BelSports This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Sabah Hensley This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

Logan By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Dana An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

GreyHunter Let's get the obvious out of the way first. This is a movie made on a shoe-string budget, using comic panels with the occasionally moving figure done in straight-up stop-motion fashion. There's some animation of the most basic sort (wavy lines representing water, for instance, were animated in a very simple fashion, or stylized eyes blinking) but nothing along the lines of what modern animation programs can do on a basic laptop. There's no way around these facts, and the result is exactly what you'd expect. It would be disingenuous to pretend that's not a fairly low bar, even in the early 2000s. The artwork itself (entirely black and white) is a mixture of cartoonish and semi-realistic (I was actually familiar with the artist's renditions of various Lovecraftian tales before I ever watched this) and depends a lot on chiaroscuro and shading effects. It has to be taken on its own merits. You're not getting even comic book quality, but that's not a criticism -- it's an observation. Some people love this sort of art; others demand more realistic (and colorized) art. De gustibus and all.With that out of the way, let's talk about what the movie is rather than what it isn't. It is a (slightly inelegant) solution to the problem of how to actually make a movie out of a sprawling and extremely fantastical story. "Dreamquest" is an almost quintessential 'unfilmable' piece. The budget necessary to film a live-action version capable of doing justice to the material would be astronomical, especially for such a niche story with limited general appeal. A traditionally animated one would be less onerous, but once again we hit the issue of budget to appeal ratio. What this movie is is an attempt to bring the story to life through visuals using the best means at the disposal of, well, a creator with virtually no budget. And that's definitely worth appreciating. Fans of the original story might crave a world where it could get the same cinematic treatment as 'Lord of the Rings' or 'Harry Potter,' but the realistic ones know this simply isn't feasible. What we have here is what *is* feasible, and it's very obviously a labor of love. If you set aside preconceptions (which I know can be difficult) and take this movie on its own merits, it can be quite a fun watch. Perhaps more than most cinematic adaptions of beloved stories, this is going to appeal mos to people who are intimately familiar with the source text and the mythos of the Dreamlands over the range of Lovecraft's entire bibliography. But those unfamiliar with the source text can still enjoy the watch, though ready access to Google and the various Lovecraft fan sites would not be amiss.One complaint I have centers on the voice work. Not the quality of it (as a couple other reviewers have focused on) but on the fact that the Lovecraft text had no dialogue and only a single instance of (lengthy) monologue toward the end. This was, I feel, done by Lovecraft to enhance the dreamlike nature of the story, to keep the more mundane practical phenomena out of the text so the reader is drawn along with the story rather than subjected to reminders of real-world behavior. It's this very dreamlike aspect that makes the story so addictive to read, and I find the creation of dialogue to express what was only described in the text itself jarring and not in keeping with the mood the text was trying to instill. Personally, I feel a skilled narrator doing occasional voice-over would have been a much better choice. Luckily, I know the story by heart, so I could watch the music-only version without losing anything, but most people don't remember the story so thoroughly, if they've even read it at all. But that's a personal complaint, though I suspect many others have the same appreciation I do for the the dreamlike qualities of the text.All in all, though, I do appreciate this movie and appreciate the fact that somebody cared enough about the story to go to all this effort to film it.

kaelcarp As a big fan of H.P. Lovecraft, and the story upon which this film is based in particular, I sat down to watch this quite skeptical that it would be well done. I've seen a lot of Lovecraft adaptations, and they are usually quite a bit worse than bad.What I got was a real treat. The creators did an excellent job of not only capturing the story, but changing it from an unfilmable, dialogue-free narrative to something more engaging. It looks like a lot of good effort was put into making it as good as it could be on what appears to be a budget of about a couple of hundred dollars.About the budget, it is quite evident that the creators had a minuscule one. The film is mostly still pictures, with some very minimal animation, and it is all black and white. My one real gripe with it is the quality of the voice recordings. The character voices are too dynamic - sometimes too loud, sometimes, too soft to hear over the music or other sounds. It gets a bit annoying at times in that regard.Overall, though, this captures the spirit of the original story better than any Lovecraft adaptation I've seen. It speaks volumes about how a good story told well is preferable to a mundane big budget flick any day.

Eric-239 This is the most unusual production of an HP Lovecraft story I have ever seen, that's a good thing. The movie has some great/fun animation. It also has wonderful music. Dream-Quest is definitely recommended for any fan of Lovecraft or original animation styles.

James J. Dominguez (DexX) ...but considering that The Dream-Quest of Unknown Kadath is a full-length animated feature made by a bunch of people on three continents, connected by email and FTP, none of whom had ever made an animated feature before (or a feature-length film of any kind) it is really something special.Sure, the graphics are largely black and white line-art (provided by masterful comic artist Jason B. Thompson, by way of his five part comic series) and the animation of quite simple (probably half the movement in the film is simply panning and zooming on static images) but somehow it works.Its first big asset is Thompson's art - imaginative, fantastic, and ambitious. His glorious panoramic vistas of dream-world locations are incredible, and despite their static features, his depictions of the many characters in the story are so good that they truly come to life. The film's second major asset is its gorgeous, haunting score, provided by underground musician Cyoakha Grace O'Manion, with some help from her band Land of the Blind. It is great music in its own right, but it complements the visuals perfectly, and gives the whole film a sense of dream awe and dread.Add to these assets some very clever animation, that suggests far more than it actually shows, plus some very good voice performances, especially from Toren Atkinson, who provides the voice of the film's hero, Randolph Carter, as well as surprisingly professional and complex foley and sound effects work, and you are left with a film that simply should not have worked, but which works very well.Technical issues aside, and most important of all, it is entertaining, engrossing, and sometimes even funny, playing up H. P. Lovecraft's under-recognised black humour.The movie world needs more people like Edward Martin, who are willing to take a huge risk and produce something unique. Fans of H. P. Lovecraft owe it to themselves to see this film.