Little orphant annie is interesting piece based on the story by james whitcomb riley. James whitcomb riley is actually in the movie as the narrator of the silent story. You will find some interesting early special effects in this movie. The story line is good although a bit disjointed in sections. Collen Moore turns in a good performance. Little orphant annie is the tale of child whose mother dies and she is sent to the orphanage at a young age. There she develops a skill of telling wild tales to the other children which leads to some fantastic early special effects to bring the story to life. As she gets older and it forced to live with her mean uncle and the story develops from there. IF you get the opportunity to catch the film it is worth viewing.
9 Reviews
The Gobble-Uns'll Get You Ef You Don't Watch This Movie
boblipton15 June 2017
This was the first starring role of Colleen Moore; the only time Hoosier dialect poet, James Whitcomb Riley ever appeared in a movie; and the last feature produced by Selig Polyscope. It was rotting on film cans, the way so much of our silent heritage is, until Eric Grayson badgered the Library of Congress into letting him have the materials, set up a Kickstarter funding, and roped in people like Bruce Lawton, Ben Model and other silent film nuts, into helping him blend remnants of five prints into something that is a close approximation of the original film. Bravo!
Mae Gaston keels over and dies right before the eyes of her daughter, who is sent to an orphanage. There, she grows up to be Colleen Moore, who likes to tell the other orphans witch stories about what happens to bad children. She is sent to live with her uncle and aunt, who beat her, but is succored by Tom Santschi, and by Lafe McKee and Eugenie Besserer, who have about a dozen other children.
The movie is bookended by Riley himself, telling the children the story. It's filled out with the images of the witches and gobble-uns, actors in masks and costumes, who are inserted witchily into the film. To the modern eye, these are primitive and obvious effects.In 1918, they were incredibly difficult and startling.
Director Colin Campbell tells the story in a straightforward, slightly stodgy fashion. Miss Moore, although almost unrecognizable without her signature hair-do of the 1920s, is very good. Although the movie is more interesting for its connections than its actual execution, its good humor makes it very watchable, even today.
Mae Gaston keels over and dies right before the eyes of her daughter, who is sent to an orphanage. There, she grows up to be Colleen Moore, who likes to tell the other orphans witch stories about what happens to bad children. She is sent to live with her uncle and aunt, who beat her, but is succored by Tom Santschi, and by Lafe McKee and Eugenie Besserer, who have about a dozen other children.
The movie is bookended by Riley himself, telling the children the story. It's filled out with the images of the witches and gobble-uns, actors in masks and costumes, who are inserted witchily into the film. To the modern eye, these are primitive and obvious effects.In 1918, they were incredibly difficult and startling.
Director Colin Campbell tells the story in a straightforward, slightly stodgy fashion. Miss Moore, although almost unrecognizable without her signature hair-do of the 1920s, is very good. Although the movie is more interesting for its connections than its actual execution, its good humor makes it very watchable, even today.
The main feature here is getting to see Colleen Moore...
AlsExGal20 August 2017
Warning: Spoilers
... in what is supposed to be her earliest surviving film. Ms. Moore's films are largely gone due to the neglect of MOMA, with whom she had entrusted them. When talking pictures came in and she decided to retire, she was really very much into continuing to build her wealth through investing, only finding out about her films being lost to nitrate decomposition years later.
The film is rather one dimensional as early silents were. We first meet Annie when she is a baby and her mother drops dead from hard work and neglect. Annie is taken to the local orphanage where she is treated very well. As she grows up - unadopted - she becomes like a mother figure to the younger children, telling them fantastic stories of what happens to bad children. When Annie becomes a teenager she must leave the orphanage, and her aunt and uncle are summoned. Even though they say she is not their responsibility they take her anyways. Why? Do they enjoy unhappiness? They must, because they spend all of their time giving her chores that deal with mechanical devices with which she is not accustomed and then yell at her when she messes up, which you would expect without any instructions. Even though Annie sleeps in the house on the upper floor, it looks like a barn with no furniture and hay strewn throughout. Was this the aunt and uncle's idea of a guest room to make sure they had no guests? At one point a handsome young man intervenes when the aunt and uncle are hitting Annie for - I don't know - not knowing how to do long division with Roman numerals or some other such thing? In the middle of this ruckus a kindly older couple decide to take Annie in themselves. They apparently are like a mini-orphanage, and again Annie takes to telling the children fantastic tales of what happens to bad children.
That is about the extent of the story minus one dream sequence that the audience thinks is real until Annie wakes up. I was expecting her to marry the handsome young man who took up for her - she never does. I was expecting some comeuppance for the evil aunt and uncle, it never happens. The good characters are really too good and the evil characters are completely evil, but nuance is really not a common thing in film by this time, 1918. You could see the beginning of a great silent acting talent in Colleen Moore though, and it was worth it if just for that.
Just one more thing. Annie is always ending every cautionary tale with "The Goblins will getcha if you don't watch out!". It's odd that my grandmother would do the same thing to my sisters and myself when she was telling cautionary tales. Both my grandmother and Ms. Moore were born during the same year - 1899. Maybe this kind of warning was a generational thing.
The film is rather one dimensional as early silents were. We first meet Annie when she is a baby and her mother drops dead from hard work and neglect. Annie is taken to the local orphanage where she is treated very well. As she grows up - unadopted - she becomes like a mother figure to the younger children, telling them fantastic stories of what happens to bad children. When Annie becomes a teenager she must leave the orphanage, and her aunt and uncle are summoned. Even though they say she is not their responsibility they take her anyways. Why? Do they enjoy unhappiness? They must, because they spend all of their time giving her chores that deal with mechanical devices with which she is not accustomed and then yell at her when she messes up, which you would expect without any instructions. Even though Annie sleeps in the house on the upper floor, it looks like a barn with no furniture and hay strewn throughout. Was this the aunt and uncle's idea of a guest room to make sure they had no guests? At one point a handsome young man intervenes when the aunt and uncle are hitting Annie for - I don't know - not knowing how to do long division with Roman numerals or some other such thing? In the middle of this ruckus a kindly older couple decide to take Annie in themselves. They apparently are like a mini-orphanage, and again Annie takes to telling the children fantastic tales of what happens to bad children.
That is about the extent of the story minus one dream sequence that the audience thinks is real until Annie wakes up. I was expecting her to marry the handsome young man who took up for her - she never does. I was expecting some comeuppance for the evil aunt and uncle, it never happens. The good characters are really too good and the evil characters are completely evil, but nuance is really not a common thing in film by this time, 1918. You could see the beginning of a great silent acting talent in Colleen Moore though, and it was worth it if just for that.
Just one more thing. Annie is always ending every cautionary tale with "The Goblins will getcha if you don't watch out!". It's odd that my grandmother would do the same thing to my sisters and myself when she was telling cautionary tales. Both my grandmother and Ms. Moore were born during the same year - 1899. Maybe this kind of warning was a generational thing.
Nice and slow and poetic
Philipp_Flersheim18 February 2022
I decided to watch 'Little Orphant Annie' because of Colleen Moore who was only about 19 when the film was made and still without her signature bobbed hairstyle. I had never before even heard of James Whitcomb Riley and the poem on which this picture is based, and I think I really missed something. There are enough reasons to watch the film even if you don't like Moore. It is nice and slow and poetic. Of course it is in many ways more than old-fashioned: it is archaic. However, it advocates values which today are (or should be) as topical as they were a hundred years ago, even though it does this in a sometimes quite drastic fashion. Cruelty to children and animals is shown in a way that modern viewers would probably find disturbing if they were less used to violence on film. I for one found the way Annie is being whipped and her cat thrown about pretty unsettling. But the message is that you should treat children and animals kindly, and that is as true today as it was in 1918. The special effects in 'Little Orphant Annie' appear of course quaint from a modern perspective, and the story line lacks a proper ending. The photography was not particularly innovative either, at least compared to earlier films shot in Europe such as for example 'The Student of Prague' (1913) that I watched some time ago. Still, all in all 'Little Orphant Annie' is nice enough and I am happy I spent an hour with it.
Orphant?
GManfred17 August 2017
The 35mm restored print shown here at Capitolfest in Rome, N.Y. is a marvel of modern technology. It was spliced together using several sources and lost footage inserted and owes its existence to a 1926 reissue by an obscure distributor from a 16mm print. The good people at the Library Of Congress did the honors.
There are several innovative photographic touches used in the film including overhead track shots, dissolves, multiple exposures and other camera shots, plus tinting that make the picture seem newer than it really is. Speaking for myself I did not feel it was good as I had anticipated and is a somewhat overrated film. The best of the camera tricks are the scenes in which Annie moralizes about superimposed ghosts and goblins that will "get ya if ya don't watch out!", as she tells the other children in the foster home. Very clever for 1918. It was hard to be drawn into the film though, most likely due to the disjointed nature of the print itself. Great to see it and appreciate the effort that went in to this restoration of an almost 100 year old movie.
There are several innovative photographic touches used in the film including overhead track shots, dissolves, multiple exposures and other camera shots, plus tinting that make the picture seem newer than it really is. Speaking for myself I did not feel it was good as I had anticipated and is a somewhat overrated film. The best of the camera tricks are the scenes in which Annie moralizes about superimposed ghosts and goblins that will "get ya if ya don't watch out!", as she tells the other children in the foster home. Very clever for 1918. It was hard to be drawn into the film though, most likely due to the disjointed nature of the print itself. Great to see it and appreciate the effort that went in to this restoration of an almost 100 year old movie.
The Only Time I've Ever Seen Colleen Moore with Long Hair in a Movie!
silentmoviefan8 August 2012
Warning: Spoilers
What struck me the most about this film was Colleen Moore with long hair. It's the only time I've seen her with long hair in a film and, I don't mind telling you that she looked good in it. Also interesting are this shots of author James Whitcomb Riley with groups of children. For reasons I really don't know, this film was not released until two years after his death in 1916. Then there's the title "Little Orphan(t) Annie". Most of you who will watch this already know the story. Annie, played quite well by Miss Moore, is orphaned and ends up with a really mean spirited aunt and uncle. Annie finds a boyfriend (not hard to imagine) played by Tom Santschi. The war beckons so he goes off an is killed. Annie's aunt and uncle and inform Annie of this demise with not a little bit of joy. One other thing seen throughout this film is the saying "The Gobbelins will get you ef you don't watch out!" Also, Colleen Moore had eyes and was quite a bit more fetching than the one in the comics!
Fun, historically interesting
deartopaz30 January 2020
The film, based on the Riley story, is entertaining. There are interesting, fun and effective special effects. Of course, the scene of Riley telling the story to the children is a great piece of history on film. There is an excellent restoration DVD/Blu Ray available with added commentary and music which is well worth the price.
Worth Seeing for Colleen Moore
Maliejandra18 August 2017
Colleen Moore plays Little Orphant Annie. Her parents die when she is very young and she is sent to an orphanage where she regales the kids with stories about goblins who will get them if they don't watch out. The goblins are creatively staged as overlaid double exposures in various scenes in costumes on people of all shapes and sizes. When she reaches a certain age, she must go to live with her cruel aunt and uncle. Animal-lovers might want to shy away due to the mean treatment a cat receives.
Unfortunately, the plot feels more like a set-up for a film that never really gets going. A possible sequel is teased but never came to fruition.
A 35 mm print of the newest restoration by Eric Grayson and Thad Komorowski was run at Capitolfest in 2017. It draws from several surviving prints in various condition and is the most complete version available.
Unfortunately, the plot feels more like a set-up for a film that never really gets going. A possible sequel is teased but never came to fruition.
A 35 mm print of the newest restoration by Eric Grayson and Thad Komorowski was run at Capitolfest in 2017. It draws from several surviving prints in various condition and is the most complete version available.
Of historical value only
pscamp0111 June 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Little Orphant Annie starring a pre-flapper Colleen Moore is an early silent movie based on a poem by James Whitcomb Riley. Riley is practically forgotten today, but the author of humorous, folksy poems was a household name back in the late 19th and early 20th century. (Back when there being a household name poet was a possibility.) The story involves Annie, a poor little orphan girl with a vivid imagination. She is brought up in an orphanage after her mother dies and then she ends up in the hands of cruel and unloving relatives, before finding true love. Throughout all her adventures, she beguiles the children around her with tales of witches, "gobble-uns" and other mystical creatures.
I know you shouldn't judge movies this old by modern standards, but it's hard to believe this movie was ever considered good. To be fair, Colleen Moore gives a very good and understated performance, and a couple of the special effects scenes are pretty entertaining. But the story is the worst type of Victorian melodrama. There are no characters to speak of other than Annie (and hers is wafer thin). Everyone is good or evil, with no personality at all. And the ending is so inept, I actually laughed out loud.
Undiscriminating fans of very early cinema might enjoy this but most people will want to give it a pass.
I know you shouldn't judge movies this old by modern standards, but it's hard to believe this movie was ever considered good. To be fair, Colleen Moore gives a very good and understated performance, and a couple of the special effects scenes are pretty entertaining. But the story is the worst type of Victorian melodrama. There are no characters to speak of other than Annie (and hers is wafer thin). Everyone is good or evil, with no personality at all. And the ending is so inept, I actually laughed out loud.
Undiscriminating fans of very early cinema might enjoy this but most people will want to give it a pass.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
