Annie: A Royal Adventure!

source: Annie: A Royal Adventure!

Let's see... in this sequel we have Annie going to London with two gal pals and her dog Sandy, to see her adopted father Daddy Warbucks being knighted by Prince Philip (Can he do that? I thought that duty was the sole preserve of the Queen). Naturally, she gets up to all kinds of unrestrained hi-jinx along the way, mostly involving a couple of dumb Home Alone-style goons employed by a villainous Joan Collins in typically flirtatious form. She plans to blow up Buckingham Palace to become the new monarch you see, and to do that she plans to kidnap a scientist friend of Annie's to launch a missile... Yes, I'm afraid it IS as stupid as it sounds. It's like the producers and TV schedulers (this was not a theatrical release, Que Surprise) desperately needed an Annie sequel to fill a Holiday timeslot. Instead of making a marvellous musical masterpiece to compliment the original though, they took a random harebrained screenplay off the shelf that could literally be about any group of spunky kids and dumb adults and said "this'll do". Oh, I almost forgot... the cast DO sing a few lines from Tomorrow just before the ending credits roll. The strange thing is though, all the people joining in (apart from the actors playing Annie and Warbucks) seem to do so almost reluctantly, with little emotion or passion behind their crooning and nary a smile in sight. Sort of how the movie was greenlit, I'd wager. 4/10.

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

My daughter picked this out from the video rental place, and it is absolutely dreadful. Irritating characters, annoyingly awful "plot" (note the quotes), shameful "acting" (quotes again!)... this movie is totally devoid of redeeming qualities. Do what you can to fool your kids into picking ANYTHING else. My daughter also picked out an American Girl movie that same day (the one about Kitt during the depression), and contrary to my expectations it was very good. A decent story that weaves in a historical lesson as well as a good example of being honest and kind. The two movies couldn't have been more different...

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.

Bad script, terrible production value, a ridiculously cheesy ending, and one token singing of Tomorrow that doesn't really even fit the moment. Save your money.

OK So I Love the 1982 version of Annie.I watched day and night.So when I got Annie 2:a royal adventure Iwas very excited.Ashley Johnson did an OK job as Annie.Camilla Belle was adorable as Molly.AndEily Ann Lyod did good as HannahThe movie was kinda predictable and dumb.But it had it's funny moments.Still I think the whole plot with the fortune teller was stupid.And you could just tell Lady Hogbottom was evil.It just irked me.I like unpredictable movies and this sequel was predictable.Oh and 1 more thing,Why sing ''Tomorrow'' when Daddy Warbucks gets knighted?It's all about looking at the bright side of things and it was a happy moment.I just didn't get it.It would've probably fit when they were in the dungeon.I mean,really? Well,all in all i liked Annie:A royal adventure.

This movie is wonderful! I don't know where I got it, but I've had the dvd since I was young. It's cheesy, but it's also so much more! Annie 2 has a great plot, while it may be confusing at times, you'll understand on maybe the third watch. I really recommend it!!

The Aileen Quinn version was one of my favourite movies when I was 10, and still is to some extent. The remake with Kathy Bates was very good, but just lacked the charm of the original. Now this TV movie, is good, but it isn't great. In fact, I have mixed feelings for this-I liked some bits, and disliked others. The acting was a mixed bag. Ashley Johnson gives a spirited performance as Annie, however if you compare her to Aileen Quinn and Alicia Morton she may be too old, and I think because of that, she lacked the innocence that both girls gave to their performances. I liked the actresses of Hannah and Molly(Camilla Belle is adorable), but not Carol Cleveland as Miss Hannigan. You don't see her very much, and compared to Carol Burnett and Kathy Bates, she isn't the Miss Hannigan we grow to love, with the love of gin, and control, and I felt both were absent here. George Hearn doesn't do too bad a job as Daddy Warbucks, and Joan Collins, looking as fabulous as she did in the 50s-60s, has a ball playing an otherwise pantomime character. I didn't care very much of the supporting characters though. The main flaw with the film was the plot. It was fast moving but it was also predictable and a little too silly at times, especially the scenes with Murphy and Rupert. I wasn't crazy about the music either. And the script is weak a vast majority of the time. In conclusion, an acceptable movie. Is it the worst movie ever? No far from it! That dishonour goes to Home Alone 4, which made me vomit when I saw what they did to two comedic near-masterpieces, and an adequate second sequel. 5/10, but that doesn't mean I hate it at all. I've just seen better. Bethany Cox

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.