By Amelia Morris
The newest adaptation of “Animal Farm” had a short run in theaters in early May. The animated tale vaguely reprises themes from the original book of the same name. Since then, the movie has been relegated to streaming platforms after its poor performance.
The book “Animal Farm” by George Orwell is a classic allegorical take on the Russian revolution in the 1940s using farm animals. Each character reflects qualities of their respective historical figure counterparts in the revolution.
This new revision of “Animal Farm” combines the source material with modern day technology, music and language. This is the animated, kid-friendly version of a complex, classic book.
In this film, the animals band together to overthrow the humans and take the farm for themselves, not unlike the book. However, the movie takes off running, plopping the audience in what feels like the middle of the scene. The rising action is nonexistent. Before the audience knows the characters’ names, the animals have taken the farm.
From there, the story progresses at a relatively slow pace. The story takes the time to explain seemingly unimportant details while leaving major plot points from the book out.
Watching this iteration of “Animal Farm” uncovered an entirely fresh level of egregiousness. From the jump the movie felt out of touch with itself.
“Animal Farm” attempted to pair modern themes with the historical allegory but it did not translate well. Undertaking such a task may just be impossible. Stylistically, it did not make sense to incorporate modern technology with a historical story like this.
Significant characters from the book were cut or altered in the adaptation. Without them, the story feels incomplete and insignificant. Meanwhile, unnecessary characters added to the film that took precedence over the main cast of the book.
The story is a watered down, kid-friendly version of an insightful book. This version never needed to see the light of day. The live-action version released in 1999 was more than enough.
Stories as complicated and as dense as this cannot be morphed into G-rated goofy mash. The story deserves to be told in the way it was intended, with metaphors, layered meanings and warnings against tyranny.
The voice acting, music and animation style also lacked character. Everything was over-polished which did not further the story they were attempting to tell. Rather than adding to the story, the music and voices take the audience out completely. When a rap song played over a serious montage, anyone would lose interest.
Humans and the outside world, including futuristic technology, were more involved in this version. The modern take may have been trying to speak to the consumerism our world is currently dealing with but they failed to deliver on that front as well.
Overall, the movie did not feel like George Orwell’s “Animal Farm.” If the characters’ names and title of the movie were changed, I would have no idea it was related to the book at all.
None of the book’s original themes are effectively communicated in the film. To some credit, doing so is a massive undertaking.
The gravity of the allegory cannot be properly expressed to such a young audience. I could not recommend this movie less. All the bad reviews “Animal Farm” is receiving are well deserved. Instead, spend your time reading the book, it will feel faster.
“Animal Farm” is currently streaming on Angel and Prime Video.
Amelia Morris is a sophomore journalism major and writer for Cedars A&E. She loves her dogs, music, reading and exploring nature.
Photos courtesy of Imaginarium Productions and Aniventure.
No Replies to "‘Animal Farm’ 2026 has uncovered a new species of atrocious"