A Little Women's Christmas

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.

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?

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.

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!

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.