I noted\u00c2\u00a0how the Armstrong version\u00c2\u00a0portrayed Laurie as a male equivalent of Jo moreso than the Cukor\/Selznick or Leroy versions. The ’33 adaptation manages to emasculate Laurie and treat him like a goofball, convincing the audience that the two are in no way compatible. The ’49 version gives Laurie a sense of dignity back, but he seems so much more refined that he becomes way out of Jo’s league, socially speaking.<\/p>\n
In the ’94 version, Jo actually refrains from calling him Laurie, and instead refers to him as “Teddy” just as affectionate but with a more masculine touch. He holds his tongue more often rather than just babbling (unlike ’33 Laurie). Furthermore, when Meg attends the ball and Laurie jokes with her, we see a dynamic very close to Meg\/Jo with Laurie in Jo’s place. He is scolded for being too informal while Meg attempts to keep up a stately demeanor. We also see key scenes in\u00c2\u00a0 his relationship with\u00c2\u00a0Jo such as the ice skating and saving Amy. And when Jo cut’s her hair, she attains a physical resembelence with Laurie, who\u00c2\u00a0rarely has his locks cut\u00c2\u00a0above his ears.\u00c2\u00a0These changes put the character on a more equal playing field, making his attraction to Jo a much larger issue and adding more internal conflict to her character.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
I noted\u00c2\u00a0how the Armstrong version\u00c2\u00a0portrayed Laurie as a male equivalent of Jo moreso than the Cukor\/Selznick or Leroy versions. The ’33 adaptation manages to emasculate Laurie and treat him like a goofball, convincing the audience that the two are in … Continue reading