User reviews

After reading some of the other reviews, I didn't know whether to expect the greatest movie ever, or the worst.

Well of course it was neither.

I never read the Alcott books, or any of the other "chick" stories, but I am familiar with some of them. People have been making movies loosely based on them forever.

They put in things they think are clever (Alcott Grove, a waitress named Louisa May) that really just make it irritating.

This movie is a modern retelling, and while not a significant achievement in film, is not as bad as some of the reviews I've read.

I agree there could have been a stronger lead, but I haven't seen Trevor Donovan even mentioned, and he was very good.

The whole four sisters thing was overdone, and they didn't really look or feel like sisters. They basically had four lead actresses jockeying for position. That never works.

I do like the GAC is making a concerted effort to include the Lord in all the movies I've seen this year.

I thought this movie was fine. To me that's good enough.

Seven.

Really? They have Jen Lilley and Jesse Hutch but didn't put them in lead roles? Jillian Murray is too weak an actress for a lead. She was boring in the lead and her low cut dress at church was inappropriate for a GAC movie. The movie had good bones but was pretty boring and needed a meatier script with more humorous lines.

As far as the Little Women theme, it fell flat. The relationships between the characters was weak. Laurie and Jo have a history that was not at all apparent. I did love Gladys Night and the other singers at the church though. I feel I wasted 2 hours of my life. I love GAC and I'm praying for better scripts!

The elements that make this a "retelling" are the girls' names. The Lorrie romance, and the sisters' creativity. But that's a low bar; a true retelling would capture the essence of the original, including themes of sacrifice, giving when you have little to give (the modern family is insanely well-off by almost all Americans' standards), and a sense of responsibility to community that pulls people together through shared hardship. Attending a church service hardly does that.

Did the creators of the movie think an Army captain fits that bill? Instead of learning an actual truth (the Army doesn't care if you miss your family), Daisy learns a fantasy that if a soldier tells God he wants to go home, God will grant his wish. What about the enlisted guys Captain Daddy left behind? As a former Army Officer's wife, I can recall being pre-empted on Christmas for lonely soldiers my ex-husband had to inspire morale into.

This channel needs to get its writers and producers out of Beverly Hills and talk to some regular people. L. M. Alcott's original is so much more relatable than this misguided production.

Still, it filled some of a night for us.

This movie had so many things that promised that it could be outstanding. Look at the stars. If this was Hallmark, this gathering of top names would indicate it to be a Hall of Fame entry.

I don't remember ever reading Little Women. Maybe but I doubt it. I'm sure the homages to that classic would have added immensely to a fan's enjoyment. I caught a bunch of name drops that even a non-fan would recognize. There are several good scenes with sisters being typical sisters. (I do love sister stories.)

I say too ambitious for two reasons. First so much in the story is derivative. I won't list them all, but the main romance is between a book editor hiding his identity sent to mentor and encourage a struggling writer while "the boss" repeatedly pressures him and eventually drops a bomb on them. At least one artistic character has lost her job. Another faces a career vs. Personal choice. And there is a husband and father saying he can't get home on leave. As I list these, is there any viewer who can't predict what will happen in each and every case?

The other reason is related to limits of a two-hour commercial broadcast which usually means just under 90 minutes of screen time. Squeeze that in with what would be an artful introduction, another artful parting scene, and then an epilogue, four main female characters, and literally 5 minutes of musical performances by blockbuster performers. (At least blockbuster for TV Christmas movies. I was disappointed that Laura Osnes got not just second place, but third being only a harmony part.) The relationship between Jo and Fritz got barely enough screentime to make a good story. That left three other sisters with stories begging for more time. I think that's part of why the endings were so predictable. Early in the movie, it felt like scenes and lines were being rushed.

Despite the rush, there were a few good Ahh moments and maybe a couple of tears.

This is a faith-based movie. The message there is not one that will offend many who are not enthusiastic about such. Who can argue with - Christmas brings joy and love?

If you saw the disaster of a romance movie called 'Prescription for Love' starring these two leads, you at least have to admit the script for this one is far more suitable...especially for Trevor Donovan. This actor does best when the romance blossoms early on and the screenplay doesn't call for him to be bumbling and tongue-tied/shy at the onset. This movie isn't perfect in that regard (in that he can't come clean right away about working for her employer) but that cringe-quotient is far less than being a clueless doctor in 'Prescription'. Here, the romance progresses credibly and the 'conflict' is also real-world credible. Marsh is attractive and sweet and her only problem....if such a thing is actually a problem in real life....is the she looks far younger than her age. She looked like a teenage nurse in 'Prescription' and here a bit young to already have achieved a list of best-sellers.

I honestly thought I was watching a high school play. It looked and felt low budget. Jen Lilley as Meg and Laura Osnes as Beth were great but should never be in minor support roles. Jillian Murray was not strong enough to play the lead as Jo. The characters of Amy and Laurie were just space fillers and poorly cast. The casting choices and writing, both dialog and plot lines, were subpar. The entire movie was uncomfortably bad. The one minute of decent airtime was Gladys Knight singing. That was it.

Within the first fifteen minutes it was obvious that the movie was not going to be worthy of a second watch. I stuck it out hoping it would improve. Sadly, it did not.

One of the best Christmas movies we've ever seen. Not the typical cringy Hallmark Xmas movie. Well done, thoughtful and enjoyable. Brilliant story line and actors. Wonderful cast and a lovely modern day remake of Little Women. The scenery was so festive and lovely and highlighted the charm of Franklin, TN where it was filmed. This was not a low budget film, the quality was noticeable. The March sisters were so sweet and casted well. A stellar cast and high end directors and producers.

No cringe just a super sweet and uplifting movie. Great American Family is our new go to for Christmas movies. Too bad Hallmark is now doing such cringy and low budget holiday films.

A fellow viewer remarked that this film resembled a high school production, and I wholeheartedly concur. The performances were lacking, and the writing left much to be desired. It is disheartening to see such a beloved story treated in this manner. One notable issue was the dialogue; characters frequently addressed each other by name in a way that felt unnatural. While this approach may have been intended to reinforce their identities as characters from Little Women, it ultimately detracted from the authenticity of their interactions. In reality, conversations are rarely so contrived-people do not typically enter a room with greetings like, "Hi John, my favorite brother." The script contributed to a sense of stiffness among the actors, resulting in performances that felt wooden and unconvincing. Additionally, the two standout performers, Jen Lily and Jesse Hutch, were relegated to minor roles when their talents could have significantly enhanced the film had they been given more substantial parts. As a devoted fan of the original novel and previous adaptations of Little Women, as well as wholesome films produced by GAC, I found this interpretation disappointing. Despite its good intentions, the execution fell short. I would recommend that future productions invest more time in developing a strong script rather than relying solely on the established names from such an esteemed literary work.

A much loved story and promising lineup but fell short of expectations. Not enough substance. Scenes were too short and changed too quickly so Jen and Jesse left me wanting more. In my opinion, Laura Osnes should have been Jo. Hers and Trevor's character rang the truest and I'd have loved to have seen her as Jo. I also enjoyed Tanya's character. I've seen some movies with Jillian and I'm sorry to say, the stories change but she's always the same... Some of the other cast members were so stiff I just couldn't believe the story. They were literally performing for the camera. It would be so great to see some of the more seasoned members of the network give this a try, perhaps with a little more of the original story left in it, maybe a series focusing on each separate sister within the family.

Faith based movies are great when the viewer isn't bombarded with stiff smiles and so much teeth and "niceness" that is so far removed from reality it's not believable. I know these types of movies are made to make the viewer feel good but we need believable characters and story lines that grip. It is possible. I'm also disappointed with the Christmas decorations throughout the movie...it was barely noticeable.

It might just be the fact that there were too many characters involved in this movie to do any of them justice. Somehow, this film seemed to both drag in places and gloss-over important story points, at the same time.

A bit more snappy banter between the leads wouldn't have hurt. They needed a better-developed story, even if that meant sacrificing one or more of the other sisters' stories.

The real standout performance here turned out to be from Trevor Donovan. I've seen him in other movies, but I believe this is the first time I've really noticed him as an actor. He did a great job here. Just wish the movie itself was better.

It's been a mixed bag for GAC Family Christmas movies in 2024 and the much-hyped and rather ambitious "A Little Women's Christmas" (a modern day retelling of the Louisa May Alcott novel) was, for me, underwhelming.

It was a weak and clunky script, lacking humour and featuring too many cliched lines.

The script error was compounded by casting Jillian Murray in the lead role, rather than the more accomplished Jen Lilley or Laura Osnes. Seemed like a waste, having someone like Lilley in the movie but relegated almost to a supporting role. Trevor Donovan was well cast, though. He always seems to do a very good job,

Whilst they appear to have a lot of the big ex-Hallmark stars, movies made for and by GAC Family need better production values. They trail Hallmark by a long way in this very important area. The sets all screamed "low budget", an area that needs to be tidied up quick smart. It's a waste of their acting talent, otherwise.

I love the actors, especially my favorite, Jen Lilley, I love what Bill Abbot is trying to do with GAF, but wow this is the worst scriptwriting I've ever experienced. The dialogue is terrible. There is far too much exposition in dialogue rather than in plot, and the exposition is usually spoken with almost no feeling or explanation. People don't talk this way! Everything in the story was utterly predictable . There was no suspense or tension. No characters really grew. The religious elements were just tacked on and felt inorganic to the story. The editing was slipshod and the directing was seriously subpar. If I didn't love the actors so much, I wouldn't have gotten past the first scene. Where did all the decent Hollywood writers go? Seriously, ChatGPT could have done better.