Viewers were left unimpressed by the animation in the BBC’s adaption of Watership Down, with many comparing it to a bad video game.
A star-studded cast including James McAvoy, John Boyega, Nicholas Hoult, Rosamund Pike, Olivia Colman and Gemma Arterton voiced the adaption of Richard Adams’ bestselling novel about a small group of rabbits searching for a new home.
The first of two parts aired on Saturday night. Despite the stellar line-up of talent, those tuning in were disappointed by the quality of the CGI animation, with many yearning for a return to the 1978 cartoon version.
One viewer said: “To anyone who has not seen the original #WatershipDown. I am so sorry and please don’t think that because the original was made in 1978 that this 2018 version is an improvement on the animation because it’s not. As a matter of fact, I’d say this new version is a step backwards.”
Another tweeted: “I’m quite certain they’ve aired a rough cut by mistake. None of the audio is mixed and the CGI looks like a 90s video game. Someone’s getting fired @BBCOne #WatershipDown.”
One wrote: “The new #WatershipDown has some of the best actors mixed with the worst animation that I’m convinced whoever was in charge of the budget screwed up big time #lookslikeacheapvideogame.”
A viewer said: “Anyone else wish they had used traditional animation instead of cgi #WatershipDown.”
One joked: “#WatershipDown 1978 – Traumatising because of the brutality #WatershipDown 2018 – Traumatising because of the animation.”
And another viewer suggested it looked unfinished. They said: “Not feeling this #WatershipDown yet, doesn’t seem a patch on the original, despite the outstanding cast. The CGI not only looks really dated, it looks odd too, like it’s unfinished …”
The adaptation was directed by Noam Murro and the second part will air on Sunday.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here