Titreenp SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

Fluentiama Perfect cast and a good story

Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

Brenda The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

m-eileen125 I understand avid Carroll fans and parents of young children might be disappointed in this film since it seemingly has so little to do with the Jabberwocky poem. But from an art/film theory perspective this film is brilliant. Knowing that this is not a narrative, but a semi- experimental stop motion short animation before watching it might help people critique it by its own standards.There's been a recent surge in considering children's literature, fairy tales, and fables in regards to contemporary social anthropology. I personally study this through visual arts but it's very relevant for scholars varying from gender studies to linguistics. Reading authors like Carroll and relating its historical context to contemporary studies is the sort of thing I geek out on. Svankmajer, through some incredible stop motion animation, has certainly veered off the original poem. In doing so he's developed not a narrative, but a bazaar world that is unsettling and repetitive. Part of the original appeal of the Jabberwocky poem (and much of Carroll's writing) was that he used so many gibberish words. They allowed for ideas of different or parallel worlds. The Jabberwocky is often discussed as a personal foe, what we most fear, and the vorpal sword is the tool by which we overcome that fear -- if indeed we do overcome it. This broad notion means that the jabberwocky doesn't have to be a dragon or a monster, it can be public speaking or a fear of rejection. In the case of Svankmajer's film, childhood itself is scary.The content of the film may be a problem for children viewers. I particularly find the blade dancing in the table cloth and eventually stabbing itself quite "adult". And there are indeed savage notions of dolls eating other dolls. But this isn't meant to be a kids film. It's *visually* beautiful but its subjects are entirely uncomfortable, dark, and bordering on morbid. Just as traditional fairy tales were quite gruesome, Svankmajer is returning to the horror of a childhood nursery -- even if the horrors are in the imagination. Ideas of dolls and objects coming to life are common themes in children's stories, from the Nutcracker to the Velveteen Rabbit. Children seem to intuitively imbue these items with life of their own. As adults we find it creepy, disturbing, haunting, and warped. Stop animation is a very effective visual display of this imagination. The repetition in the toys and their keenness to destroy each other is very un-childlike. It's far more similar to the harsh monotony of adult life. Other interpretations of the film discuss it as quite angsty -- the line in the maze trying to break free and once it does it scribbles all over the portrait of the old man (the authority figure) and then exits out the window and on to freedom. I'm not sure I fully agree with this reading of the film, but it's one of many ideas to consider. I admit that it's relationship to lewis Carroll is a tad nebulous but its significance in animation and visual technique is overt. I'm approaching this as an academic not as a parent, but I think the film is pretty damn amazing.

MartinHafer Considering that the English title for this short film is JABBERWOCKY and it began with a recitation of the Lewis Carroll poem, you'd think that this film was going to be "Jabberwocky". My daughter, a huge Carroll fan, sat in restless anticipation...and then, nothing!! Instead of Jabberwocky, the action on the screen had nothing to do with the poem and after a minute or so they even stopped reading the poem. From then on, it was a very fast-paced and super-weird stop-motion film set in a child's room circa 1900. For what seemed like an eternity, toys danced and moved in crazy manners. Some were even very creepy images--such as soups being made of assorted doll body parts. Now some of this stop-motion was very clever--especially the imagery and metaphors. But, at no point was it Jabberwocky. So what we have is passable entertainment and nothing more.By the way, this film is part of the CINEMA 16: European Shorts DVD. On this DVD are 16 shorts. Most aren't great, though because it contains THE MAN WITHOUT A HEAD, COPY SHOP, RABBIT and WASP, it's an amazing DVD for lovers of short films and well worth buying.

bob the moo As the poem Jabberwocky is read out, various toys come to life and dance all around the room and through the furniture. The only thing that seems to be able to stop their fun is a black cat who periodically turns up to overturn them or burst through them.I saw this short film as part of a collection and I was interested in it because I had seen the very recent film Otesanek by Svankmajer and was curious to see what he had been like over 30 years ago – but more of that later. This film opens with the poem Jabberwocky being read out – this I liked because it is a rhythmic and enjoyable little piece. However the visuals bare little or no relation to the words, although this is not a major problem, just something that struck me as odd that the poem should have been selected in the first place. Instead the visuals are an enjoyable mix of toys moving and all manner of weird things occurring; I would have struggled to place this as being Czech if I hadn't known the director but it is unmistakably Eastern European in origin.This to me was part of its problem – that I could recognise it as being Svankmajer's work. Baring in mind that the only other film I saw of his was from the late 1990's, I did have to wonder why the animation looked the same 30 years earlier and why he had not manage to adapt or mature his style over several decades – it is rare to see this as most people grow over the time. This is not so much a criticism as it is an observation but it did distract me from the short for a while.The short itself is interesting but it is all a bit weird ad the animation is not THAT great (even for the period). It is very Eastern European in its rough nature so I guess if that's not your style then don't bother with this. However it is still worth seeing due to the sheer imagination behind it and the number of strange images it throws into your face. It may not be that good but it is interesting and enjoyable in a rough sort of way. The only thing that really bugged me was the fact that Svankmayer seems to have just stayed where he was in the 1970's – but I reserve judgment until I get the chance to see more of his work.

tedg Spoilers herein.Svankmejer's work ranges from the obvious and tedious to the rich and deep. This is his best in my estimation. His entire career can be seen as experiments leading to his feature-length `Alice,' punctuated by unsophisticated, uninteresting social commentary. `Alice' is fatally flawed, however, because he grossly misunderstands the richness of the story.But this project is not so limited. The little known origin of Carroll's poem is his father's membership in a society to `restore' the English language to its Saxon origins by expelling the French influence. Along the way, Dodgson goofed in all sorts of linguistic jokes based on non-specific sounds. It is the first poem whose images aren't bound to the intent of the poet.Svankmejer surfs this territory by making his own touchstones that have no meaning, but which tap subtle controversies and give us subtle traction on which we can build our own film. It is not as expert as the Quay's `Are We Still Married?' which is the very best of this type. But it is the best of Svankmejer.Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 4: Worth watching.