Le petit prince

Very successful in bringing Little Prince into today. The movie made me to read the Little Prince again and learn more. The challenge between living natural and living modern became fully alive in my mind again and again. Like my childhood. I have a neighbor very similar to Aviator. He had long white hair and a very old jacket. He had a magic smile. I think he was very similar to Aviator. All of my memories of him became animated in front of my eyes while watching the movie. Maybe everyone has someone like Aviator in his or her life or must find. The snake scene was very deep like book. The movie made me to believe yet there is hope for peace.

I usually love the French animations, because unlike American, the stories, musics, characters that influences the thousands of year cultural history. Definitely not comparable to the Hollywood standards, but it had its own technical brilliance. All I wondered was why this film was in English language.

It deserves to be on the upcoming's big occasion (2016 February), if it is eligible for the American Academy Awards. From the director of 'Kung Fu Panda' original movie, which was partially based on the children's novel. The book adaptation is the stop-motion animation and the remaining story's the regular 3D animation.

Just remember the movies like 'What Dreams May Come' and 'The Lovely Bones', those magical worlds and breathtaking landscapes. Usually animations are associated with comedy genre, especially when a child character attached to it. This film was not even a comedy, more like those two titles I mentioned.

The screenplay wise it was a very 'Neverwas' type, except this one was an animation. But appropriate for people of all ages. The kids can realise the importance of their childhood and the older people can become kids again. The film compressed the gap and erected a bridge between the two hoods, the childhood and the adulthood.

"What is essential is invisible to the eye."

I did not know what to expect from it, but I highly satisfied with the final product. The film characters had no names, but called, the Little Girl, Mother, Fox, Rose, Snake, King et cetera as what their role is and species. Barely there are only 3-4 characters where the story was focused. Obviously it had a villain, but very unusual existence time and in a crucial part of the story.

I don't remember how the 100 minutes went so fast like a ray of the light beam flashed away. The pace of narration was not a rushy, except the opening part. But once the old man character, the Aviator, voiced by Jeff Bridge was introduced, the movie turned into completely different and awesome. Yes, Jeff Bridge's voice was so good for the background narration.

This story is about an old man who refused to grow up mentally and believes the existence of the magical stars and planets. The whole neighborhood stayed away from him and his troubles, until a new girl arrives at the next door. The little girl befriends him and falls for all his stories discarding her daily routines, but later it complicates their relationship after her mother finds out what they're up to. What happens to them and how the story concludes is the remaining part.

"She was not a common rose. She was the only one of her kind in the whole universe."

This story was finely fused between the reality and fantasy. Most essential storyline for the present world. In the name of education how the children were enforced by their parents to mechanical life with less time to play out and make their own friends. Especially as they were lacking the creativity to make up their own fictional worlds with their toys like the kids from a century ago were.

It might psychologically affect their characters while becoming an adult like the Aviator in this film, but as one of lines from the movie say 'Growing up is not the problem. Forgetting is', the children are losing their innocence over the adult's reality world. Who knows, someday those kids may become the greatest writer inspired by their childhood days.

If you ask me, I strongly recommend it for all. It is very encouraging film for the parents how not to raise their children and for the grown ups how not to get lost is the adult world. Most elegant flick of the year, along with a very few others.

You don't have to ignore it because you have read the book, like I said it was not completely borrowed from the original material. Instead, two-third of the film was freshly established out of the same name masterpiece. I'm not familiar with the book, so I've no thoughts that differentiate between these two formats. But definitely the film deserved all the appreciation from critics and movie

9½/10

Animation is under-estimated, perhaps because we tend to be afraid of what we do not understand.

I have seen a lot of films, done a lot of reviews and thought I had seen it all.

I was wrong.

First, I had not read the book prior to seeing this film nor had I seen the earlier screen version.

No matter. I was transfixed and stunned. I was still sitting there when the final credits rolled, which is really a feat because the credits roll for 10 minutes after the word FIN (THE END) rolls. (If you miss the credits, you miss the TURN AROUND song which itself could be highlight of one of the most incredible music scores in one of the most incredible movies ever).

When computers were first being married to animation -- a marriage made in heaven I think -- I recall an interview with a senior animator who confided that when the day came that they could get the "eyes" right, they would have reached the pinnacle of their craft.

That day has arrived. This movie is the herald.

Watching the eyes in this film, I felt as though I was watching real people. Does that make me sound daft? I hope not. There is one scene where the little girl watches the Aviator go to the hospital in the rain. She is at the same time transfixed with sadness and soaking wet. The animation made both conditions "real" at the same time. I don't know how. But it did.

Jeff Bridges, a brilliant actor with a record longer than your arm, gives the "voice" performance of his career here, and Rachael McAdams, former Femme Fatale, former "against type" actress (TRUE DETECTIVE) ditto.

Running out of superlatives, something I seldom do, so I will stop here.

See it. Don't argue. Just see it.

It was so long ago that this furred creature talked of life and other miraculous things hoisted up by far fetched maturity and sensibility presumably alien for a being draped in fur, but it resonates louder and makes even more sense now, when after all this years I re-read the novella that was first published in 1943 after the outbreak of second WW, by French writer and artist Antoine De- Saint Exupery, The Little Prince. It makes me wonder if it ever were a children's tale, but again to decode such an honest, sincerely beautiful written work of art, a child's innocence and naivety is the only play. Such stories don't need working out you feel the characters as they evolve through the pages and identify with you. 2015 is about to see in a re-imagined spirit the animated adaptation of Exupery's invention, from Kung- Fu Panda director Mark Osborne of the same name. It is majorly awaited. The trailer was irresistibly delicious instilling a magic like atmosphere with the equally enchanting background score by Richard Harvey and Hans Zimmer. This movie got an amazing cast from Bridges to Cottilard, it will be dream on screen. The little girl's imagination of the Prince and the fox is done by stop motion animation resembling and staying true to those old painted images. Remember the dewy water color illustrations by Exupery depicting the Prince on the asteroid, the magical rose that grew on it…with flaxen hair and a scarf he just looked like a cherry boy who lost his way. Walking through the sands, if you please I would draw you a sheep.

First of all, i never read the book even though i heard about The Little Prince since i was just a little kid. It's a well-known classic literature, after all. So, when i hear the book was made into a movie, i got so excited and couldn't wait to watch it. After i watched it, i do not regret it at all. It was a good movie and make me want to read the book version ( I read some of the review, that tell me that this movie was really different from the book version, so it intrigued my curiosity )

My review is as an outsider who doesn't know it real story. So, i won't compare the movie version with the book version. For the movie version, i guess i pretty much like it. I agree that this movie is not suitable for kids, since kids will find it boring. The pace of the movie is kinda slow ( also, it kinds of hard to understand for kids ). The visual itself, went so well and beautifully finished with the combination of stop motion and 3D animation.

Well, from my point of view, i think the story itself tried to teach us about life, happiness, sadness, and how to grow up without forgetting who we are. All those kinds of valuable things that we tend to forget, as we grown up and be part of the adult world.

I highly recommended this movie for those who do not read the novel yet and those who like philosophical things wrapped in a beautiful visual.