Inventing Anna (2022) User Reviews

Intriguing premise but too long for its own good

[paul-allaer · 6/10 · 13 February 2022]

As "Inventing Anna" (2022 release; 9 episodes ranging 60 to 80 min each) opens, we are reminded that "This whole story is completely true. Except the parts that are totally made up." We then go to "November 20, 2017" as Anna Delvey is charged in a New York court with various crimes and remanded to Rikers Island. In a parallel story line, we are introduced to Vivian Kent, a struggling writer at Manhattan Magazine and who happens to be pregnant with her first child. She pitches the idea of doing a deep dive on this Anna Delvey to the magazine, and goes off to Rikers to meet Anna in person. At this point we are 15 min into Episode 1.

Couple of comments: this is the latest brainchild from Shonda Rhimes ("Grey's Anatomy", "Bridgeton"). Here she uses an article from New York magazine to bring a sprawling look at the real life story of this mysterious Anna Delvey a/k/a Anna Sorokin. Who is she? A German heiress with unlimited funds from her trust? A skilled con woman out to connive Manhattan's high society? Both? More? This mini-series spares no expenses, and we get a lot of "the life styles of the rich and famous" type stuff. And Julia Garner ("Ozark") is terrific in the lead role. But two things hold this mini-series back: first, I am bothered by the disclaimer that opens each episode that "all is true, except where it isn't". So what this means is that we have no idea what parts are based on the real life story of Anna Delvey, and what is "totally made up". Second, at a running time of almost 10 hours, the mini-series is too long for its own good. Leave out the fluff, and instead it should've made a terrific 3 or 4 part mini-series. After having seen the first three episodes last night, I thought to myself "Am I really gonna spend time to watch 6 more episodes of this?" I honestly don't know as of now.

"Inventing Anna" premiered on Netflix a few days ago, and all 9 episodes are now ready to be binged if you are so inclined. If you are into true crime mixed with "life styles of the rich and famous", I'd readily suggest you check this out, and draw your own conclusion.

Anna Chlumsky is soooo annoying

[michelle_kummer · 6/10 · 13 February 2022]

Great show, love Julie Garner as always she never disappoints. However Vivian is painful to watch, she's horrible to her husband, doesn't even seem excited about the birth of her baby, she's so animated and pulls the worst facial expressions, oh she was wrongly cast and ruined it for me.

Needed less journalist/More Anna

[CyricTheCynic · 6/10 · 9 March 2022]

The story of Anna Delvey/Sorokin is an interesting one that I've been aware of since years before this series came out. Julia Garner does a great performance as Anna both showing her as an entitled wanna-be and a vulnerable girl in over her head. The problem is, for some reason the show decided to frame the narrative around some journalist slowly uncovering the story. It's like they didn't think the story of Anna had enough to work on its own (which it certainly does). It wouldn't be so bad if the premise wasn't so ridiculously tropey and over the top. Disgraced female journalist dealing with her misogynistic bosses while the ticking clock element is the fact she is literal weeks from giving birth. It's all just so unnecessary and distracting from the story of Anna. Netflix is not network television, there is no incentive to make a series longer, this could have all been told in a concise 5-6 episodes without the journalist narrative.

A petty good representation of the clown world we live in

[koofasa · 4 March 2022]

Have you ever watched something where the producer tried to mock something they have contempt for but turns out to be the world the producers actually live in? This program is about a European grifter who pretends to be an heiress and she proceeds to fool all manner of Americans into giving her money and letting her rack up debts she can never pay. All of the characters cry about their victimhood rich and poor. It is a statement about how shallow and phony people have become. In this day and age this type of wealth, pretend or real, is distasteful and ugly. The script is full of contradictions. A journalist who wrote fake news wants people to believe it wasn't her fault. Working class people want you to believe they have already made it and the rich want you to believe they have scruples. Everyone is fake just like the story. Shonda should know that you need at least one redeeming character to hold the audience's attention. I got through episode 5 and couldn't think of one reason to continue watching.

Anna Chlumsky's thousands faces

[paulokralik · 7/10 · 12 March 2022]

Not so bad in general, but too long... Julia Garner is always good, but Anna Chlumsky, gosh, so bad acting. Her facial expression is so exaggerated, faces and faces and faces. Watching her scrunch her face up was really annoying.

Really interesting story, supporting cast excellent

[[e-mail] · 7/10 · 27 March 2022]

I watched this with my wife and daughters and we was all really captured by it. However even thought the main story of Anna and the people she defrauded is intriguing and intertwined the side stories let the production down.

Anna C. Is pregnant throughout the series and this story was written by someone who clearly has never had a child as the line, 'I haven't even baby proofed the apartment.' From the workaholics guy who is the father made me laugh so loud (like a baby can crawl around the apartment on day 1 - LOL 😀) then the whole pregnancy pains and birth was all just total fluff. The story is Anna and the ppl she defrauded and the side stories got too much time that wasn't necessary.

Another story of a swindler

[blanche-2 · 8/10 · 9 March 2022]

I actually thought this was very good, and that Julia Garner was excellent. People complain about her voice, but who knows what her accent was - she was Russian, she was German - I think it was fine.

This is a true story and not an unusual one. Someone with confidence and panache fools a bunch of people into giving her millions of dollars. She supposedly has huge money back home about to be released to her. Somehow it never is. She goes on a trip to Morocco and puts her friend in the hole for $67,000.

I'm not sure whether or not we're supposed to be pity Anna. She has a legitimate dream, of building an arts complex, and I suppose if she'd actually gotten the money she might have built it. I don't feel sorry for the banks she tried to swindle; I do feel sorry for her friends. And I don't feel sorry for her.

In one of the courtroom scenes, her friend that was bilked out of all that money (credit cards) is made to look like a fool on the stand because, after not being paid back and losing her job, went on to sell her story and make inroads in journalism. Well, she wouldn't have done any of that if Anna hadn't cheated her.

These stories always amaze me - Clark Rockefeller, Anna Devry, the Tinder Swindler, Enron, Bernie Madoff, and all these guys in Nigeria who bilk widows out of thousands of dollars - I guess people want to believe the fantasy and don't ask any questions.

The banks, however, in this case did due diligence and in the end didn't give her any money. Unusual for them, since they gave Enron millions when it had no product and a bunch of dummy corporations.

Really makes you wonder.

Not engaging

[seraichyk · 6/10 · 12 February 2022]

I love the subject matter, and was really excited to watch this. Got about 3 episodes in, and just finding it to be tedious. Not crazy about the portrayals by either lead actress. Something about it just isn't working. Pacing, acting, writing, directing.. I don't know.. it's just not good enough to continue watching, unfortunately.

It's all about how you present yourself

[Turanic · 8/10 · 11 February 2022]

The story of Anna was an interesting one to follow from the first time it appeared on the media... If films like "Catch Me if you can" or "Talented Mr Ripley" taught us anything is that genius con men make damn entertaining stories... In that case it's a young con woman which tricked pretty many people into believing she is Elite and as you know Elites are allowed anything ... Julia Garner makes a damn good performance sometimes reminding Hannibal Lecter with her manipulative mind games. Anyway it was a matter of time before Netflix grabbed this story and here we are...

Good but TOOO LONG. Don't be greedy, Netflix!!

[TreeFiddy53 · 6/10 · 27 February 2022]

Based on a true story, this is a 9-episode *rolls eyes* long show about the "convicted con artist and fraudster" Anna Delvey/Sorokin. I'm late to this show so i'll skip the plot deets, you might have already watched this show.

If you haven't yet, I found the story to be interesting. It amazes me that someone was able to pull this off. Well shot, great production quality, editing and writing - me likey. Great acting, the show also makes you care for the other characters.

But the show was TOO long for me, this could have been a movie or a 4-ep show. Netflix is getting greedier by the day and dragging on shows and docs for longer than they have to be just so that you can stay on Netflix for longer.

That accent - jarring. I see the idea behind going for an accent that is neither Russian/German nor from NY/NJ. Julia Garner apparently came up with it. I see the reasoning behind it, just that it was distracting.

If you can sit through these two issues, you'll enjoy the show and may even be mindblown.

Stop elevating sociopathy.

[aarpcats · 5/10 · 13 February 2022]

Netflix paid Anna Sorokin, the German scammer at the heart of this series, $320,000 for the rights to her story. Sorokin used the money to pay back some of the funds she had stolen from banks, and some of the fines she owed the State of New York. Then she got on every talk show and new excerpt she could to keep building her fame.

As of this writing, she is awaiting deportation back to Germany, but is currently sick with COVID. ICE believes she contracted COVID so that she could stay in the US longer, because, after all, Anna is a con artist.

And, just so that we all understand how sociopathy and Hollywood works, the banks were repaid with Anna's story rights. The ordinary human beings whose credit cards and bank accounts she use are still out of money. Despite NY's Son of Sam law, Anna is profiting from her crimes by becoming an antihero through this story written by Shonda Rimes. When we watch this film, we are helping a sociopath profit.

Grifters grift.

Julia Garner does a great job as Anna, although her voice made me want to shoot the TV. Shonda gives us an engaging script. But what's the difference in this an making a movie of OJ's "If I DID IT?" The degree of crime?

I didn't like the idea of elevating a grifter, and I especially didn't like the built in idea that her thefts were okay because she only stole from rich people. She didn't.

She wasn't Robin Hood. She was just a thief.

I really enjoyed it

[jllagunos · 9/10 · 13 February 2022]

I binge-watched in a couple of days. I was aware of the original story and didn't expect anything. I found the show interesting, fun, will paced and I liked a lot. The characters really spoke to me. The pack of old writers were delightful. So I came to share my point of view and was shocked by the reviews here. I read a lot of them. Some were just unintelligible to me. I didn't find any of the things some other criticized so harshly. I may be wrong but send to me some of this reviews were a little biased. Anyway, I loved it. I found the acting compelling, the story well written and the pace perfect. I loved the music, the cinematography and even the little details, as how the story ties with all of this other scammers, like the Fyre festival guys, the Shkreli guy, and even Elizabeth Holmes. Looking at all this it is hard not to feel worried for Americans right now...

Anna is interesting but the journalist not

[mrcnicholls · 6/10 · 9 April 2022]

Oh dear. This show focuses on an annoying, self-absorbed journalist who is trying to discover the truth but what is interesting is Julia Garner's performance. It would be much better if they had ditched the boring 'finding out' bits and just let Anna's story tell itself.

Terrible writing, too long, overacting

[PeachesIR · 3/10 · 14 February 2022]

I had high hopes for "Inventing Anna." I read the original magazine stories about Anna Sorokin/Delvey in both "Vanity Fair" and "New York," the latter which served as the basis for this series, except for the clearly fabricated or heavily embellished parts. The writing is about as subtle as a claw hammer slammed into drywall, and most of the acting is just as over-the-top awful, especially Anna Chlumsky as reporter Vivian Kent.

Julia Garner is fine as the title character, a shameless young con artist who ripped off several young Manhattan residents, restaurants, shops and ritzy hotels in her quest to live the good life as a faux heiress/art entrepreneur. I assume her weird accent mimics that of the real Anna and underscores how completely stupid so many of these NYC sophisticates were to fall for her snooty-tooty act. She looks like Anna as well.

Chlumsky not only overacts, she resorts to facial contortions and histrionics that make her actively unlikable. I found myself hating Vivian, who is the central character of the series more than Anna. She's awful to her sensitive husband, who is admittedly a wimpy schlump. She makes loud proclamations about "deserving" a great journalistic career, although she's clearly a lazy, short-sighted and even possibly unethical reporter.

I agree with other reviewers that "Inventing Anna" is way too long for such a slight story, and lazily delves into political, "woke" dialogue to make some sort of point about...what exactly? I guess this series was meant to be a soap opera about greed and materialism? I have watched soap operas that had far superior writing and acting. If it was more camp, it might have worked better.

I think "Inventing Anna" would have been better if it had told the story from the perspective of Rachel and the other victims, not Vivian Kent, the reporter. One could have some sympathy for them, but not for Vivian, who is just as grasping and entitled as her interview subject.

Tooooooo loooong

[jackbaumel · 15 February 2022]

Vivian character was a complete bore. Anna Chumsky mugged and overacted. The story is too dragged out. Material for 3 episodes tops! Julia Garner, as usual, is fantastic, but the character she created is off putting. Typical Netflix_take a good story for a movie and make an 8 part series out of it.

deeper into Anna

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 26 February 2022]

Shonda Rhimes had signed a big money deal with Netflix and this is one of those projects. It's based on the true story of Anna Sorokin. Anna Delvey (Julia Garner) has been arrested for being a fake rich German aristocrat in the New York ultra-rich world. Pregnant disgraced reporter Vivian Kent (Anna Chlumsky) fights to investigate her convoluted story.

It's money. It's lies. It's a story of New York hustling. It has the potential for some deep dive into the mind of a serial faker and desperate hustler. Instead, Shonda does a simple night swim in those waters. That's not to say that she doesn't do anything with the darker material underneath Anna. Garner's obviously-fake flat voice also frustrated me a little although I understand the need for an obviously-fake accent with this character. In many ways, Shonda is making this show about Vivian and leaving Anna as a more unknowable person. It's probably the safer choice but it does leave me wondering if I actually care about anything happening to Anna in one or two of the episodes. It's a nine episodes limited series and that's kinda how I felt about this. There's a couple of flatter episodes but mostly, this is a very fascinating story.

Too many liberties & too woke

[sonicvoodoo · 6/10 · 13 February 2022]

The fact that the story is true is fascinating but some of this portrayal is too unbelievable. I'm sure many liberties were taken. The underlying woke feminist narrative is unbearable but expected in Shondaland.

Watch it with no expectations, you might enjoy it

[enasaljammal · 8/10 · 12 February 2022]

I binged watched the show in 2 days , i started watching it with no expectation and little to no information about Anna Delvey and I actually enjoyed it !

I agree with the some of the reviewers about Anna chlumskey performance , she was either annoying or the writers created her character that way !

The pilot was sooo boring and slow but once Ann's story actually begins ( beginning in episode 2 ) the show picks up and gets more interesting

I liked Julia garner performance ( or maybe I'm biased since I'm a huge fan ) but I believe that Todd her lawyer and Neff her friend were the actual stars of the show

All in all I liked it , if you can pass the pilot episode you might enjoy it.

Good, but too much filler!

[twin-chaos · 6/10 · 30 May 2022]

This series was good, but didn't need 9 episodes. There was so much far fetched BS and filler that the real story got lost. Too many ancillary characters whose input was unnecessary. The premise was interesting and could have stood on its own without the kitsch and constant chaos. Anna is not the feminist icon they're attempting to portray her to be. Also, that damn accent drove my bonkers.

This was a very typical Shondaland production.

Julia Garner owns her Anna Delvey character

[zhivago97 · 10/10 · 21 February 2022]

I read the original New York Magazine article by Jessica Pressler that inspired this miniseries as well as other articles and watched many interviews, including with the original Anna Sorokin. This miniseries is better than I expected. Actually much better.

While some reviewers commented on the miniseries' length, I thought it was too short! I'm dying for more! Anna come back!

Anna Chlumsky (Vivian Kent) was particularly wonderful as a hard scrabble, boots-to-the ground journalist fighting for her story.

Julia Garner is a standout as well as many others. If you've ever heard the real Anna Sorokin speak, Julia Garner's rendition is actually pretty close. Yes it's a weird accent but so is the real Anna Sorokin's.

The one thing I can't figure out is why so many people were willing to help Anna in this miniseries, even through the very end. Anna had her own cheerleaders and apologists, even when it was clear she had faked her identity and lied about basically everything. She wasn't even a nice person, just a user and name dropper.

As terrible a crime as it is, in this miniseries Anna was portrayed as a human (albeit a bad one). She was strong yet could be frail. I felt pity for her character. I think this miniseries shows her complexity as a real person.

Dragged on and on and on....

[ivantheeditor · 6/10 · 7 March 2022]

OMG... was a slow cooker this was! I mean, c;mon Netflix! We get it - you're trying to fill in 9 episodes but jeez.... I thought it was an interesting story and the acting is great yet I can't help but feel like my time was wasted. This Anna girl is a con. A legit criminal. And now, thanks for Netflix, she's also a rich criminal. The more we talk about her the richer she gets. This is disgusting. I truly hope Netflix understands what they've created. I feel sorry for everyone involved with this show and Anna.

The Vivian Kent character was ridiculous. This reporter was obsessed with Anna for absolutely no reason at all. It was so pointless and everything revolved around her which was a horrible choice. But I guess that's all they had to go off of...

Overall, it was a fun way to kill some time but the last 4-5 episodes I feel like the only reason I was watching was because I was already invested in the story and wanted to see what happens.

I keep waiting for the redeeming value but it never comes

[julieshotmail · 2/10 · 15 February 2022]

For me, the hook to watching this series is getting the answer to the question "Why is there a Netflix series about this particular criminal as she is the most uncharismatic person I have ever seen?" Yes, she consistently dresses elegantly and tips in $100 bills, but that's about it. She is one of the most unpleasant and cringeworthy people to be around with. So I keep sticking around to find out what her magic is. It becomes apparent by episode 5 that there is no redeeming value to her other than the clothes and $100 tips. The epitome of shallow. By then I am neck-deep in this series, and unwisely decide to suffer through 4 more hour-long episodes just to finish what I start. Episode 8 is so bad. Two stars for Julia Garner's effort, but the rest of this production (music, editing, camera work) and all of the other characters spew out nothing but drivel.

"Scam Culture"

[rbrb · 9/10 · 18 February 2022]

A superb drama!

This 9 part series on Netflix is based on the true story of a swindler who uses lies and deceit to "con" others.

The real story is fact, the series makes it clear the show fictionlizes a lot of the events, etc.

In my view nothing wrong with that as it makes the series highly entertaining.

All the actors give show stopping performances.

And the way the story is presented by weaving together the past and present is top class editing and directing.

Just as impressive is the great music which I am delighted to say can be found on Spotify.

Make no mistake in real life and in this series the fraudsperson is a repulsive, greedy narcistic criminal who does not care at all about the harm she inflicts.

Like many con artists she has the abiltiy to charm and fool others .

A person with no scruples and with the skill to lie convincingly can often succeed initially but sooner or later may well be revealed as a trickster.

Ask yourself this:

If she was so clever why was she caught?

The series is another instructive yet compellingly example of modern Scam Culture.

8 and a half rounded up=

9/10.

A complicated character

[nancyldraper · 7/10 · 4 March 2022]

First of all, this is a Shonda Rhimes creation. Her trademark is all over it - wealth, fashion and beautiful people up to no good. For some people this will be a draw, for me it is a cautionary tale. I've grown a little weary of her plastic shiny things. On the other hand, it is a credit to Julia Garner that she got this lead role. I was first aware of her in OZARK. I remember thinking, "This talented girl has a great career ahead of her!" Unfortunately, they burdened her with an exaggerated accent that muted almost all of her scenes and robbed us of the great performances with which she can break your heart. Pre-credits we see the real people some of the characters are based on, with a fuzzy connection to the actual journalist, but "inspired by" is a far shot from "based on" and they reminded us, every episode, that "This story is completely true. Except for the parts that are totally made up." However, they give us a puzzle of a character that warranted the exercise of trying to understand the whole picture of who she was. I give this limited series a 7 (good) out of 10. {Drama}

The Usual Netflix Curse - Way Too Long

[bshaef · 4/10 · 14 February 2022]

Acting was superb except I got sick of hearing Anna's fake accent. By the end of the sixth episode. I was hoping that Anna and all of her admirers and enablers would die in a terrible automobile accident and I wouldn't have to look at them anymore. I just don't understand how many stupid people could be in NYC.