Life After Tomorrow (Annie Orphans Documentary) Airs on Showtime- Page 2

[Phantom2]

Posted: 12/26/06 at 11:14pm

TV Guide? Just a thought...

I'm sorry, no really I am.

Updated On: 12/26/06 at 11:14 PM

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 12/26/06 at 11:17pm

Could someone please tell me the exact Channel Number this is on? I've searched and searched and I can't find it. Thanks!

Whatever number Showtime is for you.

[jv92]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 10:04am

Wow. What an awful film. It would have been more interesting to hear more about the stories of a child actor in Annie working in a 1970s midtown than the "I'm not a star anymore" bitching from the ladies of the film.

[Neverandy]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 10:24am

I was a performer on the national tour for over a year and I saw a lot of these issues first hand. Unfortunately the problems begin and end with the mothers. In the 13 months I was on the road, I saw some fantastically well-adjusted kids go through the role and one who was just ruined by her parents. The company manger and Stage manager were very good about treating all the girls equally, but some parental misjudgements were just to strong to thwart. Although it would hurt the girls in other ways, I think that parents being completely seperate from the production would alleviate some of these problems. (this might just be a product of the Road environment, though)

[lgfannie2]

Posted: 12/28/06 at 11:35pm

Wow, I don't know who you are or why you would spread such nonsense, but nothing you posted here has any truth to it. Andrea and I have been friends since I was 9 years old, I respected her decision not to be interviewed for my film, and in case you hadn't noticed, Sarah Jessica Parker is a huge movie star who would never agree to an interview unless she knew exactly what the project was about. No one was lied to, manipulated, or edited unfairly. You're welcome to critique the film, but please do not spread lies about me or my intentions when you don't know me.

[lgfannie2]

Posted: 12/28/06 at 11:41pm

Lisa:

I'm sorry, but do I know you? Where are you getting your information? I did not make enemies while making my documentary. All of the women who participated, did so willingly and lovingly. The few women who chose not to participate did not express any negative feelings about the project and I respected their choice. I wanted to share my story and give voice to so many of the women that I have met through the years from my annieorphans.com website and I'm so grateful to everyone who participated.

Please stop spreading incorrect information. If you would like to discuss the film with me, feel free to email me.

Julie Stevens

[westender]

Posted: 12/29/06 at 3:08am

Some of us did not participate in the documentary because we didn't want to be portrayed this way. We're all not sitting around crying over our Annie days and how our "stardom" ended, etc etc. Some of us worked before Annie and after, saw it as a fun job that felt more like a family than most, and sadly it had to end sometime. Many of us saw ourselves not as "stars" but as working actors. Some continued working, some left the business. Some have great careers, some don't. Isn't that just life?

[Schuyler]

Posted: 12/29/06 at 8:49am

Well said westender! My cousin was in the broadawy production of Annie, I believe aroung 79 or 80. It was just a job, she worked before and whe worked after and is still working in the business!! I think the documentary had a "negative" agenda. You could tell from the interviews what questions they were all asked. I did hear from some people that were interviewed that she was after negativity and conflict. One of my friends refused to give her any negative stories, re: girls fighting and conflicts.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 12/29/06 at 8:56am

Well "conflict" is the nature of good film making. I'm sure Julie Stevens had an agenda - but that's what a good director must do. Find a clear focus. There are lots of angles on the ANNIE story. I highly doubt a sweet docu-drama about how lovely life was for a child performing in ANNIE on Broadway would capture nearly the interest "Life After Tomorrow" has received.

I think Stevens is a lot more shrewd than some of you realize...

[iheartamc10]

Posted: 12/29/06 at 9:16am

I agree. I absolutely loved watching this documentary. I'm sure for some people, it was a wonderful experience before, during and after. But it was interesting to hear about the other side. I wish it was even longer. I would have liked to have heard from more Annie's and more from Joanna Pacitti, but I thoroughly enjoyed this documentary.

Mad props to Julie for her work!

[VIETgrlTerifa]

Posted: 12/29/06 at 11:31am

Even if there was an agenda, I think the idea of exposing pushy parents living through their children, though far from a new concept, needs to be done more often. Many parents do so many harmful things to their children because of their own selfishness and ambitions, and it's not recognized enough in our society, IMO.

[NathanLaneStalker]

Posted: 12/29/06 at 11:38am

"my favorite was the soap actress who riffed out a really bad "tomorrow" with her eyes closed sobbing. She was also on a baby story."

I thought I was the only one who noticed that! haha.

I know a parent who is exactly like this toward his/her kid and the kid doesn't even notice it! It's very sad.

[lgfannie2]

Posted: 12/29/06 at 12:25pm

When making a documentary, there is no guarantee what people will say in their interview. Is there an "agenda"? I prefer to think of the pitch I sold to investors as a story idea, rather than an agenda. I had some issues I was looking to explore, but the entire scope of subject matter came from the women themselves. We had been getting together periodically for reunions that I organized.

From a business standpoint, who would buy a film of all happy stories? I was not being paid by someone to make a feel-good commercial promoting the musical, "Annie." I wanted to explore some of the mixed emotions that occurred from having such a profoud experience at such a young age. Again, no one was coerced into being interviewed, forced to say anything untrue doing their interview, nor pressured into even sitting for an interview. With 120 girls to choose from, the occassional "no thank you" just meant that I asked someone else.

Julie Stevens

[DottieD'Luscia]

Posted: 12/29/06 at 12:35pm

I don't get Showtime so I hope this is showing somewhere in the DC area or I'll have to wait until it's released on DVD.

I'm glad Julie addressed the issue of someone spreading inaccuracies about Andrea, etc. In my correspondence with her (when I first saw this featured on 20/20 a few months ago), she has always been congenial and taken time to answer my questions about the documentary.

Kudos Julie!

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 12/29/06 at 12:54pm

So Julie, honestly, did any of the actresses request that their material be removed and were they told that it was too far along in the production process at that point to do so?

[lgfannie2]

Posted: 12/29/06 at 1:16pm

Everyone who sat for an interview signed a release form which gave me permission to use their interview in the film. They were told that they could have a lawyer look at the release before they signed it and several girls did so. One girl got nervous after her interview and asked that we not use a story that she told because she thought it reflected badly on her mother. I made no promises to her at that time, because we hadn't even edited her interview into the film. I explained to her that the release she signed permitted me to use anything she said in her interview and she understood. With that said, I did not end up including the comment she asked me not to use, but only because it didn't fit into the final edit.

As for anyone else who might have asked which parts of their interview were being used in the film, they were given the same response, which was that I could not share that information until the film was complete. What kind of filmmaker would I be if I allowed my subjects to control the content of my film? I was in a very challenging position as a filmmaker and friend of all of these women. It was important to me to include every person who sat for an interview and to tell an honest story. I also had an obligation to my partner and investors to tell a compelling story that would allow us to sell the film.

I'm always happy to answer any questions people might have about this film, but it really annoys me to read posts that imply that I was dishonest with people, misled them in any way, or forced them to say something that wasn't true. I spent many years of my childhood in this beloved show and tried to make an honest film about my experience before, during, and after "Annie." Not everyone is going to like it, agree with it, or want to see it, but I do hope that people can refrain from spreading rumors or false anecdotes.

Julie Stevens

[NathanLaneStalker]

Posted: 12/29/06 at 1:19pm

I have two questions.

1.Did you ask Molly Ringwald to be a part of it?

2.What exatly did Andrea McArdle say when she was asked to be a part of it?

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 12/29/06 at 2:24pm

There's enough questions for a "Making of..." documentary on IFC!

[Lola2]

Posted: 12/29/06 at 3:06pm

From Andrea's website:

Phyllis McArdle
(no login)
66.250.56.6 Annie Documentary October 12 2005, 3:17 PM

Andrea was treated unfairly and the documentary format was unacceptable. She was not being snobby, just particular. Sorry.

[lgfannie2]

Posted: 12/29/06 at 4:12pm

Molly Ringwald was not asked to be a part of the documentary because she was hard to track down at the time - it had nothing to do with her and everything to do with our time frame and schedule.

The post that Andrea's mother made on her website was in error. I spoke to Andrea about it and she apologized. It is not my place to discuss why she chose not to participate in the film, however, we had several conservations about it and she didn't feel it was not the right time for her.

Julie

[westender]

Posted: 12/29/06 at 4:18pm

Julie was shrewd enough to exploit at least one personal friendship and use the personal knowledge she gained through trust as material in her documentary. Friendships DID end over this film, especially when material was used even when the castmember declined to be interviewed.

She got an interesting film out of it, yes. But at what cost?

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 12/29/06 at 4:19pm

Shrewd is different than good.

[irememberitwell]

Posted: 12/29/06 at 4:19pm

Don't understand why Julie feels she has to justify herself to the nitpickers on this site. She made a film with footage she has and it sounds like a good one. Hope I get to see it soon!

[BSoBW2]

Posted: 12/29/06 at 6:44pm

At what price did Van Gogh chop his ear?

Art makes us do strange things. Things we lock in the closet and hope never follow us.

(On a separate note, that tape is in the mail, Rath.)

[stephen3]

Posted: 12/30/06 at 1:57am

Julie:
Thankyou for this film. I just watched it with great interest and was impressed with the fact that there WAS NO HINT of exploitation, as others have suggested. It was a gritty and honest story about the reality of life in show business, no matter the age of the particular individual(s). Yes, children in the business are "informed" of many facts of life much earlier than most children and are required to behave in an adult and professional fashion. That is show business-or any business where adults and children co-exist in the workplace, although surely because of the nature of theatre facts of adult life may become (far) more colorful and pronounced. It IS a shame that many parents who choose to place children into the business make unfortunant and greedy choices both personally and financially. Is is NOT shameful (but in fact admirable) that you chose to address BUT NOT EXPLOIT this fact for the sake of attention, ratings, or the like. Further on the upside, perhaps parents who are considering placing their children into the business will become aware of how paramount it is that responsible choices be made for the sake of themselves, their personal situations and the future dispositions of their children.