Boo, Zino & the Snurks (2004) User Reviews

Better than expected

[RWlkrSmith · 6/10 · 3 January 2006]

This was one of those "the store is out of Movie X, so I'll pick up this and hope it's not too bad" movies.

I was honestly expecting some "Ferngully"/"Dinotopia - Quest for the Ruby Sunstone" level abomination. The things we go through for our kids, blah blah.

But it wasn't. Mind you, I'm not saying it's great - just better than a title like "The Snurks" would lead you to believe. "Return to Gaya" would have conveyed the quality better, but sounds like a sequel.

The thing I liked best about it was that it did not unswervingly obey genre conventions. The idea of fictional, fantasy characters winding up in the Real World (tm) is by no means new, but it was treated with some intelligence. The Big Dumb Hero who, we discover, KNOWS that he's dumb, and doesn't seem entirely happy about it, the ostensible villain who displays a streak of heroism, the coward who, released from the narrative imperative, proves capable of bravery - and a real villain whose motivation for villainy is - get this - rage over having had his television show canceled in favor of less intellectually demanding fare - all these are surprising details, and display more originality than you'll find in a half-dozen similar movies.

Beautiful CG, BUT worse than a Saturday Morning Cartoon Story

[sempergumby · 5/10 · 15 November 2005]

The Computer Graphic in this movie were sometimes sooo good that I kept trying to figure out how such quality effects were used in a movie with such terribly poor pacing, story, and plot. The quality of the scenes was often on par with Shrek or even Monsters Inc. I would watch a scene thinking this could be a professional studio doing this film (that I never heard of in mainstream media), then I would see the characters do a scene that would no longer pass as adequate in a Saturday Morning Special.

Maybe it was the difficulty of working with CGI characters. Its possible that because the film was made in German and then English audio was dubbed that caused the audio track to be off throughout the film. I never realized how spoiled we've become with films like Toy Story, Shrek, Nemo, Antz, and so on. This film had several sweeping scenes that I thought could have been right out of any of those films, but then cut to action that could not have been in a storyboard for one of those films.

Beautiful scenes, but lacks the wittiness and pacing that would allow an adult to enjoy this movie.

Philosophical film with an odd name and strange approach

[God-12 · 6/10 · 15 March 2007]

This is a children's cartoon film, but a very peculiar one. Like another recent film it features a female, English-speaking girl with a nice bum - all the other characters are yanks.

It also, very strangely, considers, in some detail, the differences between reality and fiction as well as the matter of free will. It also makes reference to Descartes 'Cogito ergo sum'. I'm not really sure what these are doing in a children's film. Maybe, like the excellent 'Sophie's World' they really are trying to introduce philosophy to very young children.

If they are, then there are some peculiar ways of going about it. The villain has a plan to incinerate all plebvision viewers, particularly those with inclinations to watch a particular cartoon, by diverting a stream of volcanic lava through their plebvision sets. A brilliant scheme and a possible object lesson for the children. Sadly, though, the villain is thwarted and plebvision remains. Actually, plebvision is a constant theme throughout the film, which isn't very nice.

Technically the film is superb compared to the old days, but poor compared to something like Shrek - the character's lips don't fit the voices that well, for one thing, and the three eye'd frog is not very convincing.

The other odd thing about the film, that I meant to mention, is the name. The place is called 'gaya', but they all pronounce it 'guya'. If they wanted it to rhyme with Gaia, the goddess, then why on earth didn't they just call it 'guya'?

Is it that they didn't want to say 'gaya' properly because of the homosexual meaning of 'gay'? If so, that would be even odder, because the place seemed quite a gay place, in the standard meaning of the world and it would be good to introduce children to the happy and fun meaning of the word.

a few strengths and achievements, too

[hobold · 27 March 2004]

The movie does have significant weaknesses, as the other comments point out, but there are a few strengths worthy of note.

I was positively impressed by the global level of detail of scene backgrounds. Where in other CGI movies you get to see, say, a row of buildings with carefully modelled details near the camera, then a lot of empty space behind those, and finally a matte painting of the 'horizon', Back to Gaya shows you whole blocks of buildings, with the next streets showing through the gaps, all in credibly full detail, but without any obvious repetition of similar structures. To me these shots had a sense of realism that I had not seen before in CGI movies.

Along the same vein, when there are open air views, the distant landscape is never a simple background painting, but a detailed model. As far as I can tell, even the clouds in the sky were actual 3D entities instead of the usual flat background painting. This gives the camera a lot more freedom to move large distances and freely look around the scenery. The filmmakers probably overused this freedom somewhat, though, making some scenes hard to follow.

The outstanding level of detail extends to things like vegetation interacting with buildings, like plants growing inbetween and around fenceposts, for example. What I also liked was the general worn and aged look of things, a refreshing change from the polished featureless surfaces that are all too common on CGI movies' background objects.

The character animation in comparison is two classes below that, as the other comments mention. One thing I like about the characters, though, is the courage of the designers to go for the outright bizarre with the 'human' roles. It was interesting to see character design exploring a different direction than the usual either hyperrealistic or more classical comic style.

So, despite its weaknesses, Back to Gaya actually manages to advance the state of the CGI art on a few fronts. I do hope that it will be commercially successful enough that the makers get another chance to apply their talents to a better story.

Definitely not a failure, but the bad outweighs the good

[Horst_In_Translation · 4/10 · 10 March 2017]

"Back to Gaya" or "Zurück nach Gaya" is a co-production between Spain and Germany from 2004 that resulted in a German-language movie, even if there are also all kinds of versions out there in other languages. The English-language one is possibly right now even more known than the original because it includes voice work by big names like Patrick Stewart and Emily Watson. The most known name in the German version is probably Michael Bully Herbig. Now about the film itself, I think the voice acting is not the problem at all overall. But the story is. The core here is the heroes' challenge to get back a priceless stone and return to their world. This is an okay little reference in the center of it all. But all the side stories they created around it are either so generic and stuff we have seen a 100 times before in films (like the female character's emancipation) or just complete try-hard nonsense like when they met their creator. At least it needed to have been done a lot better to make half the impact only they were trying to make with this part for example. So yeah, the story here is probably the biggest weakness and I wished they could have kept it more essential, even if it had run for 75-80 minutes and not 100.

The animation part is entirely subjective if you like it or nor. I must say the way the characters looked I was never really interested or cared for their well-being and successes. The bad guys were slightly better looking to be fair (also nice voice there from Book of Unwritten Tales), but also nothing really extraordinary. The sets and sceneries were a bit better, but still it all felt so mediocre really, pretty much all aspects from this film. It is already way older than a decade now,so it looks as if there will never be a sequel and I cannot be too mad about that really. It was never a watch where I would say yes this was on par with at least the weaker films Disney and Pixar offer us these days and honestly, there are more than just a few European animated films (also in the full feature category) that certainly managed to do so in the last 20 years. Finally, what is perhaps the most disappointing thing about it all is to see how many people wrote and directed this film and still how forgettable it turned out to be. Too many cooks spoiling the broth here for sure. Then again, looking at some other stuff by Holger Tappe, one of the two directors, it s not too surprising that "The Snurks" is a forgettable disappointment for the most part. I don't recommend checking it out.

An allegory that needs psychotherapy

[jnaradzay · 2/10 · 4 March 2006]

Let me start by saying that the animated movie Snurks. Back to Gaya should not be watched by children. Unless you want to explain why the mean little snurk calls people a "putz". Or why the movie is dark and dreary like a new Batman movie. In order to enjoy this movie you must understand that this is a religious allegory with a some very bad ethnic references, the requisite "a female can be a hero too" story line, and a cookie cutter plot.

As far as a CG movie it is good. Not very good, but it has some terrific details. If you like to see pimples, pores, a stray nose hair, and blemishes then you will be impressed by the graphics. The bonus feature is kind of neat because you can watch how they build a skeleton, add "skin", texture, muscle movement, and facial features.

Did I already state that this is not a movie for kids? The story involves a "creator" (Patrick "Jean Luc Picard"), a mythical land where good battles evil (Eden, er, Goya), the good guys need "the light", ("dalamite"). The dalamite gets stolen by an evil genius with a limp and (don't be shocked) a big, bald head!! Lemme explain: evil will take away the light and you have to find the creator to get it back. If you don't get it back then you will be a putz (they said it, not me). Explain that to your kids.

Whose bright idea was it to give the poor little Snurks a shot glass filled with a Mickey? That's right, the Snurks get drugged by a tank-top wearing bar owner. I'm no censor but I know for a fact that cleavage does not belong in a kids movie.

Just to keep adults interested, the artists have decided to show you lot of the barmaid's cartoon cleavage and sagging you-know-whats. I know for another fact that sagging you-know-whats do not belong in a kids movie. And the barmaid's male lackey gets yelled at, scolded, called a putz, then kicked in the head. Way too much violence.

And they didn't miss a chance to make fun of fat people, short people, and anyone that looked different than heros. Sure, they had to cooperate to get back to Eden, er, Goya, but the snurk leader still had to bribe the "creator" to get equal treatment.

And why does "666" keep popping up in the background? Did I like it? Not really. I wish I didn't see it with my kids. What a putz (their words, not mine) I am.

what an awful crap

[mircobuck · 1/10 · 14 September 2018]

This one is just awkward with a horrible story, the characters are just a horrible pain in the neck. Perhabs it's something for kids with ADHD, but for intelligent human beings, it's just torture.

technically convincing movie with a lack of timing

[AlexMLehmann · 7/10 · 20 March 2004]

Well, today I've finally watched "Back To Gaya" which I was eagerly waiting for. My anticipation was damped because of the bad trailer which had a bad synchronisation and did not help to make one curious about the movie. Fortunately the movie was much better than what I had expected. Actually it is quite good but it has three major timing problems:

1. technically: the animation is not very good (not a single run cycle seems correct in this movie) 2. the pace: the movie seems to last longer than it is because of bad pacing 3. the jokes: first of all there are too few and second they have a bad timing. Either you know the joke seconds before it is spoken or you miss it because you don't have time to laugh about it

On the other hand BTG is technically very well done (except the animation) has tons of places and objects, is beautiful colored and has a nice music. Everyone that likes CG-movies should see it, it's worth the money... all the other should give Brother Bear a chance - since it is much better than most people think =) Well, give it a try - both of them.

Almost awful....

[B1rd · 2/10 · 14 October 2006]

I don't agree 100% with what jnaradsay says about this movie, but that reviewer is on to something that likewise irritated me about it. In this era, a mainstream movie for kids should be beyond having a villain with a physical disability, for one example of all the weird stereotypes, prejudices, and symbolism in this movie. (You Californians may not realize how offensive the barroom couple would be to southerners in a humorless movie like this.) As for technical, I can assure you Europeans that the English dub is equally as bad, though one can tell that indeed the characters' mouths were animated for English. I thought Atlanta was cute, too, but given to cartoonish gestures that were jarring in a movie like this. Though they sat through the movie last night (we rented it), neither of my kids (3 and 7) liked it enough to want to watch again this morning. Enough said.

definitely above average

[Jumping Jack Flash · 7/10 · 27 August 2004]

Back to Gaya certainly cannot match with Shrek 2 or Monster Inc. but keep in mind that in comparison this film is a rather 'cheap' movie. With the funding they had, the makers certainly did a great job!

The main positive aspect of the movie is that the makers did not apply the usual scheme of black and white. All the characters have certain strengths and weaknesses which add some shades of grey. The hero is bold but incredibly stupid. His companion is more of a shy guy yet he is quite resourceful.

Especially the introduction of the black haired Gayans teaches the kids that prejudices and discrimination because of certain bodily features are wrong and unfair.

BtG offers colourful family entertainment. It's funny, exciting and it even conveys certain moral values to the viewer.

7 out of 10

Not funny

[atlanx · 1/10 · 25 May 2007]

Bad 08/15 story.

They made the same failures like made in Final Fantasy(Spirits within).

It's an standard, I would call it "american story". Not funny. And to technically without spirit.

Probably I have watched to many Ghibli movies. And there is not one character I like. They are all stupid and to "designed".

watch an good German made (animation-)movie watch "Obelix and Asterix in Amerika".

Another tip: Watch this movie without sound, it's a really nice CG Animation without story.

Snurks

[gabruce · 10/10 · 17 March 2019]

SnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurks SnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurks SnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurks SnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurks SnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurks SnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurksSnurks

Nice try, but not far enough ...

[GerZah · 6/10 · 14 March 2004]

I've heard the producers say: "Hey, we don't want to be 'like Pixar' or like anything else ... !"

OK. But in 2004 you have to reach certain technical standards. And the makers of "Gaya" didn't. The kinematics is wooden, the camera movements make you dizzy and the lip-sync is disastrous. I mean -- this is a German CGI movie, so why are the German voices out of sync? Even movies like "Shrek" or "Ice Age" have been dubbed with German voices without visible glitches like that.

Aside from the technique: It's a nice animation film, but the plot is a bit thin and the characters are a bit weak. "Back to Gaya" is OK, but it's not more than that.

Granddaughter prefered a bath to this movie.

[graves-scott · 1/10 · 14 November 2021]

Seriously. My wife put it on for her and after 10 minutes she wanted to use the bathroom and then climbed into the tub wanting a bath. She stayed in the tub until this horrible film was over. The longest bath on record. She payed closer attention to Jurrasic Park. The small amount I saw made me feel like I lost 50 IQ points. I suspect had I watched it all I wouldn't be able to write.

As for the voice actors (English version) I was at best whelmed.

decent, but far from great

[onwa · 26 April 2004]

Well, I went to see this movie at a 10 a.m. showing before it got canned, and I was the only one in the cinema. So much for the trouble I went through in order to see this flick.

Well turns that the 5 stars it received are justified. It's a movie that isn't really bad, but makes you cringe when you think what could have been considering ist potential. The Visuals are very good at times and not so good at others. The main technical problem of this movie is the rather unrefined degree of animation (crappy would be to harsh a description to use) which is displayed during the characters movement and them talking (lip sync, facial animation/expression, eye movement, etc..).

The character's movements are either motion captured and therefore very smooth or handanimated. This mixture can work quite well, but it only works when you do a good job animating and blending these two styles in with each other so that nobody notices. Walking and other (relatively) easily capturable movements are done well, yet when it comes to complicated action scenes, with characters being thrown through air, holding on to the hood of a car the animation is poor and wooden. There is no persistent, "believeable" movement going on. In Toy Story for example characters did'nt necessarily move according to reality but they behaved in a unique and in the toy setting consistent as well as beleivable manner. Some polishing would have been necessary yet it didn't happen.

The next problem are facial expressions weren't anything spectacular either. They were acceptable, which unfortunately isn't enough for an animated flick whose main medium to convey the protagonists emotion is facial expression and therefore fails. On the other hand there weren't that many emotional scenes. Actually I can think of only one: the one where one guy tells the other and vice versa what they believe sucks about their friendship. that's it - no death, no loss, nothing to choke you up or get you involved.

The worst of the technical flaws, though is the downright bad or rather the lack of lip sync.

I read some comments here on IMDB before I went to watch this film and therefore my attention was raised on this matter, maybe it biased my perception - but only for the first minutes. After that I was convinced that the head animator must have been blind. In a german movie I expect the german voice overs to be lip synced correctly. I mean you can even have a programm interpreting speech as lip movements and they do a decent job(Deus Ex 1 & 2 for example), but this was so totally off that it must have been on purpose. As it turns out well 15 minutes into the movie or so, one of the main protagonists says something in english and is perfectly in lip sync. From then on its clear that the facial animation was entirely done for english. You then could even read from the lips what they said. Well that's an answer but no excuse, as others already stated, Shrek for example has the "handicap" but does an excellent job. Though some of the voice actors aren't first rate, which leads to some poor voice acting at times (the princess for example). This is really unforgivable and really degrades the exprience.

By the way, was I the only one who thought that "Buu" was cross-eyed?

The story wasn't that great either. Not only was it uninteresting and predicatable but it just wasn't convincing at all. I mean the villains motivation was right out hilarious. Poor character development alongside with a strange pacing of events managed to keep you from getting drawn in. In Pixar movies the stories are always well thought of, structured in a logical, interesting way and you kinda know what they're trying to get at. Also the story is interesting enough to keep you going even if the visuals would suck. Here we have few to no jokes which aren't even funny and worse, no themes like love, fear or friendship are explored beyond a superficial level. Not that I'm expecting a great depth in a children's movie, yet some, at least convincing, plausible depth would is something I expect and certainly most children see it the same way.

So this movie that has a medicore story some more or less severe animational issues, nevertheless it did enjoy it,and so will the audience for which it is intended.

But if you are expecting something like Monster, Inc. keep looking for Shrek 2 or wait till this hits the shelf at your local video store.

The only sad part to this movie is that all the dedication as well as hardwork the creators put in it show a potential which can be seen in glimpses throughout the movie is destroyed by the shortcomings of this movie. With a better script , better dialogue and more time to fine tune the animation as well as a fixed lip sync this movie could have been real good.

Hopefully, the next time, the team who put this together will overcome these flaws mentioned above and once they accomplish this we're in for a real treat!

I hope the movie is better in English

[Francinegth · 1/10 · 24 July 2004]

I went to see this movie in Amsterdam with a friend and her 2 children in Dutch. We were also the only people in the cinema. It took only 5 minutes to convince me: this is the worst movie I have ever seen. What father would tell his daughter to kiss the first bozo that comes along, just because he can drive a race car....

I think something must have gone wrong in the translation because throughout the movie I had the feeling we were back in the fifties teaching the children that the women's place is in the kitchen or otherwise just look pretty and shut up. Fine role model aye.... OK I'm exaggerating; in English it can't have been that bad: otherwise Patrick Stewart would not have taken part in it! So much for the dialog.

Although I must say that the creators have really tried to make a decent movie, I think the dialog is the downfall of this flick. I voted 1 out of 10. Better luck next time.

The worst drek imaginable

[colin-384 · 1/10 · 6 April 2007]

I'm left incredulous that anyone could see this film as anything but insulting. My 12 year old thought it was moronic. That's fine. Maybe he's too old for it. My 9 year old thought the story was stupid and the characters annoying. Maybe she was too old. My six year old left the room and asked to be told when the movie was over. These kids love films. The worst thing that a film maker can do in making a kids film is to assume that kids are stupid. This is not worth a rental, this is not worth borrowing from a friend, this is a film to use as punishment. If you still insist on watching it after reading this, make sure you take a gravol!

Am I the only one who REALLY likes this movie?

[takken_janarae · 10/10 · 30 March 2005]

This is one of my favorite movies, and is my current obsession. My family also loves it. "Boo, Zino & The Snurks" (or as I'd rather call it, "Back to Gaya") is an awesome little movie, if you know what to look for. The makers of this movie were aiming for something a bit more realistic than Pixar and added several little details that put them over the top. The 3D artists had a nice "realistic but not TOO realistic" style, here. The script was the same way. It was lacking in constant outrageous and wacky comedy (ie: Shrek; The Incredibles), but that's not a bad thing! Since when was this supposed to be a wild comedy, anyway? The movie gives a nice friendship and teamwork message, not to mention the whole "discrimination is bad" issue. Great for the young and the young at heart. I believe that the only thing the movie was missing was good advertising. The DVD cover is definitely nothing special. A 9 out of 10 from me, but only because the English version has been heavily cut apart, unlike the German version. I wish there was more of this movie (or at least more on the same subject) to see. (... And that people would stop picking on it so much...)

Though now that I'm reading through other peoples' comments... Maybe you just need to have the mind of a child to see how good this movie is (or at least was supposed to be), despite the things that may be wrong with it.

Not bad..

[anxietyresister · 22 October 2004]

Back To Gaya, otherwise known as Boo, Zino and The Snurks, is a perfectly respectable effort at producing a computer animated movie outside the confines of Hollywood. I saw this the day after I watched Shark Tale, and found this to have far more sympathetic characters and.. dare I say it.. better animation? There is so much detail on in each scene, like paper blowing down the street or moths buzzing around a lantern, it puts previous effort's static backgrounds to shame. This is even more amazing when you consider this was probably was made on a tenth of the budget as it's aforementioned Dreamworks brother. Sadly, the script lacks humour and memorable lines.. unless you think quotes like "This place is so scary it would give a ghost goose-pimples" are ones for the ages. There is a lot of action, and a few tense moments that will have the sprogs biting their nails, but there were also some parts which went on for too long, and others which could have been cut altogether. This is what separates Pixar from the pretenders.. when they do a motion picture, they make sure the quality of the screenplay is just as good as the technology, something the producers of Back To Gaya seem to have forgot. Still, there is a refreshing lack of sentimentality usually associated with this genre, and Patrick Stewart and Emily Watson do well as the only recognisable voiceovers in the English dub. Overall, this probably not worth paying to watch in the cinema (A sentiment a lot of people agree with me on apparently.. It's flopping in the UK) but it is well worth a rental, particularly if your kids have worn out everything else you have on tape. A sound-as-a-pound 6 outta 10 from me..

awesome movie!!!!!

[darkladypanther · 9/10 · 4 March 2008]

Personally I'm going to disagree with most of the reviews. I LOVED THIS MOVIE! I found the digital animation really amazing, especially the backrounds and character textures. While yes the voice overs seemed off, I didn't think the script was that bad. It had quite a few emotional scenes such as Boo and Zino talking about Zino being dumb and Atlanta and Zeek's little love thing. It also has good lessons for children such as non discrimination based on appearance and for girls, that they could be heroes too and were as strong as the boys. The movie has become a favorite in my house and I really hope the producers do a sequel for it.

"You go ahead and look for the Snurks. All I wanna do is go home."

[Victor Field · 24 October 2004]

This may contain a slight spoiler or two.

"Back to Gaya" was rechristened "Boo, Zino and the Snurks" for its UK release, making it sound less like a bold fantasy movie and more like a bad animated series on Children's ITV or Fox Kids or whatever. In fairness, the movie does unfortunately play like a very long episode of a bad animated series on Children's ITV or Fox Kids or whatever, not the result the producers of Germany's first computer animated movie were hoping for (even if it hadn't opened here the same week as "Shark Tale" it would probably have bombed).

The movie's premise - the stars of the hugely successful TV show "The Adventures of Boo and Zino" (which is so successful that they apparently have their own channel called Gaya TV) are brought into the real world by a mad scientist - isn't hugely original (as Rocky and Bullwinkle can attest; the upcoming Fat Albert movie is also based around that idea), but something could still have been done with it. One or two interesting ideas do come up, notably the notion of TV characters whose entire lives have been patterned out for them by other hands suddenly realising that they can function on their own, but they don't ultimately come to anything and the movie just lies there; the characters are all one-note clichés despite the attempts to graft some kind of emotions onto them, and the voicework isn't anything to write home about either.

The animation itself isn't actually too bad, and the design is okay (though all the voices are English or American, the unnamed city the movie's set in has some European stylings) but the producers failed to get a point that Pixar fully understands; if there's nothing in the script for the animation to be based on, it won't work. Everything from the cheating in the race at the beginning to the climactic showdown is heartless, derivative and humourless, and the writing's unforgivably slack (not to mention refusing to make sense on its own terms; the villain who brought them from TV to the real world took them by mistake while getting Gaya's power source which will give him the power to take things from TV and bring them into the real world... but how did he manage to pull things from TV into the real world in the first place? Can you say "paradox"? I knew you could). The posters claim this uses writers from "A Bug's Life" and "Hercules," but they must have been on an off day.

Is there anything to like about this movie? Well, this was one of two movies Michael Kamen was working on before his untimely death (the other being "First Daughter"), and his score does try to give the movie an epic touch that it doesn't deserve. Plus it's amusing to see that two characters look like a hollowed-out Kim Wilde and the guy with the mustache from Hale and Pace. And Alanta, the female Gayan on the trip - who's a tough lady, surprised? - is pretty fanciable; I think the producers must have thought so too, since the end credits finish with "Any resemblance to actual human beings is purely coincidental. Which is a pity, in the case of Alanta." But if you aren't a film music devotee or attracted to cartoon characters, skip this.

And besides, in what universe could "The Adventures of Boo and Zino" really be a smash hit? I refuse to believe German TV can be THAT bad.

Terrific

[brentkincaid · 8/10 · 3 January 2011]

This movie is so cute! It has all the stuff the rest of the CGI animated stuff has except for the humor displayed. But, we must keep in mind this is the first German CGI animated flick ever. So, maybe some of their humor is different from ours in the USA. Still, it makes it to nice, fun level.

I loved all the characters, and the facial characteristics of them were wonderful and a delight to see.

I will admit the rats in the chase sequence would be a bit scary for the wee ones, but I saw Bambi and cried my eyes out at their age. So, I think maybe the kiddies will be tough enough for this.

I give it an 8 out of 10. Keep the kids under about eight from watching it. The rest? You've said worse around your kids by that time. Let them have a romp through Gaya, why not?

Truly Magical Voice Performance by Emily Watson

[JohnLeeT · 10/10 · 16 November 2013]

English speakers will and those who appreciate the work of the greatest actor of her generation will want to seek out this rather lackluster film for the joy of hearing Emily Watson give yet another wonderful voice performance. Watson brings life, sparkle, and magic to the voice of her character and just her voice lights up the screen when she is being heard. The power of the magnificent actor is clearly on display even when she is only utilizing her voice to play a role! The film itself has little to offer but it is assured a 10 for one of the great voice performances of the year if not all time. This is not the quality production that was Tim Burton's elegant Corpse Bride but with the presence of Emily Watson it becomes a first-class production indeed!

Back To Gaya (a.k.a The Snurks) is an indie animation masterpiece!

[spike09 · 10/10 · 21 February 2006]

Overall, The Snurks is really great movie. A Modern Sci-Fi Fantasy full of comedy, action, drama and suspense.

The visuals are very impressive. The computer generated animation of "The Snurks" is as good as any Pixar or Dreamworks movie. First CG movie made entirely in Germany.

The story line is unique enough to keep the attention of children and adults. Toy Story with a Shrek attitude. I am not a movie spoiler, so I will not go into detail.

The acting uses motion capture to create very realistic characters. Great voice-over work.

The direction of the script keeps you entertained throughout the entire movie. A complete first rate production. Last Michael Kamen soundtrack.

Love this movie!

[thempettys · 8/10 · 26 May 2007]

After reading through a mess of mostly negative reviews, I thought I'd add my two cents. My family and I, LOVE "The Snurks"! We've probably seen it 15 times or more. Who really cares about nitpicking on all the technical junk or whining about unrealistic sociological differences. It's not supposed to be real, it's an animated film!! If you sit through the movie with your kids and watch it for it's entertainment value, you will NOT be disappointed. The Snurks is a fun action packed beautiful film with plenty of humor and suspense. Perhaps the mere fact that this movie is not loaded with the sly adult humor that most films (animated included) sadly think they need to have, is the reason for the negative comments. I don't know. I DO know, however that this movie is worth watching again and again!!