Annie

I sure know how to pick my movies, don’t I? You know what, I’ll just own it. Sure, my review choices make no sense half the time, but that’s what I live for. Anyway, it’s certainly been a while since I’ve seen this film. From what I recall, I don’t think there’s anything in it that stands out as being a problem or bad in any way. From its origins on Broadway to its theatrical outings, Annie has delighted several generations with its enjoyable songs, memorable characters, and charming story.

Not to mention several comparisons to its titular character. Most people, when they see me for the first time, think “more Jewish ‘Little Orphan Annie.’” Even as I get older, I can’t seem to escape that comparison. This isn’t a face-reveal, but just imagine the above picture with darker red hair, wearing glasses, a foot or two taller, and an even more vacant stare. That should give you an idea.

Despite that, what do I recall from this movie? Not much outside of the songs which are already replaying in my head as I write this. The story on the other hand eludes me a bit, but I remember the gist: an orphan gets adopted by a rich old guy and they form a strong bond together. That’s pretty much it. However, are there any layers to this story that I didn’t notice upon first viewing? Could this story be a clever parable about socioeconomic status and the nature of the United States’ adoption procedures?

Maybe, but I think y’all know by now there’s only one way to find out. Figure out why that dumb dog is following you, ‘cause it’s the hard-knock life for us in Annie.

Before we get into the weeds, let’s go over our cast of characters in case you forgot (like me). First, there’s our main protagonist: Annie (played by Aileen Quinn in her first role). Considering the musical is named after her, you’d expect her to have a larger-than-life personality. Honestly, I misjudged how entertaining she is watching this movie again after so long, because hers is the character that really stays with you.

Much of her character is a delightful blend of contradictions. She’s rough around the edges, yet cautiously optimistic. She’s crafty and manipulative, yet naive at the same time. She’s motherly to her fellow younger orphans, yet childish too. Basically: she’s everything that parents both love and hate about kids. The kind of kid you could easily find yourself wanting to adopt. In most other instances, I’d consider this a flaw, but since this is a musical (and based off a comic strip) I give it a pass.

While you’d ideally want characters that are more grounded and realistic, realism goes out the window once people start breaking out in song and dance numbers. Also, in some cases, it even strengthens the film. Despite being a musical, the film also portrays Annie as an imperfect human using her street smarts to get herself out of tight places while sometimes creating more trouble for herself. This is considerably more relatable than if they made Annie the “perfect child.”

You can also see over the course of the film how Annie gradually softens due to her relationship with Mr. Warbucks.

Both she and Mr. Warbucks go through a noticeable attitude change in the movie, and speaking of Mr. Warbucks, he’s up next.

Oliver Warbucks (played by Albert Finney) is another character intended to be a caricature of reality. Whenever you think “rich guy,” you probably think of someone like Oliver Warbucks. Billionaires like Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, and Mark Zuckerberg may have warped your “rich guy” view, but when I was younger, the go-to “rich guy” was someone like Oliver Warbucks. The big show-off, living in a mansion studded with gold, several servants catering to his every whim, and a staunch Republican.

In fairness, it’s a bit more difficult to believe he has a softer side Annie can bring out. Since he’s so much more of a caricature than Annie is, it’s hard to believe he has a personality at all at first.

*You didn’t say you wanted a boy, sir, you just said “an orphan,” so I got a girl.*

Because they go all-in on the “rich guy” satire with Mr. Warbucks, sometimes his progression from bitter tycoon to loving foster father can feel awkward. One minute he can be yelling at Sandy (Annie’s dog), the next he’s admiring Annie’s diction. Part of this is because we don’t see a whole lot of Mr. Warbucks’ and Annie’s relationship on-screen. It’s there, but there are only 3 or 4 (maybe 5) 5-10 minute scenes involving their progression before Warbucks decides he wants to keep Annie.

This might be a personal preference, but I do understand they have to take liberties when adapting a stage musical to film. Most Broadway shows can be between 2 and a half to 3 hours including an intermission, so they have to cut that down to make it digestible for moviegoers. However, they do make up for it by implying there’s more emotional development occurring off-screen. What are they showing on-screen instead? Well, another memorable character is Miss Agatha Hannigan (played by Carol Burnett).

Miss Hannigan is easily the funniest thing in this movie. That’s saying something considering Tim Curry is also in this. While she doesn’t add much to the plot, it’s a lot of fun to watch her. She’s the overworked and abusive caretaker of Hudson St. Home for Girls who hates her life, but she’s hilarious when she’s miserable.

Growing up is realizing what Miss Hannigan was actually drinking.

Also, the orphans never miss an opportunity to stomp on her foot.

She adds a welcome mean-spirited edge to a film that’s pretty inoffensive otherwise (we’ll touch more on that later). Where it gets difficult to defend her as a character is when they try to make her more important by introducing her brother, Rooster (played by Tim Curry [last seen on this blog wearing high heels and making sentient adult toys in The Rocky Horror Picture Show]).

In his first appearance, he greets his sister thusly:

[squawking]
I thought Tim Curry greeted everyone like this.

Sidenote: Despite being pretty good at accents, Tim Curry’s “New York” is…okay. It’s not great, you can still tell it’s him, but I suppose it’s passable.

Rooster is a criminal who was only recently released from prison. We never find out what he did, and I’m okay with that. The only thing you need to know about Rooster though is that he’s just a setup for the climax. He, along with his girlfriend Lily (played by Bernadette Peters), are only there to feed into Miss Hannigan’s worst impulses and band together to scam Mr. Warbucks out of a bunch of money.

You can tell this is the case through the scenes they share together. What they talk about isn’t interesting, and the actors look like they’re going through the motions. Not to say that they’re not invested in the material, just that there isn’t much material for them to be invested in. Instead of looking like real people going about their daily lives, they look and sound like actors fulfilling a quota. That’s one thing I can’t stand for: making Tim Curry boring.

*Sis, this very afternoon, I put me $10 on the nose of a beautiful horse, 8-1. Sure enough, the scum-bum took off and whipped the pack.*

*Oh come on, sis, this is gonna be the best bunko job ever. All we need are details.*
I feel perfectly comfortable saying I don’t care.
I never thought I’d say this, but bring back Tim Curry’s Home Alone 2 performance.

Even the song they sing called “Easy Street,” while catchy, goes on too long. When you thought you’d actually enjoy something these characters did together, they overstay their welcome. As far as characters go, you can easily cut Rooster and Lily.

There are a couple other characters that should be mentioned before moving on: that being Mr. Warbucks’ assistant Grace Farrell (played by Ann Reinking), and Mr. Warbucks’ most dedicated servant Punjab (played by Geoffrey Holder).

Grace is the one that gets more screentime and is more of a character than Punjab, but she still, essentially, has one purpose: to convince Mr. Warbucks to keep Annie. Much like Annie, Grace is quick on her feet and considerably smarter than Warbucks, but just being an older version of the protagonist doesn’t make you important.

If the movie showed Grace and Warbucks getting closer to each other throughout the film along with the Annie relationship, then it might make a bit more sense. Annie’s personality radiates through multiple people in the film, so it would make sense. There are moments of Grace and Warbucks interacting and learning more about each other, but they’re few and far between. The focus is still on Annie.

Then there’s Punjab. So…about this movie being mostly inoffensive...

I’m not saying Punjab is necessarily a bad character, but…tell me he’s not the least bit racially problematic. I mean come on, with the turban, how he’s the only character that can use magic, the fact he’s a servant, the snake charmer music that only appears when he’s on screen, and the fact his name is Punjab.

With that being said, he is, at least, a very nice guy. He takes a liking to Annie pretty quickly, takes great pride in his work, and is the character who saves the day at the end. Although, giving him good things to do doesn’t make up for the racial stuff. I shouldn’t have to say that, but here we are.

So those are the characters, but wait, this is a musical. How’re the songs? In all fairness, the songs are pretty good. They’re catchy, hummable, lively, and there isn’t one I don’t like. I like some more than others, but there isn’t one I entirely dislike. Even after several years, it’s easy to see why this story became beloved by so many. With songs like “It’s the Hard-Knock Life” and “Tomorrow,” this musical goes from a mostly safe and standard one to an instant classic.

Oh, they also meet FDR and Eleanor Roosevelt.

Each of the songs creates the film’s tone which I can only describe as “feel-good.” It’s a very feel-good movie which feels odd considering this is the same movie that has an abusive orphanage caretaker. Speaking of that, I should probably take a look at the weirdest element of this film: the climax.

Rooster and Lily scam Warbucks into thinking they’re Annie’s real parents and he pays them a hefty sum of money to take her away. Annie escapes, tears up the check Warbucks wrote, and Rooster gets blood-hungry.

[ROOSTER] *I’ll kill you! I’ll kill you, you little brat. I’ll kill you!*

*He’s really gonna kill her…*
Once again, we never know why Rooster went to jail in the first place.

While this is going on, Warbucks finds out he’s been duped and assembles a team to search for Annie. Annie climbs a raised bridge to get away from Rooster, and Punjab comes to the rescue.

This is the same feel-good musical we were talking about earlier, right?
Because this has more of a spy-thriller vibe.

People all across the globe remember where they were when they saw the thrilling climax of…Annie. That’s the thing, a story like this doesn’t need an over-the-top climax. A more down-to-earth and relatable climax pertaining to Warbucks and Annie’s relationship would’ve worked much better considering it matches the tone and themes the story set up. I actually enjoy this movie most when it’s focusing on their relationship, not when it’s trying to be Spy Kids: The Early Years.

This is also why Rooster and Lily are pointless characters. As I said before, they were only there so you wouldn’t be confused during the climax, but as I also said, the climax doesn’t work as is. If the filmmakers took my advice and redid the climax, Rooster and Lily would be completely unneeded, which also frees up some more time to focus on things like Annie, Warbucks, and Grace.

Outside of that, that’s pretty much the whole movie. Taking all this into account, what’s my verdict? Well, I’ll tell you.

Despite some of the problems I have, I still like this movie. For the most part, it knows what it wants to do and it does it pretty well. By the end I felt more like a kid and even felt happier. The songs will likely be stuck in my head until next week, and I don’t think there’s anything especially negative to take away from the film (save for the Punjab stuff).

It unfortunately can feel boring at times. The movie’s focus gets derailed by Miss Hannigan or occasionally drawn out moments including the movie theater scene and the “Easy Street” sequence. The story isn’t the most complex or interesting, and, of course, the climax that completely doesn’t match the film’s tone. Overall, I’d still say the movie is worth it if only for the songs and nothing else. Heck, even if you haven’t seen this before, you’ve probably heard some of the songs here and there.

All of it comes together to create something flawed yet charming. Isn’t that basically what childhood is? There’s nothing especially harmful here (outside of the Punjab stuff), so you could show it to your kids fine and I’m sure they’ll probably enjoy it. If you’re an adult, it might help you relive some fun childhood moments and cheer you up when you’re feeling down. So if you’re up for it, pop in Annie this weekend movie night and surrender yourself to good vibes and fun times.

I’ll give this movie a 3/5 leaping lizards. Honestly, I have a bit of a soft spot for this film, but even then I can only get into it so much. Oftentimes I have to be in the right mood to get into it, but by the time it’s over, I’m always glad I saw it. If the boring moments are too boring for you, I totally get it, and that’s also why I can’t rate it much higher. I still feel like this movie is at least a half hour too long.

(I make no claim of ownership for any of the images used in this post)

(Each of them are owned entirely by their respective copyright holders, which are not me)

(I’m just a humble blogger who talks about movies, I do not make them)

(Yet)

How the Grinch Stole Christmas (2000)

Glass