What makes it different from others?

Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

The movie is made so realistic it has a lot of that WoW feeling at the right moments and never tooo over the top. the suspense is done so well and the emotion is felt. Very well put together with the music and all.

I liked most of the character designs (some of the artwork reminded me of the Rackham illustrations) and the voicework, the music was OK too, never too foreground. The backgrounds in contrast are rather pedestrian and rarely manage to convey the atmosphere of the story. The animation suffers from uneven dynamic.My biggest nitpick, though, concerns the overall rhythm - some scenes like the Pan episode (which always seemed very central to me) are dealt with in a near offhand way, while Toad's exploits are given too much room (maybe, it's all a matter of taste, of course).Still recommended as it's surely one of the better adaptions of the book out there (I have to admit I have seen only a few of them, there seem to be more than ten, some rather hard to lay your hands on)

The book by Kenneth Grahame is a perfectly enchanting one, with the memorable characters and the beautiful story. This animated film is my favourite adaptation of the book, I thought it was beautiful and charming. The animation was splendid, exactly like I pictured it, the film is very true to the book and the music is very lyrical. My favourite scene has to be the one on the riverbank, beautifully done, and is one of my favourite parts of the book. But what made the film is the voice cast, Rik Mayall the standout as Toad, but Michael Palin, Alan Bennett and Michael Gambon voice their characters Rat, Mole and Badger respectively. They were advantaged by a well written script and assured direction. This was a perfect film, and anyone who hasn't seen it already, you will be enchanted by this. 10/10 Bethany Cox.

The colours and animation on this are beautiful, some of the best I've seen. The dramaturgy is lacklustre, only the action sequences have any zing. But you'll enjoy seeing animation the way it should be done ( also check out Watership Down and Animal Farm (1954), not to mention Fantasia.

I am writing this review after seeing this movie on the STARZ! channel by accident. Hopefully, I can save other viewers some confusion. This was advertised as The Wind in the Willows, the live-action film directed by Terry Jones of Monty Python fame and starring Jones along with other former Python stars. This is not that film. This film is actually an animated made-for-TV version. The confusion arises from the fact that both versions were made in 1996 and both feature former Python Michael Palin. He is the voice of Rat in this version and he is the only Monty Python star associated with this production.To further the confusion this cartoon does begin and end with brief live-action scenes. These scenes show Vanessa Redgrave boating along a river and reading to some children. She also serves as narrator throughout the cartoon.The animation here is about what you'd expect. It looks like every other version of The Wind in the Willows. But the story is a slight mixture of Kenneth Grahame's original "Willows" and the more recent sequel "Willows in Winter" by William Horwood. Toad's obsession with motor cars is taken from the first book rather than his obsession with airplanes in the second book. A few scenes of winter in the Wild Wood and a brief subplot of Portly the otter being lost are all that is taken from Willows in Winter.Overall it is a good cartoon. The language is very close to the books and I was glad to see that the animals still smoked pipes and cigars and carried pistols. It has not been "watered-down" for children and simpletons.