Meu Amigo, o Dragão

Having never seen the original Pete's Dragon I had no idea what the story was except that it evidently involved someone called Pete and a dragon! From the first few moments I was drawn in and captivated throughout. The dragon itself was wonderful - quite unlike other on screen imaginings. He was expressive and I loved that he didn't "talk"....something that immediately ruins any suspension of belief - think Dragonslayer's Sean Connery voiced incarnation!!! Please! The film took me through intrigue, joy, pathos, anger, heartbreak and laughter - not necessarily in that order. I cried an awful lot! Great film and if it doesn't touch you then you have no soul.

7/10. This is a remake of Disney's 1977 classic, in which a lost little boy (Pete) finds friendship with a dinosaur called Elliot. Now I must say up front that I really was never a fan of the original, I found it dull and boring. It is not a big classic like a lot of other Disney films, but it still has a big following of people that love it. However I am very glad that they went back 39 years later and remade it, I really liked this film and thought it was a great film for the whole family, with heartfelt moments, funny moments and also action scenes that were good fun for adults and children. I have heard criticism of the way this film starts off, with Pete losing his parents, but honestly this is not a put off for young children and is made in a way that is not sad. My two young kids were not afraid in this film at all, and absolutely loved it. Director David Lowery does a fantastic job in this remake for families. Oakes Fegley who plays Pete really does a great job for a young boy, I think he might be one to watch in the future. Pete's Dragon #petesdragon https://m.facebook.com/Aussiemoviereview/

The 1977 'Pete's Dragon' was a favourite as a child. As far as by today's standards, while not a great film and not as good through adult eyes (plus there are better live-action Disney films, especially the timeless 'Mary Poppins'), it's still well worth watching.

Despite having some really talented names on board, expectations were both of great interest but feeling dubious. It did have potential to be better than the 1977 film, and still stand very well on its own, or it could have been a lazy and pointless cash-grab. While it is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, it proved to be a better film than anticipated.

Not one of the best live-action Disney re-imaginings like 'Cinderella' and 'The Jungle Book' (much better than 'Maleficent' though), but still for a re-imagining 'Pete's Dragon' was a good one. It is let down by the final act, where the darker and more action-packed tone jars with what was happening before in the film and at this point the film starts to feel rushed. The villain just felt very shoehorned in and out of place, for the sake of "needing" an "obligatory" villain for conflict (that to me wasn't necessary), not helped by the hammy performance of Karl Urban that just feels out of kilter with the rest of the cast.

Where 'Pete's Dragon' especially soars is in the very charming and touching friendship chemistry between Pete and Elliot, essentially the heart of the film. Speaking of Elliot, he is a very lovingly crafted creature with not just beautiful details to him but also with a personality that wins one over in how endearing he is.

'Pete's Dragon', apart from some overly grim lighting in places, looks great visually, the splendid scenery being especially good complemented beautifully by cinematography that's atmospheric and picturesque. The music is lovingly whimsical and fits the film well when it could easily have not done.

Scripting serves its purpose well and doesn't hurt the atmosphere or the central friendship at all, weakening only with the villain and when the film gets darker. David Lowery directs very capably and balances the various elements well. Although it won't work, and hasn't worked, for some (with criticisms of it being thin narratively, slow-moving and either too sentimental or cold), for me the story (radically altered with a more sombre tone for example) was immensely charming and appreciated the calmer, straightforward, more gentle and deliberate nature of the story which allowed the friendship to resonate. Never found it mawkish and thought that there was enough emotion without it overshadowing things, though admittedly there is not much that is particularly new.

Urban aside, the acting is good. Oakes Fegley and Oona Laurence are very appealing, while Bryce Dallas Howard is luminous and compassionate and, while not being on screen for long, Robert Redford achieves the right balance of the grizzled and the sympathetic. But essentially it is Elliot and the friendship between him and Pete that carry the film, and, as they should, captivate most strongly.

In summary, while with its foibles 'Pete's Dragon' was a much more impressive re-imagining than expected after mixed expectations. 8/10 Bethany Cox

5 year old Pete is in a car accident that killed his parents. He is saved by a magical dragon named Elliot. Six years later, a crew of lumberjacks is closing in on their home. Pete is taken with Natalie. She's the young daughter of forest ranger Grace (Bryce Dallas Howard) and lumber company owner Jack (Wes Bentley). Grace has been told many times about a dragon by her father Meacham (Robert Redford). Grace and Natalie find the young boy Pete in the woods and take him in. Meanwhile, Jack's brother Gavin (Karl Urban) goes hunting for the mysterious creature in the forest.

I like the story, the characters, and the dragon. I can't help but think that the movie could be much better. It could improve with less money and holding back on showing the dragon. There is a natural questioning of Elliot as a figment of Pete's imagination that is missing from the audience. By showing the dragon from the start, Elliot is never in doubt. Heck, the dragon is often invisible. It would be more logical for it to be almost entirely invisible and the audience can wonder whether it's real, imagined, or a projection of Pete's imagination. The reveal would be infinitely more powerful. I like Bryce and the kids. Karl Urban is a little too broad. Robert Redford is odd in his role. He's too big of a movie star. The role should go to an elderly character actor from the retirement home. I have no problem with the look of Elliot but it would be more compelling to reveal him much later in the movie.

I haven't seen the original yet, but this is a real family movie. And yes some may be surprised by the fact that the voice of the Crypt Keeper (Tales from the Crypt) is "speaking" the Dragon, but that would mean you are not familiar with the versatility of the guy behind the voice and also his body of work (no pun intended).

But apart from the good effects and some good family story, you also have some heavyweights in front of the camera. Redford alone is amazing, but he gets support (literally) by everybody else. A story with highs and lows and while it is predictable, it is also exactly what family entertainment should be. Nothing more but certainly nothing less