Animal Farm (Christian Movie Review)
While not a complete failure, Animal Farm loses the plot of Orwell’s classic at times, struggling to succeed as either an insightful work of commentary or an enjoyable children’s film.
About the Film
Earlier this year, the dreadfully bad and vulgar adaptation of Emily Brontë’s Wuthering Heights demonstrated that modernized retellings of beloved literary classics do not always end well. Based on George Orwell’s timeless story, Animal Farm—a passion project for director Andy Serkis and released through faith-friendly Angel Studios—reimagines the tale for young audiences. The film sparked controversy from the outset, and while most of the pre-release criticism proves overblown, the film is unlikely to change many minds. While not a complete failure, Animal Farm loses the plot of Orwell’s classic at times, struggling to succeed as either an insightful work of commentary or an enjoyable children’s film.
With any movie adaptations of classic literature, there are two primary questions: does it work as an adaption and does it work as a movie? In both cases, Animal Farm comes up short. Despite some early criticism, much of the film (at least until a newly invented third act) adheres closely to the structure and story of the source material. Where the adaptation does diverge is in its aesthetic and tone, transporting the story into present day and aiming it toward younger viewers.
Despite the presence of anthropomorphic animals, Orwell’s novel is no “Winnie the Pooh” style children’s story. Rather, it’s a biting work of social commentary on totalitarianism and the corrupting nature of political power. But that does not mean that the story can’t work as a children’s story. Could I have done without the fart jokes and obnoxious music? Absolutely. But a softening of the book’s violence or a simplification of its complex commentary makes the story more accessible, not “dumbed down”. As a former English major and a parent of young kids, I’m in favor of anything that introduces the classics to young audiences. After all, some of the greatest literary adaptations ever made feature The Muppets. We need more, not less of such adaptations (we also need better, but more on that in a moment).
The film’s main addition is a new character in the form of an innocent and naïve young pig named Lucky (voiced by Gaten Matarazzo from Stranger Things). Lucky becomes the proxy for young viewers, providing the story with a protagonist that the novel mostly lacks. Whereas the original story is more a general commentary on society and human nature, the adaptation becomes a sort of morality play of a young character learning to resist the external forces that Orwell targeted.
Softening the source material’s sharper edge and themes in favor of standard animated children’s entertainment is not the primary issue; the problem is that the film is just not very entertaining. I’m a fan of Andy Serkis, but whether the fault lays with him or with conflicting visions from other executive or creative influences, Animal Farm lacks any sense of confident identity or direction. The film tosses Orwell’s novel and all the traditional animated film ingredients—cutesy animals, potty humor, visual spectacle—into a blender, seemingly without much awareness or attention to how those elements might fit into a cohesive whole, resulting in a somewhat confusing and disjointed final product.
Despite the all-star voice cast, the characters are mostly bland and forgettable, with only the Woody Harrelson-voiced horse Boxer infusing the story with a sense of heart or emotion. The film is also devoid of humor. In fact, the only joke that I can even recall is when a pig (voiced by Seth Rogan) releases a prolonged fart and declares “that’s the sound of freedom.” Highbrow comedy, this is not. Also, despite an understandable watering-down of the source material’s violence, the story remains a dreary slog at times. One of my 11-year-old sons actually reached over and checked the time on my phone midway through the runtime, seemingly eager to join Snowball in leaving Animal Farm behind.
In the end, Animal Farm is nowhere near the travesty or hyperbolic “desecration of a literary classic” that it has been accused of being. The movie is fine. It really is. But it’s also in sore need of at least a pinch of creative inspiration. It has some moments, such as the visualization of the novel’s potent closing words about the inability to distinguish pig from human, which is effectively creepy and easily the most striking visual in the film. But with animation that toes the line between “passable” and “poor”, a series of awkward scene transitions that leave it feeling disjointed, and an uncertain tone that seems more concerned about being “less serious” than “more enjoyable”, the film mostly falls flat. Much like the inhabitants of Animal Farm, its heart is in the right place, but even the best intentions can quickly spiral out of control.
For Consideration
On the Surface—(Profanity, Sexual content, violence, etc.).
Language: There’s a clear double entendre, where a donkey presses up against a horses’ backside to help push a heavy object, and declares, “A— support has arrived.” There is a surprising coarseness to the dialogue, with a bombardment of rude words like “stupid”, “idiot”, “shut up.” A pig refers to himself as “sexy.”
Violence: The violence of the novel has been largely scrubbed clean, but several animals (and potentially one human) die or are killed, although all of it occurs off screen.
Sexuality: There is a subplot about a male pig’s crush on a female pig, including a moment where the female pigs giggle and enjoy watching male pigs shake their backsides. There are also a few moments that some audiences might see as uncomfortable sexual tension between a pig and a human, although it is inconclusive and likely harmless.
Other: As in the original story, alcohol is featured, although it is referred to as “naughty juice.” Although the age of the protagonist pig is not given, he is suggested to be young, and he is pressured into taking a sip of the “naughty juice” (although it is presented clearly as a vice).
Engage The Film
One Battle After Another
The adaptation retains most of the original story’s central message, at least in a general sense of being a caution against abuses of power, groupthink, selfishness, and taking advantage of others for personal gain. A reimagined ending attempts to end the movie on a more optimistic note than the novella, framing the story as a sort of One Battle After Another for kids. As with last year’s Best Picture Oscar winning film, the film suggests that life is a repeating cycle of corrupting power and those who seek to dominate and exploit others, and that youth must lead the way to resist this injustice.
George Orwell was an atheist, and despite this film adaptation releasing through Angel, there is no attempt to infuse overt Christian elements into the story. But the general message is one that Christinas can affirm, reflects the biblical truth of Micah 6:8: “He has shown you… what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.”
Adults may debate the story’s political connotations. For the film’s younger target audience, the film offers a clear message about standing up to peer pressure and what they know is wrong, and to treat others with fairness and kindness, not out of obligation or coercion, but out of love.
1 Comment
by Sylvia
Thank you for this review. It was very helpful and fair.