Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

A Masterpiece!

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

An often underutilized element when it comes to rating a film is its length. A lot of critics (official and self-appointed internet forum nerds) would happily sit through films that push over 3, 4, or 5 hours long and not blink an eye. Usually, this is because the directors that make films that push these running times are out to make a magnum-opus. Very often, the product of the art is enough for not only the length not to be criticized, but praised in a manner that these films would not have the same impact without them (see Napoleon (1927), Gone with the Wind (1939), Ben Hur (1959), Once Upon a Time in America (1984), and many more). However, a good amount of these critics would also be more than willing to say that your average film pushing above as little as the two-hour mark is overlong and bloated. On the flipside of the above arguments for a longer viewing, if the content of the film does not justify anything more than a short afternoon pastime, then most people aren't happy about it invading upon the rest of their day; sure, you COULD spend 2 hours watching the Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice directors cut (2016), however do you really want to waste an extra 30 minutes of your day when the original is already wasting a whole 2 and a half hours of it? The same thing could be said about even some anime that has a strong following and community. Sure, I COULD try and catch up with One-piece, and finally be in the loop about what some of my friends and other fans mean when they reference it, but am I willing to sit through *quick google search* 848 episodes of it?! (a feat that clocks in at just over 339 hours of my free time).However, as often discussed the ambitiously lengthy runtimes may be, people tend to neglect the effect the runtime plays at the other end of the spectrum with short films. Take The Garden of Words (2013) as a case and point; clocking in at around 48 mins, its around the length of an average episode of any drama show you can find provided Netflix or the like. This is easily one of the most beautifully animated films I have ever laid eyes upon. Every single frame of this movie could be taken out of context, framed and hung up on a wall and it would most likely catch the eye of anybody passing by. The backgrounds of urban Japan that give way to the green trees that provide the backdrop for where much of this movie is set - which plays into the plot by providing private security to our characters as they spend their rainy days together - are beautiful. Even the way that the raindrops hitting the ground are breathtakingly beautiful to watch. This level of consistency is rare in any animation, which often can have beautiful moments but can be standard outside of these. If movie anime tends to blow TV anime out of the water on this point, then this movie is another tier beyond that.Surely with a longer running time, these elements would be spoiled, correct? With the painstaking effort and time that must have went into each of these frames, surely making a longer film would compromise on these points? What could one gain from doing so? I'm going to be harsh and say, probably a lot more in terms of the characters and the plot. I often think that one of the very few advantages a TV show can have over a film is the amount of time that can be put into characters and their development, if not also lending way if done correctly to a richer plot. The plot is... fine, from the standpoint of delivering a story. Not much beyond the conversations between the two main characters and their own thoughts when alone are really shown for the first half of the film. In the second half (trying hard not to spoil anything so here we go), we are given a twist, and then we are given the elements of the plot that really drive the changes that bring about forward momentum to the plot. These elements do open us up to one of the characters more, however I don't think it was precisely necessary to do it the way that the movie did... though maybe, again, I'm being harsh. Overall there is just not as much going on here as I may have hoped. Which is fine, because we have all the interactions and dialogue between the main cha...For a "Garden of Words", there aren't all that many words that we get to hear. We get some introductions, a lovely haiku (yes, I know these are the titular "words"), and then some more dialogue, but a lot of what should be bonding that we see is merely shown quickly in montage. This doesn't work to the effect of the film, and means that we don't have as strong a connection to the characters as we maybe could have by the end of the film. I think this is my main gripe with the film; that if we had maybe been shown a bit more of these two bonding, then maybe by the end of the movie we would feel the sympathies of the characters some more. HOWEVER, doing this would lengthen the film, which means that the animation may have went downhill, or at least we would not be given the same amount of great backdrop for the plot.So do I think the movie could have been longer? When rating this, do I take the length into account and ignore some of the elements that I feel are missing, or do I rate this the same way I would any other film, including those that extend beyond the three hour mark? Honestly, it would be harder to do the latter; while I have some issues with the way that the film is presented, I don't think that it could have been presented in any other way. If it became more plot and character focused, and hence longer, we may have ended up with a mid-length average to good movie, rather than a shorter-length good to great one. And that doesn't sound like a good trade to me.Viewed 21/07/2018

...was the basic fascinating aspect of film, for me. the plot is the second. and, as teacher, the feel to see a too familiar story about vulnerability, need of the other and dreams. I am only insignificant viewer of Japanese animation and its importance is result of the meeting with it after the fall of Romanian Comunist regime. so, I am not in measure to define schools, directors art or techniques. but this film is real admirable. for the manner to define characters. for the small pieces of story. for the feeling as air. and for a form of profound , delicate honesty.

One of the most visually stunning animated films I've ever seen. The story was lovely, but really, the main reason I've rated this film so highly is the gorgeous visuals.I liked the story well enough. There is something simple and human about it. It didn't hit the audience over the head - it just unfolded in a natural, quiet way, which I appreciated. I know some people found the story a bit cheesy. I didn't. There's something to be said for allowing an earnest narrative to happen. Not everything needs to be cynical, self-conscious and guarded.Overall, well worth watching.

The best thing about this film is absolutely the animation. The water affects and reflections are like nothing I've ever see before. This is perhaps the best ever effort at realism through animation, as life's little details are picked up beautifully here. The film is only 45 minutes long, do not expect a plot filled with intrigue. What we have is a very basic, but still very sweet love story. The love triumphing despite various barriers is one you'll have seen many times, which does lessen the effect. I felt by keeping some distance between the characters throughout it did add emotion to their eventual coming together at the end. This film is worth a watch for the animation alone. The story won't blow you away, but neither will it lessen your experience.