Kelly Russell
I remember watching this movie when I was young, and 7 years later I question why. In all honesty, I have never come across a sequel so bad. The storyline was terrible, and the cast were too cringing to listen to after a while. My favourite character was Sandy, that was how challenging I found it to watch the movie. Yes, the cast members were talented actors, but they just weren't right for this movie. The first Annie movie was extraordinary, incredible, and breath-taking. But 'Annie 2: A Royal Adventure'? I have no words. I appreciate the effort everyone must have gone through to make his movie, but It all seemed too predictable, and the actors were so patronising and enthusiastic that it was cringing to watch. Throughout the movie things didn't seem to make any sense. At an instant you were curious why Annie got a job doing paper-rounds yet she was adopted by the 'Richest man in the World'. In summary, don't watch this movie unless you want to waste 90 minutes of your life. Although, it would have been hard to make a sequel of one the best musicals of all time, but I just couldn't bear to watch any more.
charlotte-pethers
Well where do i start? i think it's very insulting to the original Annie with Aileen Quimnn. I love the film Annie, and i was expecting this to be a brilliant film, but i was so disappointed! the acting is awful, the original Annie came out a few years before i was born, I'm now 25 and Annie is still one of my favourite films, So i was really excited to see Annie 2. The acting was awful in the film, were any of the characters original? very badly written, directed and acted. This is not a film i wish to see again, and any Annie lover i recommend that you don't watch this film because it will only leave you very disappointed. The young girls singing isn't bad but still doesn't compare to the original
morrison-dylan-fan
I read IMDb comments before I saw the movie,and was rather put off it by them. I have to agree that Annie herself looks like a refugee from 'Whatever Happened to Baby Jane',but wonder if many viewers are missing the point about what this film really is? Consider: from 1942 on,British author Enid Blyton released a set of children's novels about 'The Famous Five'.In them,four children-the fifth member of the team is a dog-do things such as preventing Uncle Quentin's professor guest from being kidnapped along with his formula.Uncle Quentin is a sort of father figure,and looks after a girl 'George',actually Georgina,who's a tomboy.George and her friends live in a 1940s-50s world,even in most recent adaptations,and are constantly being menaced by heavies a escaping via secret passages in ruined castles.What is this,if not the basis of 'Annie: a Right Royal Adventure'? Viewed as such,it's a lot of fun.though I can see how it would disappoint 'Annie' fans. For more info on the Famous Five TV series,films,and musical check out IMDb.The musical is an adaptation of Mystery Moor',the thirteenth book of the series.
audrey292003
Annie's wig does not look good. she is not cute and pretty enough to play Annie. Annie sticks out in the movie, as her outfits look like Halloween costumes. terrible acting and terrible plots. This movie is such a change from the 1982 version. I think that a younger and smaller girl should have had the lead role. Ashley Johnson portrays a very boyish Annie. Not appealing at all. At least the casting director got it right with Daddy Warbucks. Ms. Hannigan was also miscast. Camilla Belle played Molly alright. "Warning" this movie might insult your IQ so you might just want to only show it to very young children. 8 and younger. Some of the plots are too fictional and could hardly take place in the real world.
AD
