I haven't read the book, nor have I seen the previous adaptations. I watched the 2019 version last night, and immediately after, Amazon Prime suggested this 1994 version, which I watched too. So I got to compare those two.
I like this 1994 version better overall.
I like that the story is told in a linear way, which makes it much easier to understand and adds more suspense (will Beth die?! Will Jo and Laurie be together?!).
The cast is chosen better in the 1994 version. In this version, Christian Bale is a credible Laurie, while in the 2019 version the actor looks too young and not masculine enough. Gabriel Byrne is a great Professor Bhaer. In the 2019 version I didn't quite understand why Jo fell in love with him. In this 1994 version, I totally get it. Amy's jealousy and the drama between her and Jo also make more sense with a much younger Amy, as she is in the 1994 version. That bit didn't make much sense to me in the 2019 version.
In this 1994 version, it's not so clear to me why Jo refuses Laurie. In the 2019 version, it's explained that she doesn't love him romantically, and sees him more like a brother. In the 1994 version, she only says they would be fighting all the time, which is unbelievable since we never see them fighting. They seem to get along great and she acts like she is in love with him the whole time. It doesn't make much sense.
There are some little things that disturb me in this 1994 version. The kisses made me cringe. Such anachronism!
Amy's personality seems to change so awfully much when she grows up. It's like she's a different person. Yes, it's a different actress, but the character's personality just changes too much.
The Beth/Mr. Lawrence subplot and Meg's struggle to accept poverty are missing from the 1994 version. I liked that about the 2019 version.
About both movies, it feels like me like they were made by people who read the book for people who read the book. We're supposed to just know, accept or understand certain things because they're in the book, even though they're not so clear based on the screenplay.
I like this 1994 version better overall.
I like that the story is told in a linear way, which makes it much easier to understand and adds more suspense (will Beth die?! Will Jo and Laurie be together?!).
The cast is chosen better in the 1994 version. In this version, Christian Bale is a credible Laurie, while in the 2019 version the actor looks too young and not masculine enough. Gabriel Byrne is a great Professor Bhaer. In the 2019 version I didn't quite understand why Jo fell in love with him. In this 1994 version, I totally get it. Amy's jealousy and the drama between her and Jo also make more sense with a much younger Amy, as she is in the 1994 version. That bit didn't make much sense to me in the 2019 version.
In this 1994 version, it's not so clear to me why Jo refuses Laurie. In the 2019 version, it's explained that she doesn't love him romantically, and sees him more like a brother. In the 1994 version, she only says they would be fighting all the time, which is unbelievable since we never see them fighting. They seem to get along great and she acts like she is in love with him the whole time. It doesn't make much sense.
There are some little things that disturb me in this 1994 version. The kisses made me cringe. Such anachronism!
Amy's personality seems to change so awfully much when she grows up. It's like she's a different person. Yes, it's a different actress, but the character's personality just changes too much.
The Beth/Mr. Lawrence subplot and Meg's struggle to accept poverty are missing from the 1994 version. I liked that about the 2019 version.
About both movies, it feels like me like they were made by people who read the book for people who read the book. We're supposed to just know, accept or understand certain things because they're in the book, even though they're not so clear based on the screenplay.