SparkMore
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.
Huievest
Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.
Brennan Camacho
Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.
datautisticgamer-74853
This movie was a rather fascinating present I received last year from my brother. Since today was a particularly droll day, we decided to watch The Prophet at his request. What followed was a very stereotypically fraternal dual reaction to it. But that isn't important, so let's get on to the good items. The story is, of course, adapted from Khalil Gibran's identically named fable compilation, though since it focuses more on specific Prophet fables than others, it is rather disadvantaged and disappointing as a movie plot. If the movie was in production longer, then surely it could have been possible to work in other chapters, as with only some of the 26, it doesn't have full potential. The characters are better than the story, as they translate better into a 1:24 movie better than each fable (or reference to) does. Of course, they did take much- needed time to introduce characters not from the source, but given how Almustafa was really the sole important shared character in the collection, it really was a great idea. Not to mention, I am actually somewhat jealous of Almitra's ability to parkour, which proves important in many scenes. As a downside, though, most of the other characters are forgettable, and in some cases not when they are meant to be. However, potentially the biggest saving grace in all of animation comes in this film's... well, animation. I was dazzled, concerned, scared, mystified, and hypnotized due to the animation, which undergoes several different styles. All of them, however, can be summed up as graceful and absolutely successful in depicting everything else. To sum up, expect from this movie a bit like what you'd expect from The Red Turtle: fantastic animation but not a lot of other notable substance. By all means, do check it out if you cannot deny curiosity.
SentientCrab
The movie is an adaptation, so it must be judged as an adaptation meaning separate Gibran's work and judge the movie on its ability to complement the original text. Plot 0/10: The original book had a very loose plot that exists solely to allow Almustafa to switch from topic to topic. It's usually something like "And so-and-so said, 'Speak to us of blank.'" and then Almustafa talks about whatever. So the movie chose to make those segments longer, throw in some conflicts, romance, jokes, and standard archetypes. I'm guessing it was an effort to make the movie appealing to a wider audience, but it failed miserably. Nearly every plot item that was thrown into this movie was complete garbage, even Almitra's arc made me annoyed because it felt lifted from GKIDS's Song of the Sea (which really deserved an Oschar). The humor feels like something taken out of a really crappy children's movie. I've seen people calling this movie 'Art Film', but it's not. Fantasia is art film and this movie could have been but it tried to reach an audience that would never appreciate this movie and alienated the real audience. I somewhat agree with the people who call this a kids movie, because it was seriously dumbed down. I know 0/10 seems harsh but there is seriously nothing positive to say about the plot, excluding the source.Animation 6/10: There's been a trend to use 3D with toon shaders to create a traditional animation look and it's something that still doesn't quite work. The backdrops on this movie are fantastic, but there's something revolting about 3D motion and shadows that can't be fixed without a Disney scale budget, and toon shaders only make shadows worse. The 3D is painful there were several instances where I had to look away because it was so darn awful. I also saw quite a few animation errors particularly involving clipping and eye motion. The shorts that are actually based on The Prophet tend to be better and they are all very different from each other which is nice, but this also causes varying levels of quality. Fortunately for every bad short there's a really amazing short and overall it's decent. If the movie was just the shorts I would recommend it.Acting 5/10: I'm usually really impressed with the actors GKIDS can pull. Their Ghibli work is fantastic and Song of the Sea had some really strong actors, but this movie was just disappointing. Liam Neeson did a fantastic job, but was held back by the animation, the secondary character were pretty standard for an animation movie especially the government workers, but the biggest disappointment was Quvenzhané Wallis who is one the few decent child actors but doesn't quite live up here. Her first line was pretty decent (but that's largely due to the buildup), but after that she's just another child actor who doesn't quite know how to act in an animated movie.
thomascharlespowell
Simply... Almustafa (the chosen and the beloved) was not a prisoner. He was a free man; no politics in the original.Everyone in Orphalese honored and revered Almustafa -he was never in jail. When he climbed the hill and sights his ship entering the harbor he reflects on his time in Orphalese and decides "...I cannot tarry longer." -he was in Orphalese of his own free will. This is a pathetic Socio-wash with a bone-headed screenwriter pasting his personal ideology onto a timeless classic.This nonsense is not new. Read the original Captains Courageous by Kipling -and then watch the movie. In Kipling's book the main character (a boy spoiled in his youth) is lost at sea and rescued by fishermen. In the novel the boy's father is a good and successful man who worked his way up from yard-hand to owner of the railroad. In the film (with Spencer Tracy) his father is converted into a rich wastrel. When the boy is returned to his father by the fishermen there are two diametrically opposed endings: Novel -the father is glad that his son has matured, he thanks the fishermen sincerely and becomes a benefactor to the fishing village. In the film the father is angry at his son and pays no heed to the fishermen. This production of The Prophet is false, misleading and tawdry.Everyone involved in the production of this travesty should be ashamed of themselves.READ THE BOOK.
msvarnyk
I agree with the first reviewer, in that, while I did not like all segments of the film, and some of them I would fast-forward or skip if I could, but in totality it was a very touching, inspiring and beautiful experience. I did love the section on work and did appreciate the artist being there at the screening and sharing how it was done. Also the section on love, and one or two others. I did quite enjoy how the main story was composed (and changed from the book's story) and animated.I think though that one of the main treasures of this film is precisely the difference in animation styles of each segment, which managed to bring together the difference and multiplicity, but at the same time to cross-reference to each other and weave in the images/symbolism from other segments of the book.So while I did not like the style and manner of some of the segments, I do appreciate them being there for the purpose of incorporating difference and multitude.I rarely go to see the film in the theatre twice, never mind at the festival prices, but I'm going to see it again within a week from the first time - to enjoy those parts that I did like, and also to pick up on the things I might have missed the first time around.Unlike the previous reviewer, I actually do believe it will be quite popular in North America once it comes out, if not for any other reason, then because many people could find a favorite section or two in it, even if they don't like the rest of it, it is sort of like a treasure box, which you could open to enjoy those couple pieces meaningful to you at that particular time.
