User reviews

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.

In an age that is so saturated with social media and entertainment, I often forget when the last time was that I saw such a wholesome film as this. My heart is often overwhelmed at how quickly innocence and childhood is sucked away in our culture. I personally felt when I was young that innocence was to be looked down upon. As most encounter, the years couldn't go by fast enough for my young self, constantly wishing to be older and wiser. Now is the time I look back. I deeply appreciate this film because it cherishes the beauty of a child's imagination. The animation leaves me awestruck at its beautiful simplistic style of stop motion. I cannot help but by transported back into my ever too short childhood along with the little girl and the Prince. I hope more teenagers and adults will stumble upon this piece of art because it is such a good reminder to cherish our imaginations amidst our mundane every day life.

There is one thing you have to know before even read about this movie, and it isn't the summary: There is already a LOT of things telling the same old story of the book. How the pilot and the prince became friends, all the adventures and beyond, in other animations and endless other media. This movie isn't about those two characters only. It's about how this story can touch people since it was created, from toddlers to grandpas, in different ways and in different ages. I've seen people say out loud "this is not little prince!", but I say "yes, it is!". Want to see a pure version? Read the book. The animation and the characters are rich and lovely, the CG and the stop motion are perfect and well used. Everything is heartwarming. If you don't know the book, you'll read it after seeing this. If you do, I'm sure you'll cry a lot. And at the end of the movie you'll want a fox for you too.

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

The movie opened today - 29 July 2015 - here in France, and I saw the second show here where I live, the small town of Paimpol. There were perhaps 30 people altogether in attendance. I could hear that the few children among them were bored. So, first comment: 1) This is not a movie for small children. It won't interest them.

2) If you are expecting a video reproduction of St Exupéry's story, you will be very disappointed. It's in this movie, but it only comprises a small part of it. Most of the movie is a frame for that tale, the story of a small girl who meets an elderly aviator who tells her, in bits and pieces, the story of his encounter, many years before, with the Little Prince. If you go expecting just what you know from St Exupéry's story, most of this movie will therefore be an annoyance to you.

It took me awhile to accept the frame story. It's fairly banal, fairly Hollywood. Nowhere near the originality of St. Exupéry's remarkable tale. But if you let yourself go with it, it has an appeal over time.

The part devoted to St. Exupéry's original tale is the best, as far as I'm concerned.

We also see the prince as an adult, very changed. That came as a shock at first to me, but again, I let myself go with it, and it had a certain fairly obvious interest.

This is not a great movie. "Ernest and Célestine" is a thousand times better. But it's worth seeing.

Again, however, this is NOT a movie for little children. They will be bored.

I could predict the movie ending by the first few minutes or so and I told my wife "okay, let's see if it can still be entertaining on the details...". Oh boy, I may never been so glad to be so wrong. I mean, of course I was hoping for it to be good, but I was expecting very, very little of it. Most animations I've been watching in the past 2 years or so, including Pixar's, have not being able to move me at all. At all. And IMDb score was just below what I'd expect from a good one.

( Okay, Inside Out was an exception: great and cute. Maybe my hopes for that one were too high but I was hoping for a better neural representation there, and it had some weak science behind it ( don't take my or Steve Novella's word for it, do your homework ). I would argue it is even harmful, because it will certainly create new bad myths about the mind and the brain. )

Anyway, Little Prince at least isn't about science - because else they'd get it wrong at very least on the lucid dreaming there... But it's perfectly done. Perfectly. Every little detail. Right near the beginning the girl gets a new friend and starts to wonder how his stories could be possible. While she is thinking, the wind in the background is moving engines. That's art. And science, even if only subconsciously. Even if.

The symbolism there is exquisite. I have watched a few french movies, I do know a little about the culture there, I've toured through France more than any other European country in my 2013 tour... I haven't seen anything like this before. Maybe I will need to take my french classes back again, eventually.

Here, let me tell you about 2 math formulas that appear in there (not the only ones, the first book she does open is about math, probably algebra, but in french sorry), for a few seconds: first one is about analytical geometry, and got an Escher picture in it. Now, in Brazil we don't learn any of that in school, not even Calculus, but I've gone to first year of Statistics and 1 got semester of Math in there... That shoot is complex! The only thing I can say about the first picture is she got a great compressed writing and thinking there. This to me means more than anything that whoever wrote the script (I haven't read the book) was an avid math enthusiast (like myself) at very least.

On the second one, however, she gets on to some Calculus, which to me was one of the funnest parts in school (after geometry, and I didn't really enjoy Math in college). Math was always my favorite topic in school. And that's a "simple" 3rd degree expression. All I can say is it's not being properly resolved, at first sight. But I bet there's a meaning there I just can't see yet. This is how this movie was made. Filled with tiny little details at every single second.

I'm very good at Math and at counting, but I can't even understand what the 6 year old is doing in her book there and those are images that just don't matter to the plot or for anything else, really. They're there on their own!

I'll make a real bold guess here, but I think this have became instantly my favorite film of all times. On top of Forrest Gump, Matrix, any Pixar's, Bedazzled, Terry Gilliam's, Huckabees, Stranger than Fiction, BttF, 2001, Interstellar, The Martian (still unwatched), Terminator you name it. I know almost nobody would agree with me here, but that's just how I felt having just watched the movie less than 8 hours ago.

It touched me deeply, and it did so by touching both my heart and brains, like no other one ever did. 34 year old, happily married, with no kids due to life issues, no job and lots of work to do. Specially after being this inspired. =)

-- Caue

I have read this marvelous book many times; first as a naive school boy and years later as a "grown up", have enjoyed reading it in 4 languages, so I was excited to see this new animation.

I watched it having in mind to stay open-minded… hence the first half was somehow acceptable; the story of a little girl with St. Exupery in his last days, mixed with parts from the original story of the book. I tried to understand the director's viewpoint that: you can't present this classic, as it is, for today's audience... well, yes and no!

The parts telling the original story; as animation, visuals, colors, textures… are beautiful and touching indeed! Bravo! but the second half: "Little prince in the 21 century" was rather average, and the ending more or less disappointing.

I think there are works of music, literature,art… which are to be reinterpreted very carefully, or better be left in their pure original form.I feel Exupery's book is in that category.

If you value the book as a treasure of human literature… it's probably better not to watch this animation.

If you don't know the book… you may enjoy this animation, it is not bad, but it is not a successful interpretation of "The little Prince".

At least, they could have the sensitivity of not using the original title!

6/10 … for the first 55 minutes.

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.

This movie will definitely hurt the feelings of the "Original Book Fundamentalists." In fact, if anyone would make a film only out of the book then there is no way this film can be long enough to be shown in movie theatres across the world. On youtube maybe. Anyway, the film does explain what the author wanted to: When one grows to be one of the "Adults,"his little prince,or what he stands for, curiosity, imagination, love, friendship, the ability to view the surrounding world with an aesthetical eye, or romanticism,dies with him. In the movie, the little girl has to learn about the society's materialism, to handle the relationship between her material life and her loved and beloved ones. So basically in the movie the little girl stands for the little prince, and again IN THE MOVIE the little girls experiences, although partially, what I understand that the little prince goes through in the book. The part I don't like about this film is it's rated that children are watching it. Why on Earth should they be recommended or even marketed to read or watch Le Petit Prince, Alice in Wonderland and so on? Shouldn't they be enjoying their childhood instead of pleurnicher and worrying about losing it? The author said so clearly and frankly that the book was written in a sad mood and he does not want it to be read as a bright fairy tale.

Sorry. I grew up on the book and love it for so many reasons. Doing a "what would happen to the little prince later on?" I'm not feeling it.

Take a poetic masterpiece, add one scoop of Hollywood, a tablespoon of marketing and a pinch of focus groups and you get this schlock. Gross and sad.

Better off rereading the book and watching Coraline and Up. This is too slow and boring for kids and too simplistic and poorly thought out for adults. It's in no-man's land.

Grand deception - this movie makes France sad and Saint-Exupéry is rolling in his grave depressed that the evil characters of his story, jumped off the pages, got their nasty little hands all over it and ruined it in movie form.

I like to think there is two act to this movie. The first act that still relate to the book, and the second act the script writers just added in to fill the last 35 minutes.

The movie begins wonderfully; full of artsy and inspiring animation. All the little side story and characters were left open for the audience to interpret - the same way the author did in the book. The characters were as interesting as they were in the book and the writers adaptation of telling their tale were flawless executed.

However, the second act of the movie felt like a straight-up socialist propaganda. Blaming all the problems on businesses. Mocking academic achievement and hard work. Painting the grown-up world gloom and dread; and anyone who obtain any wealth must be evil. Remember when I said leaving the characters open for interpretation? Nope, The Little Prince has been exploited and any of the original story's meaning has been killed.

The Little Prince is one of my favourite books. It's simply beautiful. I was looking forward watching this movie. And I'm deeply disappointed by how the director killed the Little Prince.

The first part of the movie was nice, and the animation that told the Little Prince's story was amazing. Loved how it was created.

The second part...you see how a book is killed. It was disappointing seeing how the movie director mutilated the personality of the Little Prince.

In the end, this movie is not about The Little Prince. Indeed, it sends nice messages about friendship, love, what is really important in life, and how we can see the unseen. But it's horrible to see how the Little Prince story is simply destroyed.

Catastrophic! Catastrophic!

You always get the book readers moaning about the movies based on them, I get it, books are wonderful, but not everyone can read books, there are people like me, maybe invalid in some way, a visual person who likes to see, hear and learn from movies, but learn in a positive way.

This is such a movie, I have not read the book, I probably won't but watching this, I get the message, I get the wonder, I learn the lessons, but I also am amazed at the skill of the animation, the characters drawn, the lighting, the direction, the editing and the wonderful dialogues by so many actors, and the actors I love, the whole thing is wonderful experience.

So, those who wrote the horrible reviews moaning about what it should be, what it turned out to be etc. open your mind or in the case close it, put the movie on, and watch it like a child would, enjoy it, and appreciate the huge work that has gone into it.

Tayfun

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.

Huge fan of the book and the original 1975 movie. I thought the animated movie was amazing. YES. They switched up the story to create something more family friendly. I watched it with my 10 year old. The original story would have troubled him. The story is still there. Intact. Its just been mixed in with this girls story that matches that of the book. He loved it. The soundtrack is superb. Helps with the story. Even though its all french, my teen sons all downloaded it. Give this "adaptation" a chance. The voice acting is really super. Jeff Bridges doesn't mumble his lines and the scenes with the girl are real touching. YOu become attached to the characters quickly. The animation is incredible.

This animation tells the story of a young girl who has a strict mother, making plans for her round the clock so that she could get into the best school. Just as she starts to think she has no childhood, she encounters an elderly neighbour who dares to dream.

I haven't read the original story before, so it's very new to me. The animation is very beautiful, smooth and joyful to look at. The story is fun, and makes me wonder what exactly happened that makes adults lose their innate childhood once they reach a certain age. Mr Prince illustrates that perfectly. Yet, the story also shows that good things don't last, and even if we want to hang on, we can't. It's a children's story with profound philosophy.

The movie's story, characters, and general flow don't really suit the general movie going audience, even those who frequent children's animations. This is because The movie deals heavily with imagination. Most people will literally stop to think, unwilling to suspend their already owned knowledge and beliefs, resulting in the movie's story being hard to digest. But once someone give in and flow the story's current, they'll find that they're seeing something that has been missing from their childhood. Especially for kids nowadays. Now parents often don't have adequate time with their children due to overwhelming work. Even after work some parents prefer to spend their time on their pleasures and not with their children.Kids nowadays also lose much space for imagination as they are stuck with electronic gadgets, restraining them from imagination sparking physical activities. That is how this movie hits home to them. The voice acting is done well enough. It's nice that the weight of the cast members' name didn't overwhelm the story as a whole.

I havnt read the book yet so I dont know of any differences between the two. Its a very heartwarming movie that will make the toughest tear up a little. also shows the importance of family time and the importance of just being a kid. easily watchable more than once!

This review is intended for all those fans of Le petit prince, the original book, and all those who like the character of Le Petit Prince.

The Little Prince (original story book) has a very simple storyline (although it's quite rich and complex in analogies and depth), written in French, first published in 1943, shorty before the untimely death of its author/illustrator, a real pilot.

I am a French teacher who has always included Le petit prince in my classroom whenever possible and for almost any age group (making the necessary modifications of course). I am a big fan of Antoine de St-Exupery and Le petit prince IS my favourite classic of all time.

I don't have a problem with the storyline of this film. I actually think it was made to entertain and even educate a little. My great concern arises from the fact that this film is NOT Le petit prince.

This film is trying too hard to cater to so-called modern audiences who like disproportionate faces and odd looking animations that barely resemble human faces. This is an insult to the author whose goal was to put his readers in touch with what's human, as opposed to money, business, rush and all those mundane exigences of the modern world.

Instead, the makers of this film exploited a well-loved story and broke it down to pieces, placing the Le petit prince story in a totally unrelated frame story to make it what I call Hollywood-friendly. Even worse, they did not bother to give it a more appropriate title such as Discovering the Little Prince. This film is not the story of Le petit prince. They named it after the original story to attract more viewers and create a poster which makes you believe this is the story of The Little Prince. If I believed in the afterlife, I'd say Antoine de St-Exupert must be shaking in his grave.

I have a three year old daughter who is very intelligent and although part of the modern generation, she already knows about this book. Do yourself and your children a favour and if you understand French, read the original. If not, read the translation of the book. Do not go for this film unless you have already read the main story.

The Little Girl lives with The Mother. Her father is absent with the exception of his gifts of glass globes. She fails her interview for the prestigious Werth Academy. Her mother moves them into the wealthy neighborhood for the school. Their home is the cheapest due to their eccentric new neighbor. It's the summer holidays and mother has set a scheduled regiment for the little girl to prepare for her long march to adulthood. Their neighbor is The Aviator. He becomes the Little Girl's best friend as he describes his adventures with The Little Prince.

I read The Little Prince for french class. It was tough enough to translate the thing. Plenty went over my head especially something like the Rose. One needs to appreciate the adult relationship being portrayed and also its autobiographical nature. The essentially literary nature of the book makes it more than a children's book. It's never been for the littlest kids although they probably like the pictures. The film takes the essentials of the book and adapts it into a cinematic Pixar-level movie. It's really the best of both worlds being combined here.

There is a switch in the world around the start of the third act. It concerned me a little about the execution. It would have been a lot easier to switch to the book instead. The Fox probably kept my faith with his humor. He is hilarious. Mr. Prince is a little problematic. It's like making Peter Pan grow up and I didn't appreciate that in Hook. However, it is all very audacious and it pulls everything together in the end.

There are many complaints about what this movie isn't. It isn't a kiddie movie and this isn't trying to be an "Ice Age" movie. It's digging into deeper material and I compare it more with "Where the Wild Things Are". That movie is definitely too dark for little kids. This isn't a simple transcription of the book. The book is unlikely to be good narrative for a two hour movie. This is able to translate this literary classic into a compelling movie structure. It's a heart-warming coming-of-age story as long as one haven't forgotten.