To the reviewer who argued that this animated feature does not capture the essence of the novel, I must say I am astounded at such a claim. I must say I have never seen a better translation of spirit from page to screen, and it is a shame this film was not theatrically released, and more well-known. When I saw the BBC production, I was horrified. Not because of the production value (I rather prefer lower-budget, more theatrical presentations), but due to the poor and often outright terrible acting, as well as the very bad choices in handling the material.
Case in point was the six-foot tall man, and five-foot tall woman, in beaver costumes with the faces cut out! Why not be more realistic by having actual beavers in the shots? I am not saying they should have pulled a "Mr. Ed" and inserted footage of animals eating, with looped dialogue, but just to show the real animals, and have their voices spoken almost by telepathy would be much preferred, if not more faithful to the novel's depictions. I must say as it was, I could not help but be half-disgusted, half rolling in the floor laughing at that choice of production design.
Also, why did the filmmakers go out on a limb to invent new scenes for the film that were not in the novel? Those additions only served to water down the source material, and give it a plodding, dull feeling. Did the screenwriter really feel it necessary to take an hour-and-a-half long story, and double it to three hours running length? That must have been a mandate from the BBC, just so they could use up an extra hour-and-a-half worth of airtime they know would be heavily watched. And as for the lack of Christian allegory the other reviewer mentioned, I must say again I am shocked. In my opinion the BBC version was the one that glossed over this aspect, while the animated one almost hits you over the head with it. Not that I am complaining, because I find this particular allegory the best ever produced in a narrative form, excepting maybe The Green Mile, but I am just arguing that due to the inflections of speech, compositions of shots, et cetera, this animated film definitely delivered allegorically. Even at the age of 10 when I first viewed this, I could not miss this point. I hope that everyone looking to give this story a try in screen form will look to the animated version first and foremost. The BBC versions are a curiosity at best. Now, if only the 1960's television version would surface somewhere...
