La ferme des animaux

The ending in Animal Farm was not only a travesty to Orwell's original work, but made no logical sense. Certain animals supposedly had the sense and wherewithal to go into hiding on the farm until Napoleon's reign came crashing. Where did they hide? How did they survive? Most of all, why weren't they hunted down as traitors by Napoleon's dogs?

But the real incongruity comes after Napoleon's fall. "The walls have now fallen," (a post-Reaganistic interpretation of the Berlin Wall) and now there is hope in the future. "There are new owners. We will not allow them to make the same mistakes."

What new power and insights do the animals now have to prevent the same mistakes? And just who are these new owners, anyway? Why do the animals (who have proven themselves capable of running a farm, if they are not mismanaged) have to revert to human owners to be their masters again? And why are we to believe these new human owners are better than Jones or Pilkington? Is it because they look more "American," drive a sleeker, newer car, and play rock-n-roll?

Orwell wrote this classic tale as an allegory of modern totalitarianism in general, and Stalinism in particular. TNT's production reeks of a post-modern, imperialistic, corporate-American view of Russia and Eastern Europe today, whose troubles would be over if they would just fully embrace their new owners, American multi-national corporations, with their hip technology and rock-n-roll culture.

If I had looked at the back of the video box, and seen that it was from Hallmark, I would have put it back on the fence. Thankfully, I checked it out from the library, so I didn't pay to watch this.

The grievances of the animals were valid. Orwell never repudiates Old Major's message, as does this movie. In the book, no animal wants the humans back. The movie shows that all the animals need is the right master, and everything will be happy.

This ain't Animal Farm. Read the book instead.

It's been a while since I've read the book, but for the most part the show captures the feeling of dread, hopelessness, and frustration the animals felt on the farm. As with any condensation of book to movie details are lost, but the overall scope remains intact.

The major problem with the movie was the ending. The book ends with the animals not being able to tell the difference between pig and man (a scene which is done pretty well, but could have been better). In this version, we still have ten minutes left. While I can't spoil the ending (though it's not much of a spoil), let's say it feels incredibly unrealistic and improbable given the situation. Then there is a final monologue about hope. Blech. All movies are equal, but movies with bad endings are less equal than others.

This movie is loosely based on Orwell's novel of the same name. The farm animals have been cruelly treated by the tenant farmer who neglects feeding the animals and treating them badly while indulging in alcohol abuse. To end the abuse, the animals meet in a barn and plot to take over the farm and expel the owners. The ring-leader is an old pig who commands respect of all the other animals. They manage to take over the farm and a sort of division of labour is established. Things move along nicely until the old pig dies and is replaced by a tyrannical pig named Napoleon. The animals are treated worse under Napoleon's rule than they had been under human ownership. Without giving away the ending of the movie, I will say that I kept thinking as I watched it that it could very easily scare young children, the animals being so realistic and the cruelty that is inflicted upon them so vivid and powerful. The movie would serve as an excellent teaching tool about totalitarianism and how people, or animals, can be easily manipulated to obey.

I was disappointed to find that this version of Animal Farm completely fails to convey the fundamental message of Animal Farm.

George Orwell's novel is about the deception, the cruelty, and the hypocrisy of the pigs' control of the farm. The reason it is such a good book is that it shows the reader how the situations slides from a seemingly democratic revolution to a bloody tyranny.

The 1954 animation of Animal Farm portrays this excellently; the scene where Boxer is carried away is often mentioned as being absolutely heart-wrenching. However, in the new edition, I remember trying to feel the same abhorrent turmoil but finding that it just wasn't there.

The story seems to be told as if it were from a children's adventure book. It most certainly is not. Admirable filming with real animals counts for nothing when the whole reason for being of the story is not expressed.

If you want to experience the sheer force of the story of Animal Farm, watch the old version.