Pete's Dragon

Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures | Release Date: August 12, 2016

6.7	USER SCORE Generally favorable reviews based on 186 Ratings

USER RATING DISTRIBUTION

Watch Now

Stream On

Buy on

Stream On

Expand

Review this movie

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.

Check box if your review contains spoilers

0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User score By date Most helpful

JeneferAug 13, 2016

I believe this movie would be far more alluring and convincing if it was animation.
Now presented in a context to persuade the viewers that iit has really happened in a town in USA,(town,people,doctors, policemen..etc,) ran short ofI believe this movie would be far more alluring and convincing if it was animation.
Now presented in a context to persuade the viewers that iit has really happened in a town in USA,(town,people,doctors, policemen..etc,) ran short of involving the adult into this illusion of reality.
Grace is a forest keeper who says she knows every corner in this forest could not catch a sight of a child who has been living there for years? On the other side, Pete himself is not aggressive to human, friendly and sociable which means he might have grown curious to meet people who pass through the wood.
Eliot, the dragon, seems most of the time as sloppy and idiotic,he doesn't capture our hearts with his beauty, dignity and courage (except the final scene)..
The plot is immature (compare for example E.T how the scenes are well-developed and how the plot is convincing and engaging ).
This is why I believe the story would have a better chance of success if it has been made into an animation movies.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

TVJerrySep 4, 2016

This film has almost nothing in common with the 1977 original. This time, a young boy is raised in the woods by a friendly, fuzzy green dragon. Their idyllic life is threatened when a lumber company nears their habitat. Disney's qualities areThis film has almost nothing in common with the 1977 original. This time, a young boy is raised in the woods by a friendly, fuzzy green dragon. Their idyllic life is threatened when a lumber company nears their habitat. Disney's qualities are in abundance: a simple plot, sweet children, kindly grownups (one mildly bad one to provide conflict) and an earnest, wholesome approach that's sure to please family audiences. While the effects are fine, it's hard to take this unusual version of a dragon seriously or realistically. Still, the performances and the story (a bit darker than I expected) are sufficiently involving for younger sensibilities.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

EpicLadySpongeAug 12, 2016

Like Disney's latest Jungle Book movie, Pete's Dragon does nothing to offer its original a big treat. However, I have not even noticed a single change which is good, but at the same time, this Pete's Dragon failed to surprise me like usualLike Disney's latest Jungle Book movie, Pete's Dragon does nothing to offer its original a big treat. However, I have not even noticed a single change which is good, but at the same time, this Pete's Dragon failed to surprise me like usual like what I did with Disney's attempt to reboot its Jungle Book movie. It's begging mysticism for those that wanted a great Pete's Dragon movie or just wanted to stay tune for Disney's next live-action reboots of certain movies.… Expand

2 of 7 users found this helpful25

All this user's reviews

PanchogulMay 15, 2020

Buen live action, divertido, emotivo y sin demasiadas pretenciones, aceptable a nivel general pero tampoco tanto para decir que es grandioso.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

TyranianDec 15, 2019

Has good visuals and some classic elements but is ultimately one big cliche.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

LeZeeDec 4, 2016

For Pete, home is where Elliot is.

I saw the '77 film prior to this so that I'm not going to miss anything if the upgradation was done in this new version. That was a quite okay film, so do this one. The difference between two was mainly theFor Pete, home is where Elliot is.

I saw the '77 film prior to this so that I'm not going to miss anything if the upgradation was done in this new version. That was a quite okay film, so do this one. The difference between two was mainly the technology, but there's a major surge on all departments. Somewhat this looked more enjoyable than the old one. Visually very good, all the actors are great and so the locations, but the story was too short, not the film. It was over a 90 minute long and the entire film looked like an introduction. So there were no developments, everything was just like a beginning. That means the sequel could become a great adventure or it should be.

The five year old boy Pete, who lost in the wood after the car with his parents met a mishap, is raised by a dragon named Elliot. Now, eleven, meets some people from the nearby town who came with an agenda. It's like he got everything back what he had lost 6 years ago. Followed by misunderstanding and the human interference in the Elliot's enclosure, the chaos unleash and thrilling final act proceeds before the narration concludes in a style.

The kid who played Pete looked some kind of related to Sarah Snook, but he was good and so the others. The film was not good as I was expecting. The box office success was not that great comparing with other Disney films. So the sequel is in doubt, yet the story had ended with a wide open. I am sure you will enjoy watching it, because everything was so pleasant, but only a few people would like it at the end. I don't know if you are one, but definitely worth a try.

6/10… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

NerdConsultantAug 22, 2016

Now I don’t think this is better than Jungle Book which I have previously reviewed, but like Jungle Book I did think I preferred this to the original movie. However, that doesn’t mean to say I completely loved the film. I just thought itNow I don’t think this is better than Jungle Book which I have previously reviewed, but like Jungle Book I did think I preferred this to the original movie. However, that doesn’t mean to say I completely loved the film. I just thought it was ok. The big problem is that it is way too predictable and gives you no surprises whatsoever. It kind of feels like one of those environmental films I watched in the 1990’s where even then I knew exactly where it was going, not helped by the fact that Karl Urban plays a really unsubtle villain. I will say though, the CGI of the dragon is very good and the relationship between the boy and the Dragon is the best part of the film, so it’s worth a watch if you have got kids… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

ohnomrbillAug 18, 2016

i was expecting a better movie. this is probably a good movie if you have very young kids. there are elements that are good, like the boy is very cute and the dragon is cool but it ends up being a movie about the environment and not a goodi was expecting a better movie. this is probably a good movie if you have very young kids. there are elements that are good, like the boy is very cute and the dragon is cool but it ends up being a movie about the environment and not a good one at that. i was sorry i saw this and glad when it was over. i think they ran out of ideas for the ending as well. this was nothing like nor as good as the jungle book!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

PipeCOct 16, 2016

Winning Streak of Disney Endures

In the period between the death of Walt Disney in 1966, the groundbreaking mecca of animation tolerated one of the most "deplorable" moments of its history, in terms of original ideas and sumptuousWinning Streak of Disney Endures

In the period between the death of Walt Disney in 1966, the groundbreaking mecca of animation tolerated one of the most "deplorable" moments of its history, in terms of original ideas and sumptuous animations, for that reason, dozens of entertainments released during later dates are currently classified as "not classics". In 1977, house of mouse premiered "Pete's Dragon", directed by Don Chaffey, a story written by Seton. I. Miller, which demonstrates the adherence between nostalgic and sincere friendship with the masterpiece of 1942, "Bambi".

Almost four decades after, Bryce Dallas Howard, Robert Redford and Oakes Fegley try to forge a new start for the celebrated pink-green dragon, nevertheless, despite it increases sweet and soulful charm of the original, it is not enough to equalize the level of excellence of live-action films from the company.

From the ingenious mind that conceived drama-romance of 2013, "Ain ain't Them Bodies Saints", comes a radically dissimilar reconceptualization from ignored commercial flop of Disney, "Pete's Dragon". David Lowery, a man with a few film titles behind him, was contracted together with his favorite co-writer Toby Halbrooks by Walt D. in order to direct and write not only for this sensible remake but also one reinvention more of the hard-hit story of "Peter Pan" with release in 2019.

New Zealand was location selected to recreate the forest, dense of tall and asphyxiating green pines in the original story, the new version does not dispense with the old setup, placing young boy, Pete (Oakes Fegley), within green leafiness after a flamboyant car accident that killed his two parents. Six years later, a forest ranger (Bryce Dallas Howard) and her boyfriend's daughter discover 10-year-old primitive and wild child and decide to take him home to care for him and try to find a safe future. But fidelity of Pete to who helped him to survive in the depth of the forest, confirms the urban legends about a legendary creature that wander around such zone, a dragon, the great green dragon, who now must be rescued of the grips of pernicious loggers.

The fantasy of Lowery abysmally deviates from the original film, keeping in mind that was an animated musical in which Elliot had to protect a helpless orphan. This time, they develop new and even greater aspects in the flood of characters, plot twists, soundtrack and of course special effects. Stone Street Studios is responsible for the restored Elliot, a dragon more domesticated, bigger, more green but less realistic and convincing, since its integration by CGI animation is palpable and we can detail that our fire-spitting friend isn't there. Even so, its tender and adorable appearance immediately connects with the idea of not considering it as something genuinely chimerical, ipso facto associated with a lovable dog or a sweet polar bear.

Despite ostentatious cast it obtained, occasionally a formulaic and slow screenplay does not exploit all the potential of its main leads, simply they limit to faces with expressions of bewilderment, happiness, sadness and hope. Nonetheless, Pete (extremely paging Mogli) can guide the course of all the film with satisfaction, despite his age.

Beyond of its exaggerated educational purpose for kids, the film tries to teach us an ecological lesson to each spectator, especially in reference to the felling of trees and strict protection of everything who harbors there. A trick to discover this function is the connection of Grace and Pete with nature, an irrefutable announcement of environmentalism. In addition, they support its deep-rooted purpose with lush and colorful landscapes used as setups for filming.

It seems that "house of mouse" is running out of ideas. "Pete's Dragon" did not enjoy excessive expectations like other Disney films, and even so, received high grossing at the worldwide box office. So, the period of remakes and reboots continues by money, tradition, love, or creative stagnation; hundreds are coming. And after original ideas become extinct, will they do remakes of remakes? All this is an unfounded success, baseless films that at some point will be destroyed. At least for the time, Pete and his dragon is an acceptable excuse for pay a movie ticket, specifying that sumptuousness and splendor characteristic of the company are not present, it is like a passable indie adventure.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

LambizkitDec 4, 2016

Boring, cliche plot that doesn't really reveal anything or go anywhere. The visuals, at least, were fun. I understand I'm not the target audience for this, but ultimately the movie was a sickeningly sweet bland experience.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

amheretojudgeJun 3, 2018

a feasible pet but not worthy..

Pete's Dragon An appreciative homage and throwback to all those early Disney features that meddled with such beasts and monsters in their self-created fragile world. The feature has the heart is in the righta feasible pet but not worthy..

Pete's Dragon

An appreciative homage and throwback to all those early Disney features that meddled with such beasts and monsters in their self-created fragile world. The feature has the heart is in the right place in here but the emotions it draws out isn't something new that may bedazzle or mesmerize the audience contradictory to the expectations. The technical aspects like background score and vfx could have been a lot better if supervised properly. On terms of writing, it offers a wafer thin script that is saved by the performance and execution for it loses its track within its first few minutes and never lifts up. David Lowery is the saviour of this sinking ship that helps the viewers survive the journey with the perfect editing and stunning colourful visuals. The performance is decent by Oakes Fegley and is supported with a good cast like Robert Redford, Bryce Dallas Howard and Karl Urban. As such animated feature (the premise is similar to it) requires, the tiny rich details is the missing puzzle that fails to connect this character driven feature with the audience. Pete's Dragon is a feasible pet but not worthy of the time and the suffering that it takes to appreciate its art which too is familiar to the viewers.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews