User reviews

I notice that the 1-star ratings are pouring in, and I can't help finding it rather odd. Yes, the animation is a little off. Yes, the plot can be hard to follow at times because some of the rabbits look a little too alike. Yes, it's a bit too long at nearly three and a half hours. And no, it doesn't compare well with the 1978 film... but 1/10? Really? People need to look beyond the problems and see the story. They need to think about what the story is putting across, and how a new generation who might not have seen the 1978 version are being allowed to see this message... They might even be curious enough to check out the film after seeing this. Look beyond the nostalgia or your hatred for CGI, and ask yourself... is there something more than nothing here. Don't be put off if the rating continues to slide, because whilst there is plenty to criticise here, it is far from a complete loss.

ETA: The third and fourth parts were weaker than the first two, and I have to admit that I lost interest during part three, it was just too drawn out for how little was going on. Part four was slightly better, but three and a half hours was simply too much in the end.

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.

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.

I haven't read the book, so I'm not sure if they got it right, but as someone watching the mini-series without any previous background, I thought it was well done. I'd recommend watching with subtitles because as others have said, the rabbits look similar and if you see the names written with the dialogue, the story and characters are easier to follow. The animation is pretty and it creates a nice world with its production design.

It's dark and probably heavy for young children, but I think the message is important so it's worth watching for that.

Never knew I could get so invested in the lives of bunnies! This was fantastic. Rated it 10 (with having no experience with the book) because I really can't think of what more you'd want in a series. It was beautifully done,; my only complaint being that sometimes it was difficult to tell the characters apart

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.

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.

Okay, I haven't read the book or seen the first movie, so for me it was all new. And for a bunch of talking rabbits it was not bad I guess. A bit of an adventure about rabbits, watched all episodes after another, yeah had nothing better to do.

Like I said in the title, it's one of the better things I've seen on Netflix lately, reason is that all Netflix originals are the same: they start really strong but halfway down the movie or series it's like the money is gone or the writers are in a hurry and it gets worse and worse and fades slowly to a bad ending.

This bunny-adventure kept interesting till the ending, and yes the CGI wasn't great and it wasn't as dramatic as I was expecting and maybe a watered down version for more a broader audience but it wasn't bad or boring.

So if you can see through the fact they are talking rabbits it's just a fun little adventure with of course a deeper message about being nice and all that stuff.

The title summarizes the problem with this retelling of Richard Adams' beloved classic. The hand-drawn animation of the original 1978 film was vivid and colorful, the music ("Bright Eyes," "Keehar's Theme") was haunting, and the rabbits were easy to distinguish with clear visual trademarks.

"Watership Down" (2018) fails on all these counts. The landscapes are serviceable, but the movement of the rabbits is inexplicably crude like a hobbling animatronic toy. The music, while not intrusive, is hardly inspiring. And the rabbits are all so similar in appearance that it is hard to distinguish them as individuals. And if it is hard to distinguish them, it is that much harder to identify with them, or to care about their story.

To compound matters, the pacing of this 4 hour miniseries sags at several points, leaving one to pine for the taut pacing of the original feature length film.

All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a Thousand Enemies ... and chief among them is an insipid Netflix reboot of your glorious tale.

For years I've been waiting for something like this. I've always said the book should be a mini series and with the use of CG I was hoping someone would actually do it.

I have a hard time writing this being a tremendous fan of the book. Having the book practically memorized, I was sensitive to any changes but understood that some were necessary, like any film been adapted from the book.

I think the use of the lapine language was a mistake. Anyone not having read the book would be so confused with the dialogue. That is why I would recommend subtitles. Also you're able to see what characters are speaking since all the rabbits, with the exception of Bigwig, Bluebell and Strawberry, all look alike.

I think a lot of the deviations from the book were actually unnecessary. They could just stayed true to the book and still told a story within the allotted time. For example, why change Bigwig's cover story when he enters Efarha? Why birds instead of rats in the barn fight? Or why have Fiver captured by the cat instead of Hazel? Why exclude Dandelion from the dog chase? Why not use the punt on the river in their escape from Efarha?

I didn't like how they changed Hazel's character appear weaker and more timid. I think this was done in conjunction with making the does more prominent and strong.

The two rabbits they excluded that I missed the most were Silver and Buckhorn. Always loved Bigwig and his Oswala of two!

Overall, I'm glad they took a shot at it. It could've been better. Probably much better.

I would love to see someone's review who has not read the book.

Netflix and BBC working together to bring a childhood classic of mine to life...animated life. I remember just 40 years ago, 1978 exactly, when I was first exposed to the novel by Richard Adams by way of the animate movie of the same name. Fiver, Hazel, Clover, Bigwig, Kehaar the seagull, Dandelion and General Woundwart to name a few of my favorite characters are rendered perfectly by the animators... with such skill and caring... you can't help empathizing and loving them. This four part miniseries does the novel proud in representing the themes in Adam's novel well... rhe voice direction is excellent... BRAVO well job done...

I was really looking forward to this, but having seen it once, will certainly not watch it again, unlike the original that I have seen countless times.

The graphics were not great but neither was the voice acting which was poor in many cases, and not in fitting with the original characters. They may have stripped out some scenes they felt wouldn't be suitable for kids (not that I remember being traumatized by the original) All the warmth and charm of the original has disappeared.

All this remake has done is make the original seem even better. How I miss the simple animation of yesteryear.

I remember seeing the original film as a kid at the cinema, and not really understanding what was going on, as a child it just went over my head. So with this version, OK, the graphics aren't great, but it is easier to follow. But really, it is the story that matters. A story that was written over 40 years ago I think, and is even more relevant today, as it shows how mankind is destroying the natural world and everything in it with their want and greed and selfishness. I just hope if children do watch, as well as adults, that they realise just what man is doing to the planet and try to change things before it is too late. I enjoyed it, but with sadness in my heart at how true this tale is. I will be watching the second part on BBC tomorrow.

The four-episode mini-series takes several liberties with the beloved children's classic. Some beloved characters like Strawberry and Dandelion are left out. The film's episode, "The Raid", is an introduction to why Watership Down is so revered and why the combination of rabbits and perpetual terror is so daunting. Everything is scary, and it always is scary. The downside is that it's not much more than scary, so if the scary parts don't work for you, you'll have a little trouble getting through the mundane stages. But the moments that work, work well.

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

For nostalgia purposes I watched the new watership down...had really hoped to enjoy it as i love the original. But it just doesn't have the emotion or heart of the original. Hazels character is cold by comparison...lacks the warmth compared to the original portrayal. In the original as a child I felt that emotional buy in, that bond with Hazel throughout. It lacks the character depth of the original for me. But I guess for today's snowflake generation it's less 'bloody...less realistic and more palatable.

While nothing can quite live up to the original book and movie, this adaptation gets about as close to it as it can with what they have. Given that it's a Netflix show, the animation tended to be mediocre to alright at best. However, they use it to their advantage in many places, such as the scenes depicting Fiver's visions, which are very surreal and well done. The voice cast is absolutely stellar, no complaints there. The story stuck closely to the original novel, omitting some parts that may have slowed down the story. The violence is toned down a bit, which would normally be a downside, however there is still enough violence to stay true to the novel without being completely traumatizing to new watchers. There is no shying away from blood and fighting like there was in the TV remake from the 90s, but there wasn't excessive and unrealistic gore like in the original movie. Overall I would have to say that if there is a way to do a good job at a remake, this is it. It's violent, emotional, and sticks closely to the main story while accommodating for its limited screen time and budget, and for that, I have to give it ten stars.

The only reason I gave this series a 4 star rating is because I am a huge fan of the source material, so almost anything to do with Watership Down will be looked upon favorably by me.

That said...this series just misses the mark completely. Characters are missing, plot points are missing, characters have swapped roles, swapped sexes etc. I realize someone clearly thought making a few of the rabbits female would potentially gain more interest from female viewers....but it defeats the point of the story being a group of male rabbits going to other warrens to find does.

It's just a mess. You have a better chance of liking this series if you are unfamiliar with Watership Down.

A warren of rabbits is living a happy and peaceful existence until one, Fiver, has a vision of a catastrophe about to befall it. His brother, Hazel, convinces a group of rabbits to leave the warren and follow him. They are seeking a safer place to live but the journey to safety is beset on all sides by danger, sometimes from the least expected sources. However, thanks to Fiver, they also know their destination: Watership Down.

Entertaining adventure, based on Richard Adams's classic novel. Interesting, original storyline with a decent amount of intrigue, suspense and action. Great CGI.

All-star voice cast that works very well. Ben Kingsley is perfect as the head villain but my favourite would have to be Peter Capaldi as the bird, Kehaar. Very funny and very reminiscent of his work in The Thick of It, just without the profanity.

Not brilliant though. It is never entirely engaging nor compelling and many of the plot developments and conclusions were quite easily spottable in advance.

It also suffers from comparison with the 1978 film (the one that gave us the superb, beautiful, haunting Art Garfunkel theme song, 'Bright Eyes'). The movie had a grimness and emotional depth that the TV series lacks. The excellent CGI of the TV series is actually a drawback, as the pristineness of the picture quality belies the grimness and gravity of the rabbits' situation.

Still, entertaining viewing with a reasonably emotional ending.

Watership Down is one my favourite books, and I'd been so looking forward to watching this series. Unfortunately, I'm sorry to say that I am very disappointed. It's not the video game like quality of the animation that bothers me about this production, but rather how much they've strayed from the book. I understand that some creative liberties tend to be taken when bringing a book to the screen, but in my opinion, they've changed WAY TOO MUCH (SO much more than the 1978 animation), and in the process, they've utterly lost the essence of the characters, and therefore that of the original story. If you're interested in a nice enough story concerning a group of rabbits and their adventures, then this one may be for you. But, if you're looking for a relatively true telling of the original Watership Down story, you *will* be disappointed.

In the age of 4k, red dead redemption 2, God of war, Spider man and Assassin's Creed Odyssey this show looks like a joke! If the BBC is into animations, then hire professionals!