laurie than seen in the film adaptations of Alcott's novel. Stephanie Bidmead is a resigned and vaguely saintly Marmee, while Patrick Troughton is underused in the thankless role of Mr March.

Locations aren't fantastic, with many interiors and the outdoor scenes showing their age in the deterioration of the film. Europe is particularly unconvincing. But still, the material is good enough to pass and despite being a little creaky, this drama is still fairly engrossing, even if it feels longer than its three hour running time.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
The Adaptation That Started My Fandom
LadyAmina18 March 2020
This adaptation aired in my country when I was a child and it introduced me to Louisa Alcott's masterpiece. I was fascinated by the 4 sisters and their friendship and I thought 'Marmee' was the sweetest lady since Rose Maylie in 'Oliver Twist.' I related with Jo because I'm a writer myself (have 3 published children's books under my belt) but I did NOT like her. I found her weird, temperamental, awkward and SO tomboyish the way she talked and felt her objection to Meg marrying was selfish. She was only gentle when she was around Beth and I liked her devotion to her. But after reading the book, I got to know her better and found her a more relatable and human character. And I also saw that the 4 actresses were way too old for the roles, particularly Beth and Amy and I hated the scenes where Amy and Jo quarrelled. But it's not an adaptation I can forget since it was the reason how I ended up reading the book.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Worth watching but by no means a perfect adaptation
Catscanfly8 June 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I'm fond of this adaptation because it's been in my family's video collection for as long as i can remember- and so for me it got a lot of sentimental value.

However i don't think I'm being entirely clouded in judgement when I say that this was pretty good for the BBC costume drama department. If you've had the misfortune to sit through the sick 1980s/70s era Dramas they put out like Pride and Prejudice, Mansfield Park and Northanger Abbey, then you'll know what I mean.

Performance wise, this is actually really good in most areas (though kinda shabby in others). Angela Down made a likable Jo (inspite of her sporting a beehive of dubious authenticity) who does seem to grow and mature over the course of the drama in a fairly convincing way. Mr and Mrs March, Mr Brooke and aunt March are also very well cast, and the same goes for Meg and Amy (though they should have hired a younger actress in the latter case for the earlier scenes). Beth is the only real failure here- the character comes across as less the sweet and innocent young angel and more a fatigued and somewhat sinister presence (terrible make up job in the last stages of her illness- she looked like something out of MJ's Thriller).

The true gem of casting in this drama though is Laurie, played by Stephen Turner. I had a crush on him when i was younger and I still think that he just is the perfect Teddy- with brooding, handsome looks, his performance is every inch the romantic Italian tearaway of the novels (one area at least in which this adaptation triumphs over the popular Little Women of 1994 with a somewhat disappointing Christian Bale as Laurie).

This series could have used a great deal more verve and spirit though, if it wished to remain faithful to the vivacity of the timeless story. As it is, the shoestring budget constantly betrays itself, and the romance of the New England setting never comes alive (probably due in part to the fact that there are scarcely any exterior scenes- and when there are they are less than thrilling).

In effect, the whole thing is very very British indeed- the cramped and claustrophobic feel of the interior studio scenes that make for 95% of the series seems to afford little scope for any genuine atmosphere of the civil war era drama.

therefore, this is unlikely to impress many today as an overall production. It seems dated and there is no real evocation of the laughter, the imagination or the tears that female adolescence affords in equal measures to the March girls in the book.

In some ways Little Women is an Elegy to childhood- and in others a celebration of growing up. whatever way you describe it, the book is a complex, moving, and textured story that encompasses just about everything that seems important in life- even today, in such a different world.   This adaptation is admittedly in short supply of bounteous merit to do justice to the novel, but at the same time it holds firmly in possession of both it's own charm and strengths.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Long, but not bad
Lori S1 August 2000
This runs 3-4 hours and feels like it. Produced by the BBC, there are very few exterior scenes, unfortunately. They would have tweaked the pace. There is a big blooper which incredibly evaded the editor: when Amy is in some European city (Florence? Paris?) with Aunt March, they quickly show stock aerial footage of some bustling city. The footage is obviously too modern, from the 1950s probably, and you can see cars zooming along the roads. Not good when "Little Women' takes place during the 1860s!

The 4 actresses playing the roles are too old, and some have better American accents than others. That said, pretty good performances are given by Jo, Meg, Beth & Marmee. Although the costumes are good, the wigs are terrible. You're better off renting the video/DVD to the 1994 version with Wynona Rider, although BBC or Alcott fans will enjoy this.
12 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Not a great Little Women, but definitely worth seeing
Red-1255 November 2016
"Little Women" (1970), a BBC mini-series, was directed by Paddy Russell. It stars Angela Down as Jo March, whose ambition is to become a writer and leave Concord, Massachusetts for New York City or for Europe. She is one of the four March sisters, whose interactions with each other and their friends and family make up the plot of the novel.

Angela Down does very well as Jo. Every other actor I've seen playing Jo has been strikingly attractive. (Remember that Katherine Hepburn and Winona Ryder starred as Jo.) Angela Down is not strikingly attractive in the film. If anything, her hair and makeup detract from her looks. She calls herself "plain" in the script. Making Jo into a young woman of average appearance was director Russell's choice, and I applaud it.

Also well cast were Stephen Turner as Laurie, and Frederick Jaeger as Professor Bhaer. I've seen (and then reviewed) several versions of Little Women, and I don't think any other actors were superior to these two in their respective roles.

This movie has a very low IMDb rating of 6.2. There are some problems with it. All the lead roles are played by English actors, and they have to use American accents. I was surprised at just how well they did this. (They are professionals, and that's part of their job, but it couldn't have been easy.)

When the movie was released in 1970, it was on VHS cassettes. The film isn't available on DVD or even new, sealed VHS. So, if you're watching a movie on the small screen, on a used VHS cassette, with faded colors, it's hard to fully enjoy it. Even so, it's better than the 6.2 rating would imply. If you enjoy the novel, and if you like BBC mini-series, it's worth finding and seeing.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed