NekoHomey Purely Joyful Movie!

ReaderKenka Let's be realistic.

Steineded How sad is this?

filippaberry84 I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

TheLittleSongbird While not one of my favourites, Ub Iwerks was responsible for a lot of interesting work. Especially when working with Walt Disney, his oldest friend and one of his best, and co-creating one of animation's most famous characters in Mickey Mouse. His career since opening his own studio had interest value but the quality was variable, often being successful in the animation and music but wanting in the story and variable in gags, lead characters and tone.1933 to 1936 saw twenty five cartoons, mostly based on famous fairytales and familiar stories, as part of Iwerks's "ComiColor" series. The "ComiColor" series is very much worth watching and interesting, as is the case with many series some cartoons are better than others but there are no real animation nadirs. 1934's 'The Headless Horseman' is watchable enough it is a little disappointing, comparing this and Disney's version it is a no-brainer which is the better one of the two.'The Headless Horseman', while faithfully adhering to the basic details of the story, is slight and is too saccharine, like at the beginning, and does take far too long to get going. This affects the pacing which generally needed more kick. There is just not enough content to the poem to fill the cartoon's length and the middle especially is where one feels the over-stretching.Its characters should have been much more interesting, their personalities are bland excepting the titular character. The wit and imagination has been more frequent and stronger in other cartoons in the series before and since, apart from with The Headless Horseman there was not an awful lot to it. The character design for Ichabod is pretty poor, going overboard with the ugliness.However, 'The Headless Horseman' in no way disgraces the story and has enough interest to stop it from being completely dull. There are a few amusing moments that aren't too corny and never repetitive (like the Clark Gable caricature), and there is a genuine likeability and charm. The Headless Horseman is suitably creepy, without being traumatising, and the part with him is where the cartoon is the most interesting.Furthermore, the animation is great generally, apart from the character design for Ichabod. Meticulously detailed, fluid in drawing, vibrant in colour and often rich in imagination and visual wit. The music is cleverly and lushly orchestrated, is infectiously catchy and adds a lot to the cartoon, along with the titular character it is by far the best asset.Overall, another example of a worth a look once but not repeat viewings cartoon. 5/10 Bethany Cox

jacobjohntaylor1 For a short cartoon this one is not bad. It is the story of a very popular ghost story. Nothing great just something fun and entertaining to watch. Good animation for the most. Story line is not to bad. The book is a lot scarier. But this is a good way to past some time. I do not like a lot of cartoons. But this one is fun. If you just want to see a good family film so good artist did work on this one. It a pretty good family movie. Washington Irving was a great writer. See this movie it is a good time. This a good movie. Good movie good movie good movie. It is fun for the hole family. This is kind of spooky. Sleep Hollow (1999) is better. But still not to bad at all. I have seen more then once it is a good movie.

Michael_Elliott Headless Horseman, The (1934) ** 1/2 (out of 4) Animated version of the classic story has a group of people meeting up at a party where the legend of Sleepy Hollow is told. Soon, a headless horseman is running loose but is he the real one or a fake? This is a pretty unique little film as it's pretty much told silent with the exception of a few sound effects. The animation itself is pretty vividly done and best of all are the night scenes with the horseman, which looks really good. The biggest problem is that the story itself takes quite a while to warm up and take off. The actual story doesn't take place until nearly the five-minute mark and the final gag doesn't work too well.

Robert Reynolds While Iwerks was a technical genius in many respects, his strong suit was not plotting or scripting and it seems as though he couldn't care less about any aspect that wasn't visual. Thus, the series of shorts based on tall tales, fables and legends provided ready-made stories that worked to varying degrees. Here, in the short, "The Headless Horseman", except for the score and some sound effects and laughter, this is a visual cartoon-there is little to no dialog here. There are some suitably creepy visual effects at times, but the cartoon is average at best. Cannot even compare to the later adaptation done by Disney of the same Washington Irving story. Has its moments, but doesn't hold up too well. Worth watching, but Iwerks did better and the Cinecolor process was occasionally jarring. Recommended for Iwerks fans.