AniInterview
Sorry, this movie sucks
Doomtomylo
a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.
Marva
It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,
masonfisk
One of my earliest movie memories was seeing Pete's Dragon on the big screen (my second big film in a theater, Jaws being the first) at Radio City Music Hall no less w/the Rockettes. It'd probably make for the mother of all screenings but that wasn't the case. Even at the age of eight, I knew Pete's Dragon was just a'ight. So fast forward more than 35 years & now a film w/same title comes out & I feel strangely unresponsive. They can only go up w/a new adaptation so why am I not more excited than I should be. After watching it, I can see why this film didn't leave a mark the way you'd think the mouse house would. Disney is raiding their animated back catalogue & keep coming up aces w/their live action remakes (I can't wait for the Song of the South remake...Samuel L. Jackson as Uncle Remus, anyone?). So by telling a tale that is both whimsical & a critique of non-environmentalism, what are we left with but an earnest yarn that goes nowhere. Not even the new tunes improve things much. At this point, I would think so far out of the box that the result would definitely raise an eyebrow. Give Terence Malick a tenth of this remake's budget & let him go to town...I'm there.
cinephile-27690
My sister and me saw a TV aired version of the original and we saw it so many times that I only mildly liked this version. The 2 movies are very different from each other as well. In fact, the part I liked best was Robert Redford taking Mickey Rooney's original role. So, in short, this is good but the original is way better.
Neil Welch
Way back in 1977 Disney made a film called Pete's Dragon in which an orphan boy was helped by his invisible pet dragon Elliot (yes, really) to find a place in the world where he belonged. It was cheery, bright and colourful, laced with songs, and featured a cartoon dragon. Now, nearly 40 years later, Disney brings us another film called Pete's Dragon in which an orphan boy is helped by his invisible pet dragon Elliot to find a place in the world where he belongs. It is often downbeat, dark and dim, has no integral songs, and features a CGI dragon called Elliot. And it is wonderful.5-year old Pete survives a car crash in remote woods in which his parents are killed. He survives thanks to Elliot, with whom he bonds. 6 years later he encounters humans again in the person of forest ranger Grace. Pete's re-integration into the human race (against his will) begins: this, and the encroachment of deforestation, prejudice Elliot's secretive existence.We know that this is going to be a very different Pete's Dragon right from the car crash at the start, stranding the helpless freshly orphaned child in the woods. Bright and reassuring, this most definitely is NOT. When we next see Pete he is almost feral, in a performance of extraordinary animal agility by Oakes Fegley. I'm not sure that this is the sort of film which gets Oscar nods other than for effects, but this lad, as well as physicality, gives a touching and believable performance of a child with divided loyalties caught between two worlds.The other actors are also good (Karl Urban has the thankless job of playing the eco-vandal and would-be dragon captor, and does the best he can with a role which is written in cliché). And Elliot is wonderfully realised. The 1977 version was clearly the initial visual inspiration, but the design is clever, coupling cuddly furriness (think Sully in Monsters Inc) with credible dangerousness, in an expressive and emotional whole. The fact that Elliot himself is, effectively, an orphan adds a dimension missing from the original. Plus the animation is amazing, giving a genuine sense of bulk, weight and momentum to this huge critter.The story works, and the morality aspects are included subtly and sensitively: you are not clubbed over the head with them.Plus the movie contains the single best Hero Moment I've seen this year - it took my breath away (and, no, I don't mean the subsequent rising from the mist one). And - be warned - there may be tears.My only major reservation concerns the 3D. It adds nothing of significance, and when will film companies understand that a 3D release print needs to be lighter to compensate for the darkness of the polarising glasses?As with The Jungle Book, this is the best kind of remake: it adds to the original while retaining the heart of what made the original a success.
wraptile
The good ol' mythical beast and a boy story, except mythical beast is boring, the boy is boring and literally nothing happens through out the movie.For a movie that starts off with "What does adventure mean?" there's very little adventure. It feels like a satire with neverending queue of "ave" and "inspiration" moments.What a waste, how do you even make movie with dragons in it so boring?
