Little Women (2019) - Drama, Romance

Hohum Score



Jo March reflects back and forth on her life, telling the beloved story of the March sisters - four young women, each determined to live life on her own terms.

IMDB: 7.9
Director: Greta Gerwig
Stars: Saoirse Ronan, Emma Watson
Length: 135 Minutes
PG Rating: PG
Reviews: 173 out of 805 found boring (21.49%)

One-line Reviews (437)

I was surprised by how much I enjoyed it, the scenes with the sisters as a family were joyous and the acting throughout was of a high calibration.

Aside from boring, how utterly disgusting to see young females experimenting and exercising their emotions such that they work toward perfecting an approach to having their base, ugly emotions lead, the mouth and rest of their bodies following.

Little Women is a spell binding, albeit slow paced film that is both sad and romantic.

SYNOPSIS: A story of Jo March (Saoirse Ronan) coming of age with her sisters while trying to support herself with writing stories for the newspaper and attempting to live outside of the social norm of what's expected of a woman during the 19th century.

Little women is a visually stunning,excellent crafted and acted cinematic masterpiece that deserves to be an awards contender.

You'll laugh and cry and leave the theater smiling.

Yet another overrated snoozer .

The overuse of the dancing scene, and overuse of the confusing flashback scene, also make the film unwatchable!

I was very bored.

Also.. such a bore!

It's been years since I read the book but I'm sure one problem here is that it tends to plod on because the script is slavish to the book--except at the end, when Jo is made out to be an uncharacteristically and unconvincingly assertive businesswoman who stands for no nonsense from her publisher.

Just boring.

A great, enjoyable film .

Rounding out the unique and witty story and performances is the film's aesthetic value, with stunning and immersive cinematography and production design of 19th-century New England.

Save Your Money .

Also, some past-present transitions are so abrupt that they disrupt the overall pacing by being a bit confusing.

Most boring film ever .

So I was pleasantly surprised by how moving, entertaining, and beautifully shot this ended up being.

Unfortunately, while previous versions adhere to the sequence of events described in the novel, Gerwig takes liberties with the chronology, mixing scenes of past and present, tinkering that only serves to create confusion and undercutting what is essentially a coming-of-age drama which relies on our understanding of character growth and development.

I had a great time watching this movie it is very like The old ones so if you are a fan if those you should watch this but great acting great reboot and worth The watch

Maybe Gerwig thinks chronological order is boring, or she thinks there's some intrinsic value in flashbacks and flashforwards.

)Costumes, sets and music all lovely and superb in the '94 film, mediocre and drab in the 2019 remake.

Whole story is so boring, the movie is overlong, all cliches and femminism only happens.

Again, however, Gerwig makes it sweet, enjoyable, and moving in her own way.

However, one of the flaws that seemed to bug plenty of people was the few slow paced screenplays that seemed to pull back the narration.

I found it too slow, not mucb happening, Only towards the end it picked up

I'm sorry, its just bored.

But I must say, it's really worth watching.

Totally and irredeemably bored.

The past-present transitions are mostly well-handled but a few are too confusing and abrupt.

Extraordinary production design inside the old mansions surrounded by the breathtaking scenery of Massachusetts, where Little Women was filmed.

It's confident, engaging and sometimes quite charming.

Good production values but no depth, just some femenist propaganda

A bunch of overrated actors playing a neverending and really boring piece of...

However this modern take was superficial, kitsch and unbearably boring.

Other than that, this movie is really enjoyable.

Bottom line: I found it rather boring and disjointed while the acting poor to mediocre.

All around boring movie with too many fails to be good.

My 13 year old granddaughter felt it was boring and hard to follow and she lost interest halfway through.

becomes boring .

Saoirse Roman and James Norton gave by far the best performances but there were too many issues for the film to be enjoyable.

In Midsommar she gave a gripping performance and also another good performance as Saraya Knight in an underrated movie this year, Fighting With My Family.

But that aside, it's still excellent, engaging and heartwarming.

19th century boredom .

All things considered, Little Women is a wonderful and enjoyable film with incredible direction and design.

Beautiful perfomances in a coming of age story about four young girls.

Felt forced in at the one and too 21th century cliche at the other hand.

Stunning Affirmation of Life, Family, Marriage, and Love .

Overall, this is a gloriously evocative film that makes you laugh, makes you cry and utterly envelopes you in the world of the March family and the love that binds them all together.


I will dare to say this is the worst movie of the decade.

Beth's death and her funeral are particularly bland.

Confusing, ne´est ce pas?

Boring, pretentious and been there done that at least a dozen times.

Even though constant time jumps were confusing at first, especially since the characters didn't change much, I thought it made the movie more engaging and somehow more relatable.

It has taken away the soul of most of the intense moments of the film, it is as if he had shot it quickly or did not know how to give soul to many moments.

Watch paint dry, it's more interesting.


But a pointless film unless you love the novel and want to see an incoherent pastiche of scenes from the text strung together without narrative.

One of the most enjoyable movies I've seen in a long, long time.

The reason I walked out of the film in awe is because of its rawness - the way most movies show relationships are not exactly how they work in real life.

Alexandre Desplat's romantic music score sets the lyrical mood throughout the film and Yorick Le Saux's cinematography is stunning.

I just found the story of the March sisters absolutely compelling.

This is by far the most boring and predictable film I've seen in a very long time.

I say, just save your money and rent this one from Redbox in a few months.

It's so confusing.

Instead, it's just another repetitive, boring, predictable, sappy hollywood love story.

Teensy bit dull .


With that said, Gerwig does her best to make this as entertaining as possible to either gender by showcasing each of the characters with relatable problems and realistic aspirations that anyone can invest themselves in.

Boring ...

The acting is superb by everone in the cast, the attention to detail here is just breathtaking.

Worth the watch!

It seemed fast paced and impersonal.

There are times, especially throughout the majority of the second act where the movie seemed to really slow down.

Enjoyable remake .

The things I didn't enjoy about this film were the extreme time jumps back and forth, which became confusing at certain points, and Timothee Chalomet.

It also dragged on forever after the death of Beth, causing the movie to be 2+hrs.

Classic tale which is still compelling.

It was rather confusing for me to follow.

these days the world is descending into emptiness and hatred and it shows in pretentious empty movies.

The movie is always engaging and it never lost my attention.

With all of the hype, I was looking forward to (and even expecting) an interesting, lively and entertaining show.

I have been thinking about whether I would take a young person to see this, as a coming of age film, and really wonder if they would be able to work the time periods out, especially as the young women did not always seem so different in age.

No structure, whatsoever, no intrigue, the characters are dull and weird ocassionally.

With also breathtaking dance routines and costumes that really caught your eye and left you in awe of what you were watching.

With the drab music, the lazy acting, the lack of intimacy, the choppy storyline, we have no characters to care for.

So Predictable .

Enjoyable movie .

I really liked the movies of Saoirse Ronan and Timothée Chalamet, their performances are gripping.

Indeed, the flow was quite boring in the first hour.

But unfortunately, by the end, the benefit on 13 year old coming of age girls is lost If you can't hold their attention.

Visually gorgeous, especially the scenes in Europe but unfortunately the whole film is rather a snooze fest.

About the plot (spoiler alert) the performance and the character of Joe was exciting, she is a very strong, comprehensive and kind woman, she always care about her family and her friends, for that time her way of thinking was out of the ordinary, I really like the phrase that she said to her mom "Women have minds and souls as well as just hearts, and they've got ambition and talent as well as just beauty.

Very boring movie....

But besides that ....? There is NO plot, NO climax, NO surprise.

Unfortunately I got so bored I didn't finish watching this film.

Pretentious and overbearing .

The blankets they used were heavy, which caused the hunt for the tortoise to be more enjoyable to see.

Not because Star Wars was bad, but this was much better acted with a more entertaining storyline.

For me Beth's death was confusing due to the simultaneous flashback scenes and seemed to drag on for some time.

Even though I've seen about 5 different movies on Little Women this film was super enjoyable.

Firstly, The characters get little character development, a lot of the run time is filled with pointless dialogue or social outings.

Constant time jumps due to flashbacks were a bit confusing.

" To Be Loved "Film: @littlewomenmovie Director : Greta Gerwig Music : @alexandredesplatofficial Dop : Yorick Le Saux Cast : #saoirseronan @lauradern @florencepugh @elizascanlen @emmawatson @tchalametOnly three word's after watching these little women's " Very Emotional Very Moving Very Engaging " !

An enjoyable period drama about the growing up and loves of a group of sisters in 1800's America.

There are a few more instances of this time play that I didn't really care for, and for the few people who don't know the story of Little Women, it can feel like some of the story is missing or disjointed.

The flash backs and flash forwards were confusing even though I knew the books.

For sure the best achievement of Greta is the amazing and unexpected ending she beautifully created.

Boring .

The timing format with flashbacks, although interesting, was also confusing and basically assumes that everyone in the audience knows (and remembers!

Then we had a very colourful perfectly enjoyable chocolate box version from MGM in 1949 directed by Mervyn Le Roy and starring June Allison this time as Jo.

Enjoyable ensemble cast performances .

First half confusing unless you are a fan of the book because it flashes back and forth so you only get glimpses rather than true character development.

Just Barely Enjoyable .

The editing really prompts the audience to pay more attention to the detail in order to get the most out of the story, though it was a little confusing at first.

Sooo boring!

" It's too long and I got bored.

Slow and boring .

Nothing happens.

It is a bit foppish in places, high society nonsense et al, but the undercurrent of female struggle powers through it well enough and if you watch this and aren't moved, you're a heartless empty vessel (and more than likely male).

I would have enjoyed it more, and compared it to the superior 1994 version less, if it had selected some different scenes from the book to include.

All in all, this was an enjoyable movie and well, people were complaining as to why Greta Gerwig was not nominated as best director, this is the obvious reason why, not saying she is a bad director or I have some hidden agenda on female directors, I really can't be bothered if the director is a male or female just give me a good movie; that's all I really want.

This is crap in comparison and quite boring.

It's a glorious movie, utterly absorbing with ravishing cinematography by Yorick Le Saux and a brilliant soundtrack by Alexandre Desplat: both I suspect likely to feature in Oscar nominations.

There were times that the dialogue went nowhere and I kept checking my phone as time felt that it stood still.


Boring .

This is a wonderful film that I just found to be a little too slow.

Overall: A terrific film interrupted by time jumps that caused confusion.

And I would recommend it to anyone who can appreciate an easy paced movie with stunning performances.

An enjoyable movie for the whole family and especially perfect for a mother-daughter date or ladies-night-out, In My Humble Opinion!

But despite this and some occasional narrative confusion, this film is superbly satisfying and an incredible experience.

Regardless, it is worth watching at least once.

Ugh It's getting really tiresome that all we have left in this world is to remake old movies remake old songs ......

The most boring thing ever, i don't know why this thing lasts so god damn long, i gave it a try but fell asleep 5 time (and i was at the movies), you should go and see this film, cuz it will solve all youre insomnia problema, i'll sleep like a horse


I have walked out of fewer than a handful of movies in my entire life.

Boring and dumb compared to 1994 version .

At more than one point, the movie gets overlong and boring; it does not help that there are so many intersecting storylines.

Thanks to the film's overwhelmingly strong performances and technical strengths, the fact that Little Women's now more formulaic and familiar plot movements and processions never threaten to detour from the fact this heartfelt and soulful effort is a thoroughly enjoyable and likable affair, that manages to say some important things about equality and female empowerment without ever feeling preachy or overbearing.

I thought the costumes were stunning as were the landscapes and the interior sets.

Laura Dern is very boring in her single-dimensional angelic role.

I've read the book a dozen times and have seen many film adaptations so am thoroughly conversant with the material and so enjoyed it.

The non-linear way in which it was told was confusing.

It's about as engaging is a bottle of Maalox.

Oh Streep herself was fine in this, giving us quirky Aunt March in a very enjoyable, almost self ironic performance.

The cinematography was visually stunning.

Yes, there are all those fancy costumes and stuff, but it felt like there was no film, no story, just a bunch of non-scripted overacting, as if the actors had been dressed and then told to start acting, without telling them first, what film they were in.

Personally, it is a pretty intense emotional struggle for me.

I knew the story & I found it confusing.

The acting was stunning.

Repetitive to me.

And the lack of any character flaws makes them all rather dull.

Although the story was familiar, it was enjoyable to watch this film.

They made Baher younger than ever and duller than ever.

I found the fractured storyline difficult to follow, especially since the characters all look the same age throughout the film.

Worst movie of 2019.

A stunning touching story of a dream and love.

The flashbacks make everything confusing and leave no room for character development.

The characterizations were so strong and vivid that it was easy to be drawn in to an extended story which, however, I found to be disjointed into snippets by the constant cutting and time traveling from the present back into the past and forward into the future.

This movie is very confusing because of all the cuts to different periods of time in the story.

I really enjoyed it and was enthralled the entire film.

I found the constant "forwards-backwards" format disconcerting, my friend declared it a waste of time and virtually unwatchable.

Sorry but its just plain boring.

After battling to stay awake for hours I left the theatre asking myself "what was the point?

The film seemed rushed, and with the constant flashback and flashforwards it just comes off as confusing to anyone unfamiliar with the subject matter.

The plot was typical of the era and very enjoyable, proving why this story is such a classic.

Hard to follow .

Fantastically acted, written, directed, and marvelously entertaining, Little Women just may be one of the best book to film adaptations ever made.

With effortless charisma, gorgeous visuals, passionate directing and delightful performances across the board, it's difficult not to love, but its muddled narrative and messy structure do work against it significantly, proving a major point of frustration and confusion throughout.

Save your money and time and just Redbox rent .

I also usually like when movies flash back to the pass and then come back to current but in this particular one I found it somewhat confusing (even with me already knowing the plot).

By the numbers, this should be a pure knock out but it all feels so blah, predictable and...

this movie is really enjoyable.

The production values are exquisite throughout, the costumes are evocative and the settings have a cosiness and charm that reminds me fondly of the period films of films from MGM in the 40s and 50s.

That's mainly due to the film's slow pacing.

I never read the book or seen the other film adaptations, but I thought the story was very beautiful and engaging, so I''m not surprised why so many people are drawn to this story.

All the performances were beautiful but Saorise was just stunning!

Wonderful , entertaining and simply beautiful .

It really is a great looking film with fantastic sets, costumes and really stunning cinematography.

I've always loved the story and a new modern version was an exciting prospect.

Greta Girwig did another movie that got amazing reviews "Lady Bird" but when most people saw it they thought it was one of the worst movies they ever saw.

You get a highly entertaining film based on a literary classic.

Secondly, the whole non-linear form of the movie is really quite dislocating, even to someone who knows the book and previous film inside out, it could be quite confusing at times.

Boring & females using group approach to learn self damaging ways .

It's just a bit slow for me.

The timeline could have been chronological if it was up to me, it can be confusing sometimes.

Saorise Ronan and Florence Pugh were the ones I liked the most and Pugh is the most exciting prospect in Hollywood right now.

It was too fast paced, dialogue seemingly modern and insincere it just didn't get me like other adaptations.

Way too long .

It's a truly stunning film for all the senses.

They are absolutely stunning.

and a bit of a boring one at that.

Emma Watson is the weakest link, but her character is also the most uninteresting one.

Another general confusion with new adaptation, it's not clear at all that Marches are doing financially not so well, or that Laurences are much better off, which was so clear in the 1994 adaptation.

This movie is about as far away from 'my type' of movie as possible, or at least that's what I thought, but I have to say I enjoyed it a lot.

Worth watching, you won't regret it.

The back and forth timeline is confusing.

Besides the incredibly choppy and confusing timelines that deflated every opportunity for intimacy or connection, the actors were so clearly not their correct ages.

Taking what is a sweeping, epic and slow burning story and throwing its structure into a blender is one of the biggest filmmaking blunders I've ever witnessed.

But I found myself feeling a little bored, particularly at the beginning.

However it's day has gone and watching To Kill a Mockingbird now is uneventful as the story has been shown in much better ways many times over the years.

Stunning costumes mixed with boring plot story .

Such a boring film!!!!

I found it boring.

But still a good and enjoyable movie.

Well worth watching.

There is a scene where Jo Marsh is running down the street and it changes to slow mo for 2 seconds and it felt weird.

She has created a lavish film that skillfully recreates the March sisterhood with stunning production values and an excellent cast.

It is too confusing and abrupt to be even considered.

It seemed rather dull.

There is almost no plot or climax - the only reason I didn't leave the cinema early was because of an old woman sitting on the edge of the seat row and I didn't wanna ruin her cinema experience.

Ronan and Watson are breathtaking.

confusing if you're not familiar with the book .

This one, however, was just so boring and disjointed, I couldn't follow it.

I went to see this movie with low expectations, but thorougly enjoyed it.

In general, it is very boring and meaningless

Extremely boring.

Compelling adaptation by Greta Gerwig.


The director tries to do something interesting with the source material but ends up with a too long and ultimately boring / messy story.

Uninspiring .

Such a compelling and heart-warming story.

It's an absolutely complete and absorbing piece of cinema.

The exception of Laura Dern who I love..but I found even her performance in this tedious and uncomfortable to watch.

My main complaint is that the film was far too long for such little conflict.

Another theme is the contrast between everyday hapiness and compelling drama.

Overall, it's a great dramatic film, is exciting, you laugh, cry and feel a lot of emotions.

While this is still an entertaining and ultimately satisfying film to watch, quite a few things mar the experience.

Act 1 - 7.2Act 2 - 7.7Act 3 - 7.8 Film in nonlinear and jumps back and forth between timelines which can be a bit jarring at timesActing is really good all around and modernized for this time, still takes place during the Civil WarRonan is great as Jo and is very endearing and independent in this rolePugh is also very good as Amy March and makes her more than just a bratty younger sister, has some really strong and emotional scenesChalamet is very good as Laurie and is a joy to see on screenLove the relationships between the family and friends and how there is so much energy when they are all together talking over one another, feels very realFilm is a joy to watch for the most part but hits emotional notes when it needs to while always remaining endearingEnding isn't as strong as it good of been as it felt a little forced and suddenAll other supporting performances are good and make the characters come to lifeLove the modern way of thinking that this film uses to challenge norms and stand up for woman and what they want in life instead of just being a wife which was common place in this timeScore of the film drives home the emotional scenesWritten so well and realistic by Greta and directed well tooCinematography is consistently satisfyingThere are a few corny scenes and the laughs don't always hit, can also get a bit slow at timesOverall a strong film that I would recommend to most .

You have Saoirse Ronan who commands every scene she is in and gives her Jo so much life and makes her also very unpredictable in emotions and reactions.

Being a coming of age story, Little Women could have been so much better both structurally and emotionally if it used child actors.

yawn .

Even if I could get behind the chaotic way in which the story was told and the drab choice of actors and actresses, I absolutely draw the line at Greta Gerwig's choice to merge the life of Louisa May Alcott and the character Jo March.

This movie is truly enjoyable and the cast did an excellent job ( the scene that Jo and Laurie dance for the first time is just wonderfully hilarious) .

As of Ms. Watson, I regret to say her acting is as boring and predictable as ever, and she probably will always be Hermione.

V disjointed adaptation, gimmicky back and forth time period jumping, so very unnecessary.

First of all the films cinematography and aesthetics were stunning.


Both have great actors but this version left the characters somewhat empty and the constant hopping between past and current day was bothering me.

Its just all over the place, I tried to keep my eyes on this film but could't help it I just fell asleep.

Overall it's a heart-warming, highly quotable, 10/10 family movie worth the watch.

I was just bored, which is really frustrating when there's THAT MUCH talent on screen.

Predictable untila lovely ending which is a variation from previous versions.

Enjoyable Period Piece.

The acting is empty and it's basically a repeat of the lines from the one with Winona Ryder.

This is a classic book done with an all-star cast in an entertaining fashion.

It's done sloppy and unless you read the book or watch the other versions, it's hard to follow.

It does sag in the middle; could perhaps do with shaving 15-20 minutes to tighten it up a little, but otherwise a thoroughly entertaining watch.

It's boring, lazy & poorly filmed.

Worth the Watch - All Five Times .

I Fell Asleep .

The constant switching back and forth from present to past was confusing.

This version was boring.

The worst movie ever.

Worst movie of the decade .

There was no plot it was just two and a half hours of character development.

My only complaint is that because of the constant change of time (like in all other movies that use that method of transition) the story is hard to follow.

Certainly a film worth watching.

In the movie, I did fall asleep as the story moved so slowly.

boring .

I love its genuinely charming and entertaining storytelling and it's amusing acting.

Especially confusing was Amy in this new adaptation.

This one was worth a watch but I didnt much like the time jumping, found it confusing.

Slow and very very boring.

Same for the ambiguous meta ending that brings more confusion than emotional depth and clarity.

This is pure stereotypical cliche garbage.

Simply put, it's confusing.

Soairse Ronan is too uptigh and bland.

But i have to say emma was very enjoyable while this one is just a bore.

The story, oh my, it keeps you on the edge!

She is so overrated and just boring to watch.

Very enjoyable and the best Jo by far!!!!

Brilliant Film But Difficult To Follow .

Florence Pugh and Laura Dern are also incredible, delivering depth and emotion to thieir compelling characters.

This flick was so boring that I had to stop it about 1/3 into it.

On the most part this aspect does work surprisingly well, but there were times where it was confusing and not always easy to tell straight away what was the past and what was the present and that was the case with this 'Little Women'.

Apparently, its time-hopping structure is entirely new, seemingly included to call attention to the story's various call-backs and contrasts, and has caused some confusion among audiences unfamiliar with the book.

It's also because the film is so confusing that I couldn't actually understand a lot of it.

Overall, the story was engaging, the acting was great, and it does have a re-watchability factor, which is a big surprise due to it being a period-drama.

The scenes at the beach in particular are stunning, with one shot of Beth and Jo with sand swirling around them being my favorite of the film.

An Unexpected Phenomenon .

More entertaining than Star Wars Rise of Skywalker .

There was too much jumping back and forth from past to present which made it difficult to follow the story line especially for someone who doesn't already know the story.

Despite film being emotionally engaging it is little bit confusing at some points as storytelling includes parallel timelines which is simultaneously showing present and 7 years earlier stories, also film could've been concluded within 1hour 40mins despite its been stretched to 2 hours and 15mins.

Entire film quite long, and full of boring conversation!

This story will seem very confusing and disjointed unless you already know the plot well.

You're certainly the most enjoyable movie of the year for me.

I found it confusing and distorenting.

These moments offer a slower side to the story, which don't always land as well as they perhaps should.

Very confusing movie .

Furthermore, the movie's basically extremely slow paced and takes its time to elaborate it's characters and even though I appreciated it on the one hand, it also had a minor flaw to it on the other, as it was extremely lengthy at times, just slightly too much.

I heard such great things but I fell victim to the "liberal propaganda club" to give this movie great reviews.

The characters come to life and I think everyone can find bits of themselves in every character which makes it very compelling and absolutely heart wrenching.


Enjoyable and worth seeing.

The flashbacks are a bit confusing.


Unexpected ending worth it all .

The story kept going back and forth between the past and the present, which made it a little difficult to follow at first, especially as the characters look identical at both times (especially Amy, played by Florence Pugh, who goes from being 13 to 20).

They take the classic story and tell it in a new and unexpected (and delightful) way.

Also it was really confusing because it kept jumping around time lines from the present and future which made it really confusing, and the whole movie I thought that the girl who burned the novel and Amy were different people because in different time lines she looked very different.

What is strikingly and perversely amusing is that even the author of this well received movie, Louisa May Alcott agreed that even her book that so many movies were based on was not a work that she enjoyed writing, never liked girls, and that the book in fact was "dull.

I enjoyed it even more the second time.

The jumping back and forth in time was confusing to the point where it seemed that it took Beth 7 years to die.

A totally unnecessary remake of an outdated boring novel that could do without.

Saoirse Ronan was simply stunning.

) The order (flashbacks) were also a bit confusing at times, and some scenes were a bit odd and had no explanation or reason for being there.

But after ten minutes in I was bored.

Oscar worthy performances, breathtaking scenery and sets, gorgeous costumes and the plot was true to the story.

She won a Gold Globe and was nominated for the Oscars with this film, so I thought: "Little Women" will be fascinating too.

The original Louisa May Alcott story proves to be a compelling baseline to this film in and of itself.

Little Women (2019) Review:Greta Gerwig writes and directs the beloved story of four of sisters coming of age in the aftermath of the Civil War.

Totally unexpected, yet totally fascinating to witness.

I was in tears with past versions and found myself yawning at important moments in this movie.

The star for me, however, is Timothée Chalamet - he plays the charming but emotionally fickle "Laurie" in a thoroughly captivating, engaging manner.

Its really nice to see Ronan on the edge to become truly her generations Meryl Streep.

Boring and goed about nothing.

As usual, Chalamet gives us a stunning performance and for me, really gives the audience a good picture of how Laurie is.

It was the most boring film I have ever watched 1/10.

Overall it was a pretty film, if terribly disjointed.

It was so boring and meaningless that I thought I was watching this movie for 10 hours.

And now its even more boring in this age of Ultimate PC, Adding black people and Asians where there were none before.

Very boring .

I found it too slow, not mucb happening, Only towards the end it picked up .

Heart-warming and entertaining .

The story jumps back and forth through different time periods and it is a little confusing at times.

Often times long time fans will be resistent to certain changes to what they have come to love however for a first time exposure like myself I found the approach so engaging and perfectly timed.

What a waste of time.

A really decent, engaging ensemble effort .

Very enjoyable period piece film or at least it seemed like one.

With fresh, innocent eyes and mind that never experienced a "Little Women" movie or novel, this apparently seventh version of the well-read book by little women themselves seems to offer a rather difficult to follow movie.

Even with much knowledge of the story it was hard to follow which timeline the story just jumped to till part way through the scene.

Little Women is a good coming of age drama about four young girls who are raised by there mother.

For those who are not familiar with the story, it is just a confusing mess.

What a waste of time.

All feels too theatrical and dull!

Overall enjoyable version .

While the start was very slow, and despite being perhaps not the target demographic (being a man), I really got into it by the end.

The reason I mentioned the editing before is because the movie is told in a sequence of flashbacks, but it gets a little confusing at times differentiating between flashbacks and modern day.

This meandering mishmash went on far too long and left me and my sister yawning well before the end.

Adding to the confusion was that none of the girls seemed to change in age right up to the end.


I felt the whole thing was chaotic and disjointed.

Feels very disjointed.

I thought it looked stunning and the cast were all very good especially those playing Jo and Amy.

As a whole between the wardrobe, houses, and landscape it really was overall incredibly beautiful and visually stunning.

Largely I suspect because the story is pretty fast paced.

This film was simply stunning to look at.

I don't feel like giving it a low raing--I wanted to love it, but I was kind of bored most of the way through.

It got better in the third act for me, once I completely understood what was going on, and once I did, I can tell you that the movie is very smart and could be a real eye opener for many if it was more engaging to those people.

The story overall is not bad, but can get boring.

Powerfully written story, better told, moving and compelling.

The cinematography coupled with Desplat's score is breathtaking and should easily pick up multiple award nominations.

Thoroughly enjoyable .

The non-sequential timeline certainly helps too, creating a varied and intriguing story arc.

The non-linearity makes it super confusing.

One of the most enjoyable movies recently I have watched,nice, funny, sad, cute and gorgeous.

Boring, making little sense until late in the film .

This movie is about coming of age in the 19th century and Hollywood chooses actresses of age 20, 23, 25 and 29 to portray teen girls that should be of ages 12 to 16.

Very visual and enjoyable period drama.

Alongside, Emma Watson, Florence Pugh and Eliza Scanlen are delightful as her sisters, each bringing unique and memorable characteristics to life in genuine and enjoyable style.

The pacing is masterfully done, and the film is altogether incredibly enjoyable.

In a nutshell, the story is about a family with four coming of age daughters in American civil war years.

So it firstly made it fairly confusing at first to know what time period you were in.

A movie worth watching .

I didn't hate it, but the 2+ hours dragged by.

It's compelling and punctuates the emotional depth of many scenes, as they're contrasted and compared in interesting way with similar or different scenes, appearing in the past or future.

They hit the required emotional notes during some intense scenes and when it's just pure joy and dancing, you can feel their on screen chemistry is what really sells their friendship in the movie.

), feminist virtue signalling (yawn) and costumes and hair that were not quite as on point as they should have been.

Definitely worth watching (although I am torn between giving it a 7 and an 8).

To me it was very a regular coming of age movie and i didn't concur with extremely rave reviews it received.

I must say that it can get confusing since the story keeps on going back and forth in the timeline.

I have seen better versions, this one is a bit dull in the middle.

The add-ons in terms of feminist dialogue were tiresome and out of place.

Enjoyable with superb acting .

Confusing - followed by pointless .

I felt that everyone was just absorbing the experience and didn't want it to end.

a fascinating film.

All in all this film is NOT Oscar worthy, It's too confusing, terribly miscast, and has a feminist message that is over done to nauseum.

I highly recommend it.

I was board, so board, slow, nothing new, nice for girls seating around the table drinking tea.

In addition to this, the film flashes back and forth between two different years and because each of the characters don't look that much different in either year, it can cause confusion figuring out which year we are supposed to be watching.

Messy and super confusing .


Coming of age, historically dramatic pieces can't afford to be edited that way because realating and investing in the film and the characters will be times harder.

Not only is this a brand new take on a beloved classic, it's visually stunning, superbly acted, and any minor adjustments in sequence and plots in no way diminishes or strays from the incredible characters Alcott gave us.

Thoroughly enjoyable and heartfelt film.

This was a boring story when she wrote the damn book, it was a dreadful movie when Winona Ryder did it.

Late into the film, Jo asks Amy how domestic struggles and joys of women could make an exciting book.

Confusing .

Ladybird was great and so was Ronan but here she's just bland.

This one, the trailer seemed very exciting and I thought there will be a lot of adventures.

"So visually excellent with good acting but hard to follow unless you know the story well.

Gabriel Byrne (from 1994) has that something, you can see that inner spark, you can see what connects them with Jo, what is fascinating her.

Overall, this story of poor grown up girls with their own yet intermingling stories along an engaging background score does get a few tears while watching.

The story doesnt go in a chronological way, its moving too fast and I feel it will be just pure difficult to follow if you havent seen the old movie or read the book.

Disjointed jumping backwards and forwards in time, actors far too old for the roles and missing the warmth this story usually generates in readers and audiences.

This movie is boring from the beginning to the end.

But all it did was create mild confusion.

And ultimately just a bit, well, boring.

The cinematography is lush, there is a compelling intimacy and the acting is superb.

It just jumps from scene to scene and provides no story line.

A deja vu and predictable quotes borrowed from Wuthering heights, Jane Eyre, Pride and prejudice, Gone with the wind etc

Although the acting is outstanding nearly all-round, for me Louis Garrel was somewhat bland as Professor Bhaer.

For example, it might be difficult for viewers to understand the timeline, as the events are not in order, which makes it confusing for those that dive into the tale for the first time.

Waste of time.

The deathbed scene with Beth in the new version was vague and confusing.

It was just kinda basic and uninteresting.

making the story seem a bit disjoint and confusing.

Since the movie crosses the two-hour mark, I found myself bored during certain storylines that failed to captivate me.

My primary criticism is that the chronology is at times a bit difficult to follow, let alone keep track of.

stupid and confusing .

But the narrative makes the story confusing, somertimes everything happens so fast and so slow and the same time.

If there was ever a way to turn a charming girlie novel into a boring movie about relationships, Greta Garwig seems to have found it.

Overall she created a confusing, nearly storyless mess out of a classic story, with her horrible screenplay and horrible directing.

Joe's novels are mostly about war at first, to make her earn money or other material, but because a lot of life experience and eventually realized that she really wanted to describe only his family all the mundane of daily life, not only for proof of existence of beth left once, also think back to how they naive themselves into from the past to the present.

This was good but found the editing from past to present rather confusing and annoying.

A reflection on life a coming of age story also.

Brilliantly acted but confusing and 1994 version still superior .

Rightly so, the film was a charming coming of age story.

I'm especially - ESPECIALLY - let down by the last love scene in which the book's heroine has a romantic and private moment that the film adaptation turns into a gossipy, contrived sister scene.

The 2017 version was much better in my opinion, but this was still worth watching if you are a Little Women's fan!

I did notice a lot of elderly women in the theater where I saw it, and the reaction I got from them is they enjoyed it.

I will always revere Gillian Armstrong's movie and compelling plot.

The movie is not preachy by any means and I was surprised at how entertaining it was funny, sad, emotionally resonant and completely engaging.

Nevertheless I enjoyed it immensely especially the postmodern scene towards the end of the film.

Although I beleive I have interpreted it wrong I got the sense that the scene in the rain when Jo kisses the professor that it's direction was so different from the rest of the movie, that it was very cliche and hollywooded up making me beleive it wasn't a reality.

From here the the movie constantly switches from Jo's current situation to flashbacks of her childhood, making it a bit hard to follow.

It was a little confusing at first with the story bouncing around from the past and present.

I enjoy about half the chick flicks I watch but this torpid and tedious chronicle is best left for those who revel in the search for and adoration of leading ladies.

Boring .

As expected, the whole cast is phenomenal, but Saoirse Ronan, Florence Pugh, and Timothée Chalamet not only deliver the best performances of the film, but their characters carry the most compelling arcs.

Sadly, the big-screen result is tedious....

Hell, that was a new dimension of boring .

Worst movie ever .