A Verdadeira História do Gato de Botas

There are elements to this movie that are very pretty. Many of the visuals are stunning, excellently deep textures throughout. The characters by and large good but their movements can be very strange at times.

The real problem is the murkiness of the story. A narrator would have been an excellent improvement. Without an internal monologue or narration the cat seems to be crazier than you would guess. The setting is perplexing with random elements from Spanish, Middle Eastern, and French styling with no clear rhyme or reason. Also for no clear reason a school of ghost fish come to life near the end. yep.

The voice acting was also painful. Namely Shatner's cat voice is something to truly despise. The monkey is Jamaican? Most disappointingly is that they didn't get a quality singer for the princess.

This last point sticks out because there was a lot of music in this movie. It has a charming American Indie vibe including stripped down percussion and on occasion a ukulele. But her voice fails to be either traditional or suitably indie.

Also the Ogre is inexorably dumb and useless as a villain.

I saw this movie on a DVD that contains 4 movies. I never watched all of them, I only watched 2 and they were all crappy. The True Story of Puss'n'Boots was one of them.Unlike the other movie ( Legend of the Sea ) it was the "boring" kind of bad. Seriously ! The're more cons than pros for this movie PROS : + Has a little bit of character development CONS : - All the characters are annoying ! Especially the cat, the monkey, the chamberlain and the queen.

• It is too unrealistically looking to be called THE TRUE STORY of Puss'n'Boots - Doesn't catch at all the spirit of the original fairy tale. This is the biggest example that I can get. The ogre transformations True Story The Movie Lion and mouse Squid and duck My rating : a 3 out of 10 don't watch it

This film is dreadful. I had rented a copy of the movie "The True story of Puss 'n Boots" because I thought it was by the same people who did the Shrek movies; the Puss on the DVD cover looked just like the one in Shrek. Instead, it was a horrible, badly animated regurgitation of the fairytale that looks like it was done in Belgium and is over-dubbed in English. It supposedly contains voice-overs by William Shatner, but you can find him among the other noise in the dialog. And many of the characters are just plain ugly: the drunken queen, the obese king, and the Fright-Night-Evil-Clown of a chamberlain may play overseas, but here in the US they're just awful in what is supposed to be a film for children. It was such an ugly, boring mess I turned it off after about 10 minutes. The Shrek people should sue these folk for false advertising, and anyone who rents this should be aware that it's NOT what it pretends to be.

I'm sure my impression of it would have been much better had I listened to it in the original French. But William Shatner was a horrible, horrible, HORRIBLE choice for the voice of the English version. His raspy, shaky voice and constant non-verbal noises he kept making just utterly ruined it. In the prior release, for English-speaking audiences, I suppose we were spoiled by Antonio Bandaras' as the cat. Shatner's Puss was just plain nails-on-chalkboard awful. Totally ruined any potential enjoyment I might have been able to get out of it. The story itself was okay, though definitely a bit on the "silly" side - but it doesn't seem to be geared towards an adult audience, so that's okay.

I can't really comment on the French version, though surely they had to have a better voice than Shatner. If you're listening to it in English, just don't expect an experience even remotely similar to the original movie release. This movie was nothing like it. At. All.

A very bad perfomance by an excellent and convincing actor (that worn a grammy already) - the puss. With that being said, i am for now long a dog person.