Jo & Laurie isn't horrible, but it isn't really great either. Stohl and De La Cruz imagine events happening between the first volume of Little Women and the second volume, Good Wives. Straying away from the chronicles of the actual story, Jo, Laurie, Meg and Amy are having adventures different than their "characters", including a non-existent relationship with Meg and Mr. Brookes, an adventure in New York City, and a rival for Teddy's affections that comes from outside the family. The book is almost always told from Jo's point of view, but occasionally strays to that of Teddy or Meg. While done most likely to give context to something Jo wouldn't have known, it's awkward because it's done so inconsistently. I also kind of feel like the complexity of the characters seen in Alcott's books is lacking. Instead of coming off intense, passionate and strong-willed, Jo just seems like goofball caricature of the original. The same with Teddy. In Alcott's story he's in love with Jo, but there just seems to be so much more depth to his character and things he needs to learn about himself. Maybe Jo and Laurie will be thoroughly enjoyed by its intended audience, but it just doesn't come close to the original story of Little Women for me.