As said in my review for the 1940 RKO film, 'Little Men' is a charming, entertaining and heart-warming book. If you like the more popular 'Little Women' and 'Good Wives', 'Little Men' won't disappoint as it does have much of the ingredients that make those two books so good.
The main reason why there is a personal preference towards the other two is to do with that 'Little Women' and 'Good Wives' are stories I've known and loved since childhood whereas 'Little Men' was introduced to me quite some years later.
So far this reviewer has only seen two adaptations, this and the 1940 film, and while this does have flaws it is the far superior adaptation and film. Sure there are omissions, changes and merging of characters, the characters' personalities are not quite as interesting and it doesn't really convey the essence of the book, but there is much more of the original story and spirit here whereas the earlier adaptation, which was terrible as an adaptation and mediocre at best on its own merits, was almost unrecognisable.
'Little Men' looks very nice, simply but cleanly and beautifully photographed with elegant and evocative costumes, sets and scenery. The music score is understated, lilting and soothing, never overbearing, too low-key or inappropriately jaunty. There is much more of the gentle tone, subtle social commentary, charm, poignancy without being too maudlin and gentle humour without being corny or too slapstick-oriented than in the 1940 film, though there are parts that are a little stilted and don't flow as well as they could have done.
Much of the story is wholesome and charming, with a very heart-warming ending. There are a couple of crucial scenes, like the death of John Brooke, that don't have the impact and are clumsily done, and there is a choppiness and skippy nature to the storytelling giving a sense of incompleteness. The film tries to solve this by getting narration to fill in the gaps, but the narration is rather unnecessary and distractingly over-explains at times.
With the acting, some are better than others. The children fare far better than the adults, with the standouts being Michael Colaz and particularly Ben Cook, who is superb and the best thing about the film. The adult actors are disadvantaged by the adult characters being too much in the background and underwritten. Chris Sarandon is a bit too rough and stern as Bhaer, though admittedly it is preferable to having Bhaer played stiffly like he has been. More problematic is a far too bland and subdued Mariel Hemingway as Jo, who has lost her spirit, tomboy-ish charm and spunk and reduced to a paper-thin cut-out.
All in all, a long way from perfect but watchable. As an adaptation, it's still less than ideal but it's much better than the 1940 film. 6/10 Bethany Cox
The main reason why there is a personal preference towards the other two is to do with that 'Little Women' and 'Good Wives' are stories I've known and loved since childhood whereas 'Little Men' was introduced to me quite some years later.
So far this reviewer has only seen two adaptations, this and the 1940 film, and while this does have flaws it is the far superior adaptation and film. Sure there are omissions, changes and merging of characters, the characters' personalities are not quite as interesting and it doesn't really convey the essence of the book, but there is much more of the original story and spirit here whereas the earlier adaptation, which was terrible as an adaptation and mediocre at best on its own merits, was almost unrecognisable.
'Little Men' looks very nice, simply but cleanly and beautifully photographed with elegant and evocative costumes, sets and scenery. The music score is understated, lilting and soothing, never overbearing, too low-key or inappropriately jaunty. There is much more of the gentle tone, subtle social commentary, charm, poignancy without being too maudlin and gentle humour without being corny or too slapstick-oriented than in the 1940 film, though there are parts that are a little stilted and don't flow as well as they could have done.
Much of the story is wholesome and charming, with a very heart-warming ending. There are a couple of crucial scenes, like the death of John Brooke, that don't have the impact and are clumsily done, and there is a choppiness and skippy nature to the storytelling giving a sense of incompleteness. The film tries to solve this by getting narration to fill in the gaps, but the narration is rather unnecessary and distractingly over-explains at times.
With the acting, some are better than others. The children fare far better than the adults, with the standouts being Michael Colaz and particularly Ben Cook, who is superb and the best thing about the film. The adult actors are disadvantaged by the adult characters being too much in the background and underwritten. Chris Sarandon is a bit too rough and stern as Bhaer, though admittedly it is preferable to having Bhaer played stiffly like he has been. More problematic is a far too bland and subdued Mariel Hemingway as Jo, who has lost her spirit, tomboy-ish charm and spunk and reduced to a paper-thin cut-out.
All in all, a long way from perfect but watchable. As an adaptation, it's still less than ideal but it's much better than the 1940 film. 6/10 Bethany Cox
