Where have you been all this time? I discovered this recently. I had heard of him, but could not see him anywhere. And so, on YouTube, albeit in English (I understand English perfectly), I found it. I saw it. In principle, the cartoon is very good, even quite good. Although I hate the characters and twists in the plot with the genre of the original novel (we will discuss later), especially since of the adaptations or films inspired by the book, I like only the black and white film of 1939 and the full-length Disney M/F of 1996 (it will have to be written about because I have known it for many years) are the only two truly diamond films.
But back. Most importantly, you can watch it! First of all, I want to say that this is an Australian cartoon from the 80s. I will not disclose the details of the plot and go directly to the pros and cons of the cartoon.
Plus
That's awesome music. Although it does not reach the epic music of the Disney cartoon, taking its epic, the music of this cartoon is very close to this. Seriously. Oh, I almost forgot. For the first time looking at the picture that began, I considered it a cartoon of domestic production of the 70s because of the rather rigid style of the drawing and somewhat oppressive, as if grossly shaming and foreshadowing danger, ghostly music. All this rumble and “stepping into oblivion” curious whisper of music made me shudder and swear a little even during the start of the cartoon. There seems to be nothing in this cathedral (think, a couple of strange people in robes, and one of them is cunningly removed) but the music is combined with these pastel painted walls with sloppy lines emphasizing imperfection, with a rough pattern that I think you will get used to over time. In general, the atmosphere here is not weak.
Speaking about the characters, they can be attributed to the minuses for freshness, the very component of them is transmitted through the background and music. Let them be quite close to their (unpleasant for me) prototypes of the book, even if the slightest bit is roughly drawn, but mostly everything is conveyed by the atmosphere. To some extent, the Middle Ages were like this - despondency, pessimism.
And for lovers of the novel, I want to say that almost everything, except the ending and a couple of scenes, is close to the original, so you should distinguish between film adaptations, films adaptations, and films created under the inspiration of the original.
Minuses
Let's break it down. Since my eye is a diamond, it sees everything and knows everything.
1. Voiceover. Again, it all depends on personal opinion. The fact is that most of the characters voices literally “beat on the ears”. Once again I had to remove the sound or swipe forward. How do I describe their voices? Well, it's like one person wheezing in your ear and playing a mime, and another person pretending to be extremely unpleasant and ticking. It’s like people who have a lot of fear. Some quacking-screaming voices, except for Esme - she alone had a normal voice.
2. Motor and motion plastic. Most movements are either unfinished or not realistically depicted. Sometimes the picture with what it relies on simply do not harmonize and diverge. The interactions both in the visual and in the narrative are not fully thought out and sometimes distract rather than attract. And the volume with integrity is a bit lacking.
3. How do you explain that? I'll try. There is no action here! Incomprehensible? I'll explain. About 89 percent of the cartoon is just talk. Where energy and fire advances are needed, there are only curses and cries. I don’t “think and act.”
However, the cartoon in my opinion is good. So the cartoon gets its legitimate
7 out of 10