Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Tyler

Little Women Gritty Dystopian TV Series

Recommended Posts

Yes really.

 

 

Little Women is described as a hyper-stylized, gritty adaptation of the 1868 novel by Louisa May Alcott, in which disparate half-sisters Jo, Meg, Beth, and Amy band together in order to survive the dystopic streets of Philadelphia and unravel a conspiracy that stretches far beyond anything they have ever imagined – all while trying not to kill each other in the process.

 

Edited by Tyler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Link to our thread on the upcoming movie adaptation, where I just posted this same story. I'll repost my comments from there:

 

Of course, Alcott made her bread writing gritty stories, so it's not like this is a total departure. But the fact that someone looked at Little Women and said "Y'know, this really needs to be a post-apocalyptic thriller" makes me happier, perhaps, than it should.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

--and it just occurred to me that a Hannibal-style mashup of Alcott's thrillers with Little Women could actually be fun. Good, probably not. But fun.

Edited by NBooth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really hate this idea. Here's one explanation of why:

 

 

The CW can totally tell a story of four half-sisters surviving in the wastes of Philadelphia. That seems right up their alley, as it combines a female-centric storyline with sci-fi elements and it sounds interesting! Women who here to chew bubblegum and kick butt, but they’re all out of bubblegum, make for fun action heroines! But nothing about the sisters unraveling a conspiracy on the dystopian streets of Philadelphia while trying not to kill each other indicates an interest in the kind of introspective examination of gender and society structure central to the source material.

Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe the adaptation will shine a light on modern societal expectations of men and women using a dystopian backdrop to set the stage. But if I’m right, maybe they just shouldn’t call it “Little Women."


Read more at http://www.hitfix.com/harpy/gritty-and-stylized-are-two-words-that-shouldnt-describe-little-women#P6SgreaJlbxoDW6b.99

 

I've seen two or three similar responses. Go ahead, CW, make a show about four kick-ass, semi-related young women saving dystopian Philadelphia from apocalypse, vampires, or corporate greed, but don't call them "Meg, Jo, Amy, and Beth" and pretend it's Little Women. That's just lazy.

 

P.S. Your Mary Queen of Scots show Reign isn't about MQoS, no matter what you call her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The author of that tweet wrote a Washington Post column nails it:

 

 

Writer: No I hear you I just — you can’t just call that “Little Women” because their names are the same. I mean I can’t say I’m adapting “Anne of Green Gables” and then be like “so it’s in Detroit, in the year 2360, and two cyborgs named Marilla and Matthew take in a girl named Anne, and together they uncover a conspiracy that goes farther than anything they could have possibly imagined while fighting to stay alive –”

Exec: This is genius! Tell me more.

 

I'm not just being cranky about this. I love Bride and Prejudice, Clueless, 10 Things I Hate about You--movies that play with, update, and parody the plots and characters of classic novels and plays--but they work because they don't present themselves as "adaptations."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×