Little Women The Musical

[Theaterkid7]

Posted: 6/14/06 at 3:27pm

Hey everyone. I was wondering about people's opinions on the Broadway show Little Women. I know the show only ran for about three months on Broadway and is now on tour, but I was wondering what all of you think about it...?? I was thinking about going to the show but I'm not sure if I should.
Updated On: 6/14/06 at 03:27 PM

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 6/14/06 at 3:33pm

It is somewhat of an homage to the classic era of broadway of the 50s with the way the music is written and how it is directed. I saw it in previews in North Carolina and thought it was pretty good. Maureen McGovern (who played Marmee) was UNBELIEVABLE. She was the best part of the whole show to me. Sutton Foster was a let down for me. I have never actually seen a broadway actor/actress on stage before and I had such high hopes since everyone on this board always talks so good about her. The reason she was a let down for me, was because she over acted in every single scene she was in. You can play an enegergetic young person without sounding like Goofy and going all over the place. All the other actresses were really good. My favorite song from the musical is "Something's Were Meant to Be." I cried SO HARD when they performed this song and still get choked up now when I hear it on the cast recording.

If you want to see it on tour, please go see it. It was well worth the money.

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 6/14/06 at 3:45pm

The show is fun (not great), the music is fine, but the cast is exceptional.

And...search feature? There have been plenty of posts about the LW tour already.

(This is the part where Sanda is the detractor. This is your cue, Sanda!)

[Elphaba]

Posted: 6/14/06 at 3:49pm

there are at least 4 threads on this already

being brand new, you may want to use the search feature.......put in "little women"

it was fabulous, I saw it in San diego.....it is worth seeing

[Theaterkid7]

Posted: 6/14/06 at 3:51pm

Sorry. I will definitely try searching next time before I post.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 6/16/06 at 4:52pm

I LOVED this show when I saw it on Broadway! Sutton Foster is genius. I disagree that she overacted...her interpretation is what carried the show. She was accompanied by excellent performances by most of the cast members (especially McGovern). To be honest, there are some big weaknesses--mainly the fact that you never see Mr. March--but the score and show are beautiful. That bein said, I saw the tour in Philadelphia in May and was disappointed. The show fell apart without Foster's strong leading performance. Julie Foldesi was good, but not strong enough to carry the show. The actors playing Meg and John Brooke were horrible on tour...

I hope this helps!

[Stagerage2003]

Posted: 6/16/06 at 5:00pm

I just love Danny Gurwin! Take a Chance On Me is my favorite song from the show!

[Ruth Sherwood]

Posted: 6/16/06 at 5:01pm

I saw Little Women three times on Broadway and loved every performance. The score is not brilliant, but there are some knockout songs: Some Things Are Meant to Be and Days of Plenty.
It's not a flawless musical, but it is certainly worth seeing.
I completely disagree with the Sutton overacting comment. I don't think she's the best actress in the world, but I think she was so well-suited to this part. She is exactly as I had imagined Jo when I read "Little Women."

[Shawk]

Posted: 6/16/06 at 5:05pm

I did not see the show on Broadway, so this isn't really a fair comparison, but overall I definitely enjoyed the voices of the tour actors more than I did the voices on the OBC.

And I would have to disagree about Michael Minarik (John Brooke) and Renee Brna (Meg). I mean, everyone has bad nights, but they were quite good when I saw them, as was the rest of the cast.

My basic opinion of the show overall is that it is an ok show with a great cast; that was enough to save it for me.

[WickedGeek28]

Posted: 6/16/06 at 5:20pm

I really enjoyed it.

[bluesoprano]

Posted: 6/16/06 at 11:16pm

I loved the tour. Maureen McGovern was a standout for me, both of her songs were wonderful and she is such a wonderful singer! The cast is pretty good, Kate Fisher who plays Jo was pretty good, some people compare her to Sutton, but I don't see it. The girls that play the March Sisters are all wonderful!

Go see the tour, at least for Maureen!

[ElphabaRose]

Posted: 6/16/06 at 11:20pm

The tour is far superior to the Broadway production. The cast was far better on tour and it helped detract from the fact that the book is terrible and the music is only ok. The entire production is a massicre of the amazing original book.

[BroadwayBound062]

Posted: 6/16/06 at 11:21pm

I really at first listen thought the music was kinda like stupid but once i listened over and over I really began to get into it. Why did it close on broadway so fast...

[theatregrl0456]

Posted: 6/17/06 at 12:33am

sadly i've never seen the show, but i would love to. I really liked what i heard on the cd, which has been listened to quite a bit in my house.

[rKrispyt]

Posted: 6/17/06 at 1:06am

well...

I was so psyched to see it and have to admit I was disappointed.

the only performer I was like "I don't get why they cast her on bway" was the actress playing Meg (who's name I can't BELIEVE I can't remember!). I am convinced I saw her on an off night, becuase, while not bad, she didn't offer anything to the show or the role. She was kinda there, adn I've come to expect more from bway performers, especailly those featured. I'm sure there was more there that I just didn't see that night.

The show as a whole..disappointed. It was, all-in-all, a so-so version of the book. Anyone unfamiliar with it (the book) amy not have completley understood. It seems like they jumped around a lot and hit some highlights but left out most of the throughline.

The chemistry was so amazin betwen Laurie and Jo, and so very lacking between Jo and the Professor (not sure if it was the actors aor the way the material was written, though I lean towards the latter) that I was so let down when she ended up with the Prof. Thinking back to her time on stage with Laurie, it was so much more alive and passionate, and the Prof and their exchanges so very dull and unchallenging to Jo as a woman and individual that it sent the message, I felt, that she'd settled.

The music was also...just there. It didn't serve to move much of hte story along, or give much more insight than the scene preceding the song, y'know?

It wasn't horrible or antyhing, but it was far from amazing. It was alright.

As someone who'd expected great theatre, I was disappointed.

[lilprima2b]

Posted: 6/17/06 at 1:38am

My school is doing Little Women next year (I go to a performing arts school and we have a lot of very strong female talent). I'm really not a huge fan of the music... I like "Astonishing," "Some Things Are Meant To Be," "The Fire Within Me" and "Days of Plenty," but the rest is just... ehh. I've never seen it or read the book (I read the actual novel when I was 11ish; don't remember it very well), so I can't attest to that...

[Mikey3]

Posted: 6/17/06 at 2:12am

I think this show was not so bad when I saw it. Not great..but OK!!
Maybe just because Sutton Foster was in the show.LOVE her voice so much!

But Maureen McGovern is in the tour...so really have to see that!