Rating: 
Summary: Heartwarming film for the whole family
Review: A Dog of Flanders is a touching film, and well shot with beautiful scenery. No it's not a masterpiece, far from it, but it is a solidly good family film, you don't see very often now-a-days. The two main children characters are acted well by the young actors and actresses, Warden is good as the aging grandfather, and John Voight, one of my favorite, is once again superb in his role as a very talented artist, Michael. The film's title is A Dog of Flanders, but don't be fulled, it really isn't about the dog (who was cute) that much. It's more about a poor, young boy (Nello) with lots of artistic dreams, overcoming obstacles to be the best that he can be. The ending is good if a bit predictable (my father knew how it would end only a few minutes into the movie). A Dog of Flanders is good, clean, enjoyable, family fun. It doesn't make your brain frazzle with its storyline, and no Oscar winners are here, but I'll take it any day over these shoot-em-up, cuss-em-out, vulgar movies hollywood is churning out by the minute today.
Rating: 
Summary: Wow!
Review: A dog of flanders is a touching story about a boy who rescues a dog. together they find out about the boy's past, and have many exciting, wonderful adventures that will make you laugh and cry. I highly recomend A dog of flanders to everyone!
Rating:
Summary: Heartwarming
Review: A terrific family movie without those embarrassing words to worry about while your watching, but suspenceful enough to interest your twelve-year-old. Probably not intended for little tikes.
Rating: 
Summary: Kinna Dumb
Review: A young boy in late 19th century Belgium finds comfort in the friendship of his dog as he dreams of becoming a painter and copes with the ill health of his grandfather.
Rating: 
Summary: Flanders Revisited
Review: Although different from the four previous versions, A Dog of Flanders(1999) basically follows the same story line. This version showed less dog than the rest, but was more acurate in depicting the breed, as the filmmakers use three wonderfully shaggy Bouviers des Flanders for the role of Pastrache. Jeremy James Kissner's portrayal of Nello is lifeless and exhibits little emotion making it was hard to connect with his plight. Although I prefer the 1959 version (David Ladd's Nello was more believable, and he used the correct Belgium terms for grandfather and mother), a wonderful performance by John Voight makes this movie worth watching.
Rating:
Summary: Very poignant but very good.
Review: Frankly I'm surprised that a film this poignant could have been made in this era when violence and special effects, rather than plot and compelling characters, seem to be the cinematic norm. Nevertheless, this outstanding film was made quite recently and it is outstanding. The story is quite sad much of the time, but it does conclude happily. If you are not too sophisticated to enjoy a well made tear-jerker, I think you'll like this film.
Rating: 
Summary: Ugh! Sappy and cheesy!
Review: I own the 1959 production of this film and like it. So with high hopes, I rented and watched the 1999 version last night. The production is better, as one would expect. But the interesting, multi-dimensional characters from the 1959 version have turned into flat, good or evil charicatures; the philosophy has taken a decidedly post-modern turn; and the plot has been altered from touching (1959) to sappy sentimentality (1999). It has transformed from a touching, interesting story to a flat fairy tale.
In 1959, the grandfather opposes Nello's desire to be a painter, saying that it is no way to earn a living. Likewise, Nello's artist mentor in Antwerp (one of the primary and most interesting characters) lives with his model and tries on several occasions to talk Nello out of being a painter. The miller is a reasonable but hard man who just wants the best for his daughter. The landlord is evil enough to serve the plot, but human enough to be believable: I know people like him <shiver>! The movie presents a consistent, optimistic existentialist point of view: virtue is having and making choices which shape your own destiny; while un-virtue is having or exercising no control over one's life. Also, virtue is focusing on the relational, human side of people, while un-virtue is treating people legalistically as objects. As the plot progresses, Nello, though persistent and determined in his pursuit of his dream, finds his choices slipping away until it looks like he has lost everything, even his life. But in the end, he, the miller, the legalistic priest, and the artist mentor all find existential redemption. The ending is rather contrived, but not so much that it ruins the movie. The production and acting are typical of the time; they were perfectly fine back then, but now we are used to much better and you may find them a bit jarring. For example, Nello is the only one in the movie with an American accent!
In 1999, the grandfather is a sappy dotard who fawns over Nello's art and spouts new age platitudes. The mentor also encourages Nello, treats him with kid gloves, and turns out to be Nello's father (jerk those tears!). The miller is a miserly fool who values his money above all else. The landlord is so evil he's funny, not scary; he should be in a Western melodrama. The worldview is a post-modern mish-mash of existentialism, nihilism, new-age spiritualism, Eastern monisim (expressed by the fortune teller), and Christianity. The story is pure good against pure evil, with every opportunity for cheap sentimentality liberally exploited. Visually, this film is much better than 1959; I especially liked the gypsy circus scene. But this is a technical element, and a movie stands or falls on its story and worldview, not its technique.
My recommendation: Skip the 1999 version and get the 1959 version.
Rating:
Summary: No oscar for the dog!
Review: I rented this movie today (will probably buy it if it comes out on DVD) because I appreciated the 1959 version with David Ladd so much. (It is still available on VHS.) There are good things about both versions-- in the earlier, David Ladd at least attempts to sound native to Belgium, using their words for 'father' and 'Mrs.' if I remember correctly. Both have happy endings. Much is added in Hollywood style for the 1999 version, however. In fact, about halfway into the story, it pretty much becomes a new story, compared to the earlier version. I did like the way the film touched on a belief in an afterlife and the good 'model' it displays about being honest for possible kid viewers today. Some have said the dog was cute. He looked like a big blob with two tiny eyes to me-- and he certainly couldn't 'act' much. If you want to see a dog really perform, then see "My Dog Skip"! Another good point-- the music score is excellent. I thought I had spotted a 'flaw' when the boy still had 'snow' on his hair after being in the church all night--- but then remembered how cold those old European cathedrals really are! All in all, a good movie for the whole family, and a an excellent way to see some great art and scenery from Flanders, the movie being done 'on location'.
Rating:
Summary: not that bad
Review: I saw this on a whim when it came out.I thought it was an independent art film about an artist!But to my surprise it was a kiddy family flick,something I wouldn't normally pay to see. But it was Ok,the best thing about this was Jesse James the boy who played the young Nello. Jesse is the best young actor out there who doesn't get the credit he deserves! Other then that,I could rip this apart but I won't. I guess if you have kids they would like it.
Rating:
Summary: It sword of grows on you .
Review: I was scrolling through my channel guide but then I stopped at HBO thinking it was just weird I passed it about 4 minutes later I thought I have too at least watch it one time I only saw the ending of it but that was good ,so at 12:00 I went too HBO west that time I only saw the scene where Nello and Alosie woke up at the circus ,after her father forbidden too let her see Nello ever again Alosie had only one memory the pitcure that week Nello gave Alosie a puppet . That night the barn caught on fire , everyone in the town blamed Nello for the causing of the inferno . Alosie's father broke Alosie's puppet then went back inside. Enough with the story but on the scale of 1 too 10 I would give it a perfect 10 !
|
