just watch it!

Fantastic!

n my opinion it was a great movie with some interesting elements, even though having some plot holes and the ending probably was just too messy and crammed together, but still fun to watch and not your casual movie that is similar to all other ones.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

The King and I (1999): Dir: Richard Rich / Voices: Miranda Richardson, Ian Richardson, Darrell Hammond, Christiane Noll, Adam Wylie: Animation that expresses something extraordinary through the experiences of a teacher with a King. Story regards an English governess who is summoned to teach the many children of the King of Siam. He lays heavy emphasis on tradition, which results in many foolish rules. Of course the governess will win him over and his son will marry the servant girl that the King nearly whipped. Animation is rich with detail but the story is boring and about as exciting as watching golf. Directed by Richard Rich who remains faithful to the story, which appears in many forms including the 1956 version starring Yul Brynner and Deborah Kerr. Voice talents are unable to bring life into the empty personalities. Miranda Richardson voices the governess as straight forward and as uninteresting as a person can be. Others talents lending their voices to shame are Ian Richardson, Darrell Hammond, and Christiane Noll. The characters are flat and even its message of tradition and adaptation is lost in its dreary storytelling. This is the sort of storyline that has been done countless times and whether it is animated or not, it is still no less boring. Bland animated remake of no great significance that falls into a rotten tradition called formula. Score: 3 / 10

I am embarrassed to admit this was one of my favorites as a kid. I mainly enjoyed it for the relationship between the King and Anna, and I always thought they were a great couple and should have married. Now watching it, the people who made this film should have just not bothered.This 1999 version of The King and I is abominable on almost every level. The animation is pretty good, but that's it. Several elements are borderline racist (some of this comes from the source material, but they added their own little doses of problematic elements too). There are downright stupid story choices (turning the villain into a goody wizard) and the way they watered down the dark elements of the story is truly silly. The less said about those awful animal sidekicks the better.It tries so hard to compete with the Disney films of the time without possessing any respect for the audience. A waste of time; do not inflict this on yourself or your children.

ah come on! i loved it as a child and i still can enjoy watching it again. i have seen the original version and yes they have changed it a lot! but so what? but let's not forget that this is a children's movie and that children will not see the original version from 1956 until they are grown. if you want to watch a lovely movie filled with fantasy and a bit of romance in Siam this is perfect. i can't stand the way people hate on this movie, the story is nice, the artwork is nice, so is the music and setting. people who say the characters are overboard are used to safe played characters. i love the way they made the king so extravagant! i say it again; i like this movie and i will defend it if necessary because it's worth it. i mean come on people, it's not a Disney movie.

I have both versions on video, and I'll admit the 1956 version is much better. I had mixed feelings on this version, but I hated most of the plot changes. Many important bits that worked so well in the 1956 version were changed and replaced with hackneyed plot-holes. The saving grace is the songs, and the singing is passable. The best is Christianne Noll, and Barbara Streisand singing in the end credits was a treat. Back to the bad. The voice talents were OK, but there were a lot of dodgy accents. Miranda Richardson does well, and her character animation is good too. Martin Vidnovic was trying to replicate Yul Brynner, and in no way did he succeed. Adam Wylie has a false English accent, that was shown when he was singing, because his American accent was heard. Ian Richardson is a really good actor, but I was expecting more from him. He had lots of really good lines, but his delivery just felt a bit OTT. The worst character was Master Little, who was funny for only ten minutes, and then the occurring joke about teeth wore thin far too early. Don't get me started on the animals. they were cute at first, but they served no purpose at all to the plot, especially Moonshee. As for the animation, most of it was good, but why on earth did they animate a sea dragon and moving statues that were only there for a couple of seconds, I didn't get it! As for the romance between Tuptim and the Prince it was so unnecessary, and the romance between Anna and the king was painfully underdeveloped. And why did they change the ending? The ending in the 1956 version was so poignant, and this one was pointless. In conclusion, only watch it if you haven't seen the fantastic Yul Brynner version, otherwise you'll be disappointed. 5/10 Bethany Cox