Revamping Classic Literature: Does Andy Serkis' Modern Take on Animal Farm Miss the Mark?

In 80 years since George Orwell's ‘Animal Farm’ was published, the critique of Soviet society has seen various adaptations. Director Andy Serkis' new computer-animated version, scripted by Nick Stoller, appears to deviate from its serious anti-totalitarian themes, incorporating pratfalls and fart jokes. The adaptation has a more audience-friendly approach, employing celebrity voices, engaging character designs, and frenetic energy reminiscent of American studio animations.

The film includes Woody Harrelson voicing the hardworking horse, Boxer, and Seth Rogen as the power-hungry pig, adding a diverse dynamic to the classic story. However, certain changes to the original narrative disrupt Orwell’s political allegory. For instance, Stoller's script eliminates the Old Major character, a symbolic figure of Lenin and Marx's ideologies, and introduces a new character, Lucky, serving as the audience surrogate.

Serkis introduces a broader skepticism of all leadership instead of focusing on a singular target as Orwell did, amplifying the role of human characters initially requested to be cut from Orwell’s tale. These humans symbolize the evils of capitalism. Amidst the comedy, the story underscores Orwell's primary message: the fleeting nature of freedom and the inherent piggishness of humans.

However, despite Serkis’ background in performance capture and his detailed adaptation of Rudyard Kipling’s ‘The Jungle Book,’ his ‘Animal Farm’ takes a surprisingly cartoony approach. This interpretation maintains some of Orwell's raw material keeping the story recognizable. However, the film is disorderly, making it a questionable substitute for the book. As a paraphrase of Napoleon, one of the book's characters, would say: All "Animal Farms" are equal, but some "Animal Farms" are more equal than others.