Kattiera Nana I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Alicia I love this movie so much

Nonureva Really Surprised!

NekoHomey Purely Joyful Movie!

Brandt Sponseller It may take some adjusting to be able to appreciate this version of Wind in the Willows. Although now distributed by Disney on home video, the quick pacing and wild abandon of Disney's 1949 version, which was half of the film The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad, is not to be found here. Neither will you find the over-the-top absurdism of "Monty Python's Flying Circus" (1969), despite the presence of four Pythoners, including The Wind in the Willows' screenwriter, director and star, Terry Jones.On the other hand, wild abandon and Pythonesque absurdism are not completely absent, but this is usually a much more mild, subtle and deliberately-paced affair which more closely follows Kenneth Grahame's original book--except for the plot developments towards the end. Jones has made sure to retain much of the book's symbolism of ideas and phenomena such as class stratification, plus he adds some of his own with more fascistic weasels. But at the same time, he also manages to produce something family and kid-friendly.Although filled with humor, The Wind in the Willows is rarely--and rarely tries to be--laugh-out-loud funny, even though it occasionally reaches the comedic heights of Python (for example, during the courtroom scene, which features a great cameo from John Cleese). But most of the Python crew have spent the majority of their careers in an attempt to avoid being pigeonholed in that particular style--while most Python fans have experienced years of at least slight frustration at the subsequent void. Jones strikes a nice balance here, and ends up producing a very enjoyable, slightly fantastic, slightly silly romp with its own dramatic sensibilities.

Dale Houstman I saw this film directly after reading it to my wife. I loved the book, and - really - I was more than happy to see the film, which has many good points, and some very nice performances. But...Although I am aware that it is not necessarily a useful process to compare a book and its film adaptation, I did feel somewhat let down by the rather frenetic pacing of the film, with its emphasis on "gadabout" and a degree of mugging. I expected plot variations from the book, but I think several were egregious (the dog food factory was - I feel - a bad addition), and I most regretted the loss of the intimate coziness one finds so often in British children's books, the lingering over a home's warmth, and fireside chats, and a delight in tea and food. Much the same loss is felt in the "Lord of the Rings" adaptation, which my wife and I enjoyed immensely, but - again - whose largest letdown was the loss of the many simply sit down talks that abound in the book. Now, I am aware that film cannot take its good old time on such things; they are called "movies" for a good reason; but there are ways to capture this atmosphere of lazy friendship which informs every page of the book, and creates a pleasing nostalgia for time and culture vanished. The film was far too rambunctious, as if Mr. Toad himself had directed it...which 9in effect) he did! So although I appreciated the attempt, the film lacked a certain "heart" for this viewer, and far too much frantic movement. I was disappointed, but still recommend a look see...

Roger Sharp Hey, what's going on?I've been reading the reviews of this film, and can't understand the (over) reaction to it.This is a children's film. For children. Adults watching it who are not amused must have hearts of stone - even though it does not follow the current trend of having a subtext directed at the adult audience.And yet, other reviewers are comparing it to Monty Python, Pink Floyd, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, John Majors pre 97 UK - et al. This is ridiculous.It's a light hearted representation of the story which does not stick to the original text. I'm sure the author would have laughed in the right places. I've seen (a few) better films of the genre - I've seen many, many worse.The low points?the songsthe pet food factory plot (Why??)The high points?the fact the songs are very shortthe costumes (an eclectic mix of modern, Victorian, Edwardian, and Middles Ages which I think work really well).Toad's green face paintThe steam train.Anyway, my children, who can be deeply cynical of films like this, loved it. I laughed. End of story.

GregS-6 The quiet charm and whimsy of the Wind in the Willows is overtaken by violent scenes of Nazi-like weasels attempting to exterminate the riverbank denizens by grinding them up in a dog food factory. The queasy mixture of songs, gunplay, chase scenes, and Monty-Pythonish humor leaves a sour taste.