This paper compares George Orwell's 1945 satirical novel Animal Farm with its 1999 film adaptation, examining how the two works differ in tone, theme, characterization, and symbolism. The essay argues that while Orwell's novel uses dark humor and allegory to critique totalitarian communism and Soviet leadership, the film softens this message by adding a hopeful ending that reflects the real-world collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. Key differences include the film's sympathetic treatment of human characters, its reduced satirical edge, and its resolution in which the animals are ultimately freed from oppression — an outcome entirely absent from Orwell's bleak and ironic conclusion.
The 1999 film Animal Farm differs significantly from George Orwell's 1945 novel of the same name. For one thing, the film opens with one of the animals reflecting on the fall of Napoleon and all his evil ambitions — a scene nowhere to be found in the novel, but one most likely added to mirror the fall of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. For another, the film emphasizes the cruelty of humans toward animals in its opening, with the farmer's children slinging rocks at sheep while their father looks on approvingly. The novel, by contrast, opens with Old Major's dream of revolution, and the animals clearly represent Soviet leaders — Trotsky, Lenin, Stalin, and others. Thirdly, the film is more dramatic than satirical, whereas the novel is far more satirical than dramatic. The film tends toward sentimentality, while the novel is bleak, dark, and darkly funny — and heavy with symbolism.
The theme of the film is introduced in its opening, when one of the animals reflects on the fall of Animal Farm and declares that the era of oppression is over. Oppression, then, is the film's central concern — and the significant change it makes is to treat that oppression as temporary. This is an unmistakable reference to the collapse of communism in the 1990s and the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Given that the film was made only a few years after these events, it is unsurprising that the filmmakers chose this direction. They wanted to offer audiences hope — something Orwell deliberately withheld when he wrote the novel in 1945.
The novel does not end with the fall of Animal Farm. Instead, it concludes with the pigs behaving exactly like humans, indistinguishable from them. Although the farm is renamed Manor Farm, it remains firmly under the pigs' control. They have betrayed Snowball's original vision and enriched themselves at the expense of the other animals. In fact, by the novel's end, the animals are considerably worse off than they were under Farmer Jones. In the film, however, the animals are ultimately liberated — the leader pigs are killed, and oppression is brought to an end.
"Humans, animal allegory, and Soviet symbolism compared"
"Orwell's satirical rules and communist critique"
Orwell, George. Animal Farm. 1945.
Animal Farm. 1999.
You’re 36% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.