June 4, 2016

> High quality narration, low standard production! Yet wins fairly.

I'm shocked, this is not a Disney's or the Pixer's, not even DreamWorks' or the Sony's, but a very good film. I meant only the story, though the animation was outdated, even for a film from the 2005. I had trouble watching it in the initial parts, because of the poor technical quality. Once the flashback began, I totally hooked to it and forgot the production standard. The fil… read the rest.

> High quality narration, low standard production! Yet wins fairly.

I'm shocked, this is not a Disney's or the Pixer's, not even DreamWorks' or the Sony's, but a very good film. I meant only the story, though the animation was outdated, even for a film from the 2005. I had trouble watching it in the initial parts, because of the poor technical quality. Once the flashback began, I totally hooked to it and forgot the production standard. The film was saved because of the very good story.

You know retelling the same old tale is so old fashioned, telling a tale in the different angles and adding more flavour to it is the new thing. Like for example the recent 'Maleficent'. So other than those all the awesome qualities, the film is more a television type. But very enjoyable by all.

It has been a decade since it came out and I never tried it because someone told me that it's very bad, but I regret for believing that and ditching it. So believe me it is a wonderful film, except it's not a top notch presentation. It is too short and well worth spending your 80 minutes for it. There's a sequel to it, so I want to try it as well and let you know how it is in another review under that title.

6/10

show less