Fleeing their doomed warren, a colony of rabbits struggle to find and defend a new home.Fleeing their doomed warren, a colony of rabbits struggle to find and defend a new home.Fleeing their doomed warren, a colony of rabbits struggle to find and defend a new home.
- Awards
- 1 win & 9 nominations total
Browse episodes
Featured reviews
Having watched the original in the cinema at the age of 12 this film made quite an impact as didn't pull any punches and was a genuinely scary film.
This remake follows the same basic story albeit a more watered down version. But I can't see how this cost £20m to make as the cgi/animation is very poor especially of the rabbits themselves to the point where it is impossible to tell most of them apart.
Overall if the new generation want to watch this I would recommend they also see the 1978 original.
This remake follows the same basic story albeit a more watered down version. But I can't see how this cost £20m to make as the cgi/animation is very poor especially of the rabbits themselves to the point where it is impossible to tell most of them apart.
Overall if the new generation want to watch this I would recommend they also see the 1978 original.
OK. I've only seen part 1. I'm apparently supposed to be have been 'traumatised' by the 70's version (I was). This was an attempt to bring an old tale into the modern age. Personally I think it was off. The animation/cgi is worse, a LOT worse - it's 2018 folks! The storyline is weaker and flakey. Ok ... it's 'tamer' than the original one to get it onto mainstream UK TV, but the script is weak and patchy. They've brought in some high flying actors to voice our 'bunnies'. I'm not sure it's cutting it though. Changing our favourite German seagull to Scot's is weird, and less amusing. There's a lot of oddities - e.g. there's mention of a 'homber' consistently - which was never a fox. No proper expansion of the orginial gore how humans affect our countryside. I'll see how part 2 does. Still a good old tale, it needs a lot more improvement to bring it into this generation who probably think it strange, rather than the hard core originals who know the story.
10Juneyhod
Richard Adams didn't write a book for children about fluffy wuffy bunnies. He wrote the story for adults about life from a real wild rabbit's perspective. I agree that the animation makes them look more like hares but up to now, this version is more true to the book. I find it full of emotion and I'm expecting to laugh and cry. I've read the book many times over and I only have to turn to the back page and read the final paragraph to be consumed by tears. A wonderful story.
Well enjoying the remake it lacks the john hurt richard briers combination , but thats not saying its not good , i grew up with the original but all in all a good modern version for the kids of today,
Brights eyes burning like fire
Okay it lacks in the latest cgi techniques, by it is good storytelling nevertheless. It took sometime to get to know the characters as the rabbits distinguishing marks are not very much emphasized, but as a close observer of rabbits at my campsite, that will always be a problem with a graphic portrayal of these furry creatures. Voice acting was good, action was believable and they adhered to to the story as I remembered it. Would not watch it with my grandkids though, but that is because Richard Adams story was never intended as a kids story anyway.
Did you know
- TriviaRichard Adams, author of the source novel, initially told the story to his daughters while on long drives and they insisted he write the story.
- ConnectionsFeatured in AniMat's Crazy Cartoon Cast: And The Nominees Are... (2018)
Details
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content