New "Annie" is black. Racist heads explode!

[PennySycamore]

I first read this on Raw Story today and then on Daily Kos. Oscar nominee Quvenzhane Wallis is to play Annie in a remake scheduled for release at Christmas. Quvenzhane was nominated for Best Actress for her role in Beasts of the Southern Wild. At age 9, she was the youngest person ever nominated for that award and she was only 6 when she made the movie. She's a wonderful actress. The movie looks really charming. Some of the comments are really vile.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/03/07/o ... s-go-nuts/

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/03/0 ... king-Crazy

As several people pointed out, the Little Orphan Annie from the comics back in the 20s was a ginger because she was supposed to Irish. The Irish population was still fairly marginalized. You could certainly say the same about black Americans now.

edited to correct the award she was nominated for: Best Actress, not supporting actress

[DifferentGurl]

The only thing that makes me unsure is that it takes place in modern times, not because the new Annie is black. I just hope this Annie movie turns out to be good.

[crazyforkate]

Quvenzhane is so talented, it's going to be awesome - certainly in Beasts of the Southern Wild she demonstrated all of the spirit and more that Annie needs. Not so sold on Cameron Diaz as Miss Hannigan though. And modern times? Uuuugh. Also, it's dumb that they got rid of Daddy Warbucks. Jamie Foxx as a more villainous character instead...

[Mama Mia]

There is absolutely nothing on the Internet that doesn't explode into racist rants if comments are allowed.

On my Facebook feed yesterday someone posted a news story from a local channel about a missing ten year old. Of course there were several people ranting about race, religion ( pro and anti), food stamps and Obama. Why?!?

[DGayle]

A lot of people would freak if Annie was made blonde. Her trademark feature is her red hair. What color are her eyes? Who cares? It's all about the red hair. Even the freckles are optional.

Also I don't see how the hell this movie an work in the modern day. We've got far too many rules and regulations around adoption. Grace Farrell wouldn't just walk into an orphanage and leave with a kid without a fuck ton of paperwork and homechecks, and there wouldn't be any week-long stay. A big part of the movie and musical is Annie wasn't supposed to stay forever, but softened the rich guy's heard. Social services doesn't lend kids for a week.

[Trynn]

Exactly, I have less of a problem with the race of the actress and more of a problem with the modern day setting, it just doesn't work!

That and Hollywood for be last decade and a half has been screwing up the classics. Can't they lead them alone and come up with some original story lines? Jeez.

[DGayle]

Exactly, I have less of a problem with the race of the actress and more of a problem with the modern day setting, it just doesn't work!

That and Hollywood for be last decade and a half has been screwing up the classics. Can't they lead them alone and come up with some original story lines? Jeez.

Original? No. They think taking a classic and updating it to an era that doesn't work is original. They think rebooting the same tired franchise (with Ben Affleck as Batman, or Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor) makes it original. If they wanted to update Annie, they need to do a lot more than change the period. Maybe Daddy Warbucks, whatever his new name is, and Grace, could be married, and are looking into fostering. DHS usually wants couples to be married. He's on the fence, but Grace is excited about it. They get approved, and Hannigan is a bitch who's jealous of a kid going from poverty to luxury, and sets out to sabotage the set-up, even though it's only planned to be temporary until a long-term placement is found. But Annie melts the big guy's heart, and to make her happy, he offers the reward to anyone who can provide verifiable information about her background, which is what she wants. Rooster and Lily kidnap Annie when she's going home from school, and plan to hold her for ransom. Hannigan gets scared and does the right thing. Big Daddy realizes full out how much he's come to love Annie in the time he's had her.

Not a perfect outline of a workable modern take on it, but it's what I've got off the fly. It's the same enough to be similar, but different enough that the names should at least be changed and passed off as original.

[louisa05]

A lot of people would freak if Annie was made blonde. Her trademark feature is her red hair. What color are her eyes? Who cares? It's all about the red hair. Even the freckles are optional.

.

Once upon time, many years ago, I cast a brunette girl to play Amy in a high school play of Little Women. People freaked. I heard about it continuously for the next five years until I left that school. And someone randomly commented on it being so weird and "hard to watch" about a year ago on Facebook. :roll:

I agree with the poster who suggested that Hollywood think of original stories for a change.

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

Original? No. They think taking a classic and updating it to an era that doesn't work is original. They think rebooting the same tired franchise (with Ben Affleck as Batman, or Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor) makes it original. If they wanted to update Annie, they need to do a lot more than change the period. Maybe Daddy Warbucks, whatever his new name is, and Grace, could be married, and are looking into fostering. DHS usually wants couples to be married. He's on the fence, but Grace is excited about it. They get approved, and Hannigan is a bitch who's jealous of a kid going from poverty to luxury, and sets out to sabotage the set-up, even though it's only planned to be temporary until a long-term placement is found. But Annie melts the big guy's heart, and to make her happy, he offers the reward to anyone who can provide verifiable information about her background, which is what she wants. Rooster and Lily kidnap Annie when she's going home from school, and plan to hold her for ransom. Hannigan gets scared and does the right thing. Big Daddy realizes full out how much he's come to love Annie in the time he's had her.

Not a perfect outline of a workable modern take on it, but it's what I've got off the fly. It's the same enough to be similar, but different enough that the names should at least be changed and passed off as original.

DHS doesnt usually care if you're married or not (private adoptions do), so long as you have been living together for more than 2 years (and the 2 year minimum applies to married couples as well as people who are single and living with others) with no plans on separating. They want to make sure the home is stable, but that doesnt require you to be married, or to even live with anyone else.

[Ave Maria]

A lot of people would freak if Annie was made blonde. Her trademark feature is her red hair. What color are her eyes? Who cares? It's all about the red hair. Even the freckles are optional.

Also I don't see how the hell this movie an work in the modern day. We've got far too many rules and regulations around adoption. Grace Farrell wouldn't just walk into an orphanage and leave with a kid without a fuck ton of paperwork and homechecks, and there wouldn't be any week-long stay. A big part of the movie and musical is Annie wasn't supposed to stay forever, but softened the rich guy's heard. Social services doesn't lend kids for a week.

This.

It seems like too many changes for it to be the same basic story, especially if they try to make it realistic.

I understand remaking/recasting stage plays, but remakes of movies almost always disappoint. The girl who stared in the original really owned it to me, and to me she will always "be Annie," kwim? I felt the same when they remade Rear Window -- it wasn't that I disliked Christopher Reeve but common, he's not Jimmy Stewart.

ETA: From the sound of things, this young actress is very talented. I can't say for sure, because I haven't seen the film (and I don't bother with many current dramas, so I doubt I *will* see it), but that seems like the general consensus. I think it would be better for her to tackle other roles -- new ones, ones she can own -- rather than be in a remake of a film that so many loved. Look what happened to Carrie Underwood with The Sound of Music -- there was nothing "wrong" exactly with her performance, but people weren't happy because she isn't Julie Andrews. There's literally nothing Carrie could have done to make people happy, and I think this young lady might find herself in a similar situation.

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

This.

It seems like too many changes for it to be the same basic story, especially if they try to make it realistic.

I understand remaking/recasting stage plays, but remakes of movies almost always disappoint. The girl who stared in the original really owned it to me, and to me she will always "be Annie," kwim? I felt the same when they remade Rear Window -- it wasn't that I disliked Christopher Reeve but common, he's not Jimmy Stewart.

ETA: From the sound of things, this young actress is very talented. I can't say for sure, because I haven't seen the film (and I don't bother with many current dramas, so I doubt I *will* see it), but that seems like the general consensus. I think it would be better for her to tackle other roles -- new ones, ones she can own -- rather than be in a remake of a film that so many loved. Look what happened to Carrie Underwood with The Sound of Music -- there was nothing "wrong" exactly with her performance, but people weren't happy because she isn't Julie Andrews. There's literally nothing Carrie could have done to make people happy, and I think this young lady might find herself in a similar situation.

As someone in theatre, I never compare actors or actresses. That said, I really disliked Carrie Underwood's portrayal of Maria. Her singing was great, but her acting was terrible.

The purpose of the televised version was to sell us on watching the stage version. After seeing the televised version, I would hate to pay money to see her on stage. Her spoken vocals were emotionless, even when she was supposed to be mad; and she relied on small gestures and facial expressions, which work for movies but NOT for stage. And those gestures/expressions also failed because her voice did not express the emotion she was trying to convey.

Additionally, I saw no character work. There was nothing different between Maria and her part in SoulSurfer except that Maria sang a lot. When you have only one character, you're not a good actress.

Her performance led me to believe they cared more for the name recognition than for the talent. I guarantee there were thousands of more qualified people who auditioned, but they didn't attract "the common man."

[Ave Maria]

Yeah - I guess, looking back on it, her acting was rather stilted, wasn't it?

Some people were mad as all get out from the first second they saw the poster, though, and I'll admit that I was in that camp, even though I usually like her singing.

Of course, some people are experts in theater and are able to look past seeing a new actor in a role -- but the general public often gets very attached to a certain actor and a role and can't see past it.

[DGayle]

I am semi-retired from theater to raise my kids. I love to compare actors and actresses in the same roles. No two are going to bring the same qualities, and how they interpret the role will often come through in their performance.

From the second I saw Carrie was playing Maria, I was against it. She's a talented country singer, but that doesn't mean she's got the ability to so the type of singing for that role. It's a different beast. I started watching the production, and saw I was more right than I thought. She hit most of the notes, but it takes more than just getting the notes. "Do Re Mi" made me cringe. There were times you could hear her really reaching. The audience shouldn't be distracted by extremely obvious effort. In Phantom of the Opera, at the end of that song when Christine has that insane vocal piece, she's supposed to be strained. Maria isn't supposed to be like that at all.

The acting was horrible. I was so embarrassed to watch her. It's pretty clear the focus was on trying to teach her a different singing style and that the acting was a distant second. She wasn't even the worst among the actors, but as she was the big name, she's a lightning rod for this.

Sound of Music is a big enough deal that just saying there's a live version would have interested people. Put Sierra Boggess in there as Maria, and you'd have had a better show. Mandy Moore would have been a better choice too. Maria is right up her alley, and she has the wholesomeness people talked about, and we know she can convey emotion through her voice.

The theater I was at got so much negative feedback about that disaster that our planning for SOM was scrapped. I might go back to the theater if things change and it goes back in the schedule. Maria was my dream role.

[Hane]

I am semi-retired from theater to raise my kids. I love to compare actors and actresses in the same roles. No two are going to bring the same qualities, and how they interpret the role will often come through in their performance.

From the second I saw Carrie was playing Maria, I was against it. She's a talented country singer, but that doesn't mean she's got the ability to so the type of singing for that role. It's a different beast. I started watching the production, and saw I was more right than I thought. She hit most of the notes, but it takes more than just getting the notes. "Do Re Mi" made me cringe. There were times you could hear her really reaching. The audience shouldn't be distracted by extremely obvious effort. In Phantom of the Opera, at the end of that song when Christine has that insane vocal piece, she's supposed to be strained. Maria isn't supposed to be like that at all.

The acting was horrible. I was so embarrassed to watch her. It's pretty clear the focus was on trying to teach her a different singing style and that the acting was a distant second. She wasn't even the worst among the actors, but as she was the big name, she's a lightning rod for this.

Sound of Music is a big enough deal that just saying there's a live version would have interested people. Put Sierra Boggess in there as Maria, and you'd have had a better show. Mandy Moore would have been a better choice too. Maria is right up her alley, and she has the wholesomeness people talked about, and we know she can convey emotion through her voice.

The theater I was at got so much negative feedback about that disaster that our planning for SOM was scrapped. I might go back to the theater if things change and it goes back in the schedule. Maria was my dream role.

I'm so sorry. My daughter will be playing Maria in a community production next month. She was so over the moon to be chosen that she turned down the role of the Witch in "Into the Woods."

Carrie has a decent singing voice, but not a musical-theater singing voice, and she can't act. IMHO, she was cast because she has a huge following and is marketable. Most people don't follow Broadway performers, so someone like Rebecca Luker, who would have been amazing, would have been unrecognizable and wouldn't have generated the ratings.

[DGayle]

Just saying that a live version of SoM was going to be put on would have drawn major crowds! A lot of people actually know who Audra MacDonald is, and there are non-singing roles they could have put big names in and used to market. I think that someone involved in this travesty is a Carrie fan, and pushed for her to be in the lead role.