Reviews

It is more on the bad side than the good one, but it's watchable enough. The film lacks in a clear storyline and the writing is off.

Having the eagle and the yellow bird tell almost everything makes the story loss the impact and makes them look as narrators. The dialogs are very cheesy. The way Pocahontas tries to woo John at the beginning looks too bland to be convincing, and we saw no chemistry whatsoever. The film doesn't have a solid conflict and just feels like a bunch of events like in the Tarzan and Huncbkack films, even if it's better than both.

The characters are for the most part too bland and uninteresting. Only Pocahontas and the birds are somewhat interesting due to their friendship.

Visually the film is good, with well painted fields and cities.

I can praise the cleanness of the cameras, the good selection of settings and the general dialog, but otherwise the film falls apart.

While I get the film wanted to distinguish itself from other biblical adaptations, the execution was disastrous. The point the movie wants to get across was not clear at all, while the various plot points of the book of Genesis were shown in a messy way that they fail to convey any consistent message through them. The staging is also poor, as it shows Noah floating on water as opposed to being in the Ark, which makes everything look confusing, or Joseph doesn't change at all when he meets his brothers again.

The fashion/costuming is not good in this movie, since it includes buttoned shirts when they appeared after Christ and pants don't look very sensical for that age, even if pants did exist in Ancient Ages. There are some characters with looks that fit 21th century more, like Adam having a perfectly trimmed beard or young Jacob having a modern classic haircut and a perfect shave.

The acting was not the worst thing ever, but I had some problems with Venus not having too much credibility as the mother of Moses due to the lack of chemistry with the baby, while Avery Merrifield looks weird in a bad way when portraying Adam, although his acting improves when Eve enters the scene and his sadness for Abel's death is decently impacting. The dialog was generally alright, but the emotions weren't conveyed too well in the delivery.

It tried to be artistic and have an identity, but the message gets lost and the film looks pointless in the end. You can see potential, but this adaptation was not very effective.

The version itself is entertaining, but obviously pales in comparison to the book or the versions by Disney and Luigi Comencini, which have set a high bar.

The time is wasted a lot on minor scenes and even feels plodding. The new additions were okay characters.

Coco is mildly annoying with her remarks.

The acting is good. Mario Adorf looks sympathetic and the other characters do a fine job.

The problem is that this version is bland and uninteresting. It is entertaining, but not awesome.

It is not an awful film, but not a good one either. First of all, I cannot forgive the fact that they spreed the misconception of the Queen of Hearts and the Red Queen. The Red Queen is from Alice Through The Looking Glass, not this one.

The animation was rather weak. The "race to dry" overuses ad nauseam repeated sequences. Alice's design was charmless. The house of doors seemed flat.

The staging and the storytelling are not very good. The film jumps from scene to scene in a forced, rushed way, making the story a bit confusing. The weakest sequence was the race to dry, which felt like a loss of time with the repeated scenes and the instrumental part of the song of the scene creating the feeling of a long scene for a moment not that relevant. Some scenes were funny, but on the whole the film wasn't enthralling.

There is not too much to say in favor of the characters. Most were forgettable for their bland nature. Alice fails to be sympathetic, because she feels like a robot. The Hatter and the Queen OF HEARTS are exceptions. The voice acting is mostly decent, but the poor characterization and weakened dialog tarnishes that aspect.

The music was cute and somewhat catchy, if a bit shoehorned. The "M is for Me" song was an entertaining sequence.

Finally, this is a subpar film for Jetlag Productions, worse than The Hunchback of Notre Dame.

This movie tries too hard to appeal to kids using a lot of clichés and stereotypes from many children's show, to the point that it seems a parody. This is the greatest flaw of the film and the reason of many of the other problems.

Another problem is the conflict of the "Big Balloon Adventure". It may be OK to maintain a short chapter, but is too weak to maintain a feature film. The problem is made more obvious with all the filler scenes and repetition. Therefore, the storytelling is terrible. The first minutes of the film feel like an eternity, the pattern quickly gets predictable and when you think there is going to be a good scene, there isn't. The film also keeps treating as linear a mission that isn't.

The characters do not fare any better, being barely more than bland stereotypes. In the case of the "puppets", the unappealing designs do not help. The three Oogieloves are too bland to be sympathetic or engaging, the Vacuum is annoying, the fish feels like a load (it is inappropriate for an adventure, the pillow is unlikable, Windy Window feels bland, the animals are useless and only serve as filler, and the human characters feel embarrassing being only utilized for humiliating roles, all them failing to be entertaining. Even if they tried their best on the film, the script ridicules them too much to let them give a decent performance. Talking about the script, it is utterly shallow. It keeps treating children as stupid and has little educational value, which is things that their audience has already learned or could learn easily in other sources. The running gags feel forced and fail to cause any laughter. The Special Effects look mediocre, but tolerable; while the jumps of the Oogieloves feel too fake.

About the music, all the songs were cheesy, superficial, generic and lazy, keeping the underrating of children. Many of them were badly sung, maybe with the exception of Rosalie and Lola. And they did more harm than good to the film, due to their irrelevance.

To finish, I recommend this film as involuntary comedy, rather than a product for kids.

This film is a solid adaptation of Snow White. The film is easily engaging and entertaining, with good organization. The best part of the film is easily the Evil Queen. She is properly terrifying, manipulative and entertaining. The staging of her excessive vanity was a nice touch, as was the thing of her disguises. The other characters in general, like Snow White and the seven dwarfs (whoops, an accidental title drop), worked well with the plot, although it is the Queen who steals the show. My only complaint was the prince. His attitude seems very contrived and his dialogs are very forced and hard to take seriously, with that exaggerated cheesiness.

The music is good, both the incidental score and the three notable ones. The voice acting is also good in general. My complaint is with the Huntsman, who sounded a bit overacted when he spared Snow. In animation, it is passable. Hardly a rival for Disney, but it allows the enjoyment of the show. The drawings do not look boring, flat or annoying at all, despite Jetlag Productions' limitations.

All in all, a very enjoyable version.

This film is very weak. The plot is confusing and hard to follow, and that is not helped by the repetition of scenes that gets distracting. The script is not grating, but it doesn't stand whatsoever. Also, there are lots of anachronisms, like pants, glasses or perfumes in 10000 B.C.

The songs are pretty mediocre. Not as bad as the two earlier songs of Tarzan of the Apes or all the songs of The Hunchback of Notre Dame, but they were cheesy and they hardly added anything to the film. The first song feels longer than it is and does not know what road it would take.

The animation itself was mediocre and bland, with something of a mix of very saturated and very dull colors. The character design was lifeless and sometimes inappropriate. Hera is not as attractive as the plot wants us to believe and Hercules' suit is very ridiculous. Pretty much anyone looks generic. The backgrounds, however, were good as usual.

The voice acting is uneven with many bad acting, and it can be noted when the actors are trying to change their voices, thus the suspension of disbelief is dead.

Among the characters, all them are dull and simple, maybe with the exception of Hera.

Well, a bad movie, but at least is watchable. It only serves to kill boredom.

Burbank Films Australia did good versions of Peter Pan and The Hunchback of Notre Dame, but this adaptation of Don Quixote is really bad. This film is superficial, with nothing engaging and an extremely episodic feeling. The big problem is that the source material was too complex and long to be adapted properly in less than a hour. Then, all it ends up as messy and aimless. This doesn't know whether being a comedy, a simple cartoon, an adaptation of the book or an allusion to the book. The pacing was uneven, with superficial dialogues that delay the thing and sudden conflict scenes. Those scenes are not engaging at all.

There were no good characters in the film. Everyone comes off as bland and very stereotypical. The dynamics between Isabel and Fernando (do not confuse them with the Catholic Kings) feel forced and useless.

There were some amusing scenes, but generally speaking, the dialog was completely immature and shallow, verging in obvious recalls at times. The animation and drawings are mediocre and sometimes annoying with the poor choice of colors. The music, while not bad, is forgettable.

In few words, this film was all over the place. There is little redeeming about this film.

I prefer the Disney version, but this one is pretty solid too. While it works with a big book, the storytelling is fluid and easy to follow, in spite of the short time of the film. The character designs are rather dull, but the backgrounds are fairly detailed and the animation looks fluid. The characters themselves are not particularly complex, but are effective. Quasimodo and Esmeralda are sympathetic, and the rest do their work.

The writing avoids being childish or hyper-complex, focusing well in the story and having a few moving lines. My complaint is that it lacks a bit more of emotion and impact. The voice acting is solid. The opening sequence and the incidental score are awesome and successful.

In conclusion, this is a legitimately good work. A shame I cannot say the same about a few animated adaptations that are mediocre at best.

The story had potential, but the narrative fails to make it interesting due to the lack of focus or topic. It feels as a drop of random events. There are no memorable, clever or engaging moments. You hardly care for what is happening. Tarzan can be funny in some shots, though.

The characters are utterly dull. You do not care for any character and nobody is memorable. Tarzan is the closest to an exception, because he has funny scenes and his genius seems interesting, but he is otherwise bland. About the character design, most of the character designs are alright, but Terkoz' design is a failure, since its design is forgettable and it can get confusing who is Terkoz during all the film. Another problem was Sabor, who looked like a rip-off of Simba (two wrongs never make a right). The best designed characters are the black tribe and Jane.

The animation is weak and drags in occasion, but I have seen worse. The backgrounds are decent, but Golden Films has done better backgrounds.

About the music, this has one of the weakest scores of Golden Films. The song "Child of my heart" has uninspired lyrics (repeats similar concepts), a forgettable melody and a poor choice for the voice of Tarzan's mom. The voice for Tarzan does a good job and the tune seemed an interesting idea, but the bad lyrics and weak music outweigh any strenghts or potential it could have. Tarzan's song is bland and that tone is out of place. The only salvageable song is "Everlasting love", which is catchy, has good singing has a more vibrant tone and more musical richness than the previous songs. And the voice acting, Tarzan was lifeless, Jane was hard to believe, Kerchak was overacted and Esmeralda... was annoying (her voice).

Overall, this is watchable and can give you entertainment, but it won't give you a smile.

This is not horrible, but it does have many mistakes.

The most obvious problem is the character design. At a simple sight, they look decent, but there are European-looking people (even Caucasian people) in Africa and the Mediterrean Sea. The first Pharaoh and some foot soldiers had beards, while real Egyptians would have shaven them off.

The animation is not always bad, but it is inconsistent and there are lots of notable goofs, like some slaves disappearing in the background or mistakes with Rameses' hands. The movements of the crowds were hard to believe and looked too false.

The characters in general were personality-thin, with the exception of Moses, but even him has his flatness.

The story, while very faithful to the Bible, has inconsistencies and in general lacks emotion. In example of the inconsistencies, Moses tells Jethro that he is an Israelite, but he didn't know about Jacob (a.k.a Israel) and he wouldn't see the day when Israel is consolidated. The narrative felts rushed in some situations, because they cut quickly in some bits, like when Moses sees the "burning" bush. In the emotion part, there are moments of drama, like when Moses asks God why does (God) kill the babies, because (Moses) feels that Egyptian moms care for their sons like the Hebrew moms, but in general, you hardly care for the characters and for the plot.

What saves the film is the music. The singing kind of feels different from the voice acting, but is alright. The songs had very beautiful melodies and were catchy. The best song is "Marching towards the Sun". The incidental music is not that memorable, but is successful.

Overall, this is decent, but The Prince of Egypt is much better.

This show is not a masterpiece, but is decently done. The animation is weak and the artwork is not very good, although both are better than The Secret of the Hunchback.

The narrative was pleasant and genuinely entertaining, the writing was decent, there are effective emotional moments and the characters, while not deep, are likable or memorable. The instruments are not irritating, but likable. The jokes with Goofinoff weren't funny at places, but some scenes with Vladimir and Anastasia are funny. The humor in general is not nearly as annoying as in the Secret of the Hunchback. And the most important, the songs are wonderful and catchy, especially those ones sung by Anastasia.

In general, not a masterpiece, but well done in many areas.

This show is not all that bad. It has some charm and it has good decorations and an alright animation. However, this is not a good educational show. The weak story lines can be overlooked (this cannot be a super-complex philosophical show, for obvious reasons), but it is mostly of that stories than education. And in that few time, the writers limit to show the same things: a few bonus words, some directions and a limited counting.

These flaws are worsened by the fact that this is a status quo in the series. Tropes are not bad, but this is quite mishandled.

The video game atmosphere is not a bad idea, but the handling of it makes Dora and company seem stupid. They are just asking for things and places they have closely, which barely contributes to knowledge.

That's all I had to say. I won't be harsh about the storyline or other things, for reasons that should be clear, but this can hardly be called educational.

The book and the Disney version are of course better than this work, but this is not bad at all. It has many obvious flaws, like a simplistic artwork for the main characters, some inconsistencies in animation and the mishandling about Geppetto's earlier attitude. Its animation had scenes with big flaws, like when Geppetto didn't move his mouth when he was talking, a seller smiles before preventing Pinocchio from taking an apple or the scene at the Fairy's house which supposedly happens at night but there is a blue sky with clouds. However, the animation was mostly decent, had some fluidity and good drawings. The opening melody was beautiful.

The voice acting is very well done for a movie of this caliber, although Mangiafuoco's voice sometimes felt overacted. Among the characters, Pinocchio and Geppetto bring some sympathy, the cricket is not equal to his Disney counterpart but is okay and the Fairy is likable.

Aside from Geppetto's attitude of not getting surprised about Pinocchio being alive and to some extent Mangiafuoco's scolds to Pinocchio, the script is well written, avoiding the pitfall of weakening the story. The most positive thing about this movie is that it is not only entertaining, but also it has successful emotive moments, with some fun, sadness and heartwarming. This is the reason this film earns my respect.

It is not the best adaptation of "The Adventures of Pinocchio", but it has its positive things.

Simply, there are episodes which are funny, entertaining and well written, but many episodes are awful.

The main problems are void plots, offensive jokes, exaggerated torture porns, protagonist-centered morality, annoying characters and misuse of serious topics.

It puts Mr. Krabs to act in a hugely unethical way and getting away with that more often than not, like if he was a hero. Also, Patrick Star's misbehaviour is also left without consequences most time, and they imply that his misbehaviour is driven by sociopathy. Spongebob has his moments of hatefulness, like what he did in A Pal For Gary, which make me almost unable to sympathize with him.

The writers tend to forget which is the demographics of this show, with its exaggerated violence, the excessive homoerotic subtext and the protagonist-centered morality. They even mock of suicide! Come on.

Since there are worthwhile episodes, I give this a good grade, but it is still affected by the awful episodes.

This film is a mishandled work. It's better than the atrocious Golden Films version, but it's impossible to call this a quality product.

To begin with, this story throws the moral of "looks don't matter" in a painfully obvious way. It's said hundreds of times. And it's treated like the big secret of the film, many, many version had the moral in a better way, and this film is hardly the first time this moral was tackled. I got it, looks don't matter. They didn't have to drop the moral like a bucket of cold water.

The scenes were badly organized, the characters don't behave in a believable way (like the mask scene, where none act surprised for the weirdness of Quasimodo's clown mask), jokes are forced, boring and clichéd, the dialogs are rather simplistic and cliché. The writing is very pretentious, because it risks to invoke high drama just to end up not doing so. The ending is the worst part. I won't give details, but it's a very mishandled Deus ex Machina. Even for a Deus Ex Machina, this comes from nowhere.

The only worthy characters are Quasimodo, Esmeralda, the archdeacon and Pierre, but even they aren't a big deal. The other characters are annoying or uninteresting. Lord Frollo is a very weak villain, with many clichés, and also he's a rip-off of Gaston of Beauty and the Beast. Well, at least he's somewhat better than the "villain" of the Golden Films version. The henchman and the evil gypsies are very annoying characters, with stereotypical attitudes. Quasimodo is a decent character, but the treatment of magical disadvantaged is just wrong. Kinda ruins the movie moral (if the 0% subtlety already didn't).

Esmeralda's greedy song is quite good and memorable. Sadly, the same couldn't be said of the other songs. The gargoyle's song is just a cheap imitation of the Disney version, doesn't contribute to the plot, goes out of nowhere and is blatantly anachronistic. Blues came years later. Frollo's song isn't helpful, has letters which weaken him as a villain, is very repetitive and have a forced ending (too low notes). There is another song that doesn't matter. The soundtrack is decent, though.

Mostly, is not unwatchable, but it's a bad work. The moments hardly worked, almost all failed... Simply, this has some guide in how not to do derivative works.

Simply, this is a truly appalling movie. It's an outright offense to all those who died in the Titanic disaster and their relatives. A group of deaths is not a topic to treat lightly. That's a disaster, not a fairy tale or a warmhearted musical.

The storyline is void and lifeless. It has many plot points, but they don't go anywhere. They're just cheap, lazy, blatant rip-offs of Disney films and another things, like Cinderella, 101 Dalmatians, Lady and the Tramp, Speedy Gonzales, Sherlock Holmes, etc. The romance between the boy and the girl is completely forced. They fell magically in love. Also, the writing is poor. The jokes don't work, the dialogs are badly thought. In one scene, the people try to combat the sinking ship with buckets, something that not even Patrick Star would do. And the cheesy ending deprived all the sadness this film should have, because it's about a serious topic.

The music "Holding Me" is quite good, but it cannot redeem this fiasco. The other songs are bad. The rap song is anachronistic, unpleasant and out of place. Bonus points for mocking a real life disaster. The mice song is completely dumb, lifeless and racist.

The characters have no personality. They're no more than cheap knock-offs. Either they're irritant or forgettable. "Cruella"'s dog is unreasonably treated as a villain only because his owner is evil. Those Mexican mice are just stereotypes of Mexican people, specially in their song.

Character design is decent, but animation is bad, lacking fluidity.

Enjoyment? No. At best, you can laugh of the terrible work.

Moral: Never mock a real life disaster, please.