So onto phase two of my mash-up fiction experience; Little Vampire Women, author Lynn Messina's attempt to add blood-suckers to Lousia May Alcott's beloved tale. I haven't read Alcott's original book, but I am familiar with the story, thanks to the 1994 film version starring Winona Ryder and the book adaptation, which I must have read a hundred times (and yet never the original). So how could I pass up the chance to see the March sisters as vampires?
Turns out, I probably could've done without it. You see, all the March sisters, their parents and even Aunt March are all vampires. In this Concord, Mass. vampires live out in the open with their human neighbors. The March's are strict humanitarians, in that they don't eat people, so neighbors Laurie and his grandfather are free to form a friendship with them.
So this probably sounds not too unreasonable right? But you see, here's my problem; there just didn't seem to be any point to the changes. The plot stays just about the same as the original text, but certain factors had been tweaked or edited so it makes sense in this new world of vampires, with mixed results. Was the story still enjoyable? Sure it was...but it was when they were human too. It seems the only reason they were made vampires was to cash in on this fad.
I liked Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter so much because it had something interesting to say and the supernatural elements worked within the realm of American history. The changes in Little Vampire Women were not necessary, and sometimes seemed kind of ridiculous. The book's ending, though nice, was too tidy and had one glaring plot problem that was not resolved to my satisfaction. I hate when that happens.
My Verdict: A fine read, but don't go into it expecting too much.
No comments:
Post a Comment