[yasr_overall_rating]
The adventures of an orphaned boy named Pete and his best friend Elliot, who just so happens to be a dragon.
Director David Lowery’s 2013’s ode to Terrence Mallick, the “shot-in-the-early-stages-of-twilight” drama “Ain’t Them Body Saints,” was an ambitious “art film,” aimed at a steadily-declining group of cinema appreciators (“ATBS” earned a measly $400K in the U.S.): folks who would get all the subtle cinematic references, catch every nuance of Rooney Mara and Casey Affleck’s performances, “ooh” and “aah” at Bradford Young’s cinematography and dissect the film for hours, if not days, after watching it. So who would have thought that the director’s leap to big-budget, studio filmmaking would be so drastic? Did the execs at Disney watched “ATBS” and say, “This guy would be perfect for a remake of ‘Pete’s Dragon’?”
One could argue the same thing happened to Colin Trevorrow, who zoomed from tiny drama “Safety Not Guaranteed” to the Everest heights of helming “Jurassic World,” as well as the upcoming “Star Wars: Episode IX.” The situation is slightly different though: I can see how someone like Spielberg could see traces of 1980’s fantasy magic in “Safety Not Guaranteed” and – far from a safe bet – assume the novice is ready for the big league, perhaps even with the potential to spice it up with some of that indie sensibility in the process. (Side-note: Spielberg was wrong, “Jurassic World” sucked, Trevorrow dazed and confused amidst all the dinosaurs). But… “Ain’t Them Body Saints?” Really? So, I pose the question again: what was it that some (and I’m being presumptuous here) sleep-deprived, bloated-on-wealth studio exec saw in Lowery’s film that made him hand the director the reigns to a $100+ million feature about a kid and his dragon friend?
Having just screened “Pete’s Dragon,” I can attest that one of those factors may be the poignancy that dominates every scene in “ATBS.” The Disney SFX-laden extravaganza certainly capitalizes on the director’s knack for creating touching moments, particularly between the central duo. However, his ability to flesh out characters, dial back on sentiment and infuse the plot with originality is not on full display here. As a result, we get a thankfully-brief (it runs just over 90 minutes), charming but clichéd fantasy melodrama – and by clichéd I mean this film is literally a retread of the “sad-child-befriends-creature” staple, seen in superior films like “The Neverending Story,” “E.T.,” “Dragonheart,” “The Iron Giant” and even this summer’s earlier “The Jungle Book” and “The BFG.”
Pete (newcomer Oakes Fegley, compelling as the lead) befriends the chameleon-like dragon (voiced by John Kassir) after a terrible car accident leaves him an orphan. He calls the dragon Elliot, after a book his parents gifted him. (We later find out, from a character called Meacham, played by a wise, “twinkle-in-the-eye” Robert Redford, that dragons “come from the North… but sometimes a dragon gets lost.”) Having spent six years in the woods, Pete now resembles a less-agile, Mid-West version of Mowgli, fighting off bears and sprinting through the flora – until forest ranger Grace (Bryce Dallas Howard… being Bryce Dallas Howard) and her daughter Natalie (an animated Oona Laurence) discover the two. As you can imagine, this leads to quite unpleasant consequences. Grace’s husband Jack (a cardboard Wes Bentley) cuts down trees for a living (makes sense, ying-yang kinda thing, I guess), while his “evil-but-not-really” brother Gavin (a hammed-up Karl Urban) helps him out. Gavin has an affinity for hunting, and when he finds out about the dragon, the action kicks into (relatively) high gear.
I would delve into the rest of the plot, but any more-or-less savvy moviegoers can see where it’s going: danger-culmination-redemption. It’s definitely been-there-seen-that stuff, enlivened by the charismatic lead, who had to converse with a bunch of pixels and make it looks convincing. The dragon’s kinda cool, though his facial features are a little too eerily human. There’s a scene or two that elevates the film to “recommended” status, one particular standout being Pete’s escape from a hospital. The tiny guy in the little white gown hops over cars, growls at dogs and clings to a school bus – an exhilarating sequence, ALMOST ruined by the twangy soundtrack accompanying it (a factor prominent throughout the film – one of the times the director’s indie (read: granola) musical tastes clashed with, instead if aided, the plot).
“If you go through life seeing only what’s in front of you,” a characters spells out the film’s main theme at one point, “you’re gonna miss a whole lot.” Profound observation – it’s moments like this where the filmmaking team clearly took cues from the subtleties of “Ain’t Them Body Saints.” There are also themes of deforestation and nature preservation; adulthood and friendship. The FX are decent if unspectacular… But enough of that, I have questions. What does the dragon eat? His sharp fangs, strength, ability to disappear, breathe fire and fly clearly indicate he’s not a vegan – but we never even see him consume a chipmunk or a rabbit. Why doesn’t he turn invisible more often? How has he managed to survive with the boy for six gosh-darn years?
While it’s not quite the artful, thought-provoking, fresh blockbuster it could have been (think Spielberg’s “A.I.”), “Pete’s Dragon” does charmingly hark back to the days of old-fashioned filmmaking, albeit with modern technology in its every shot. As for the director, (the horror!) Lowery is now scripting/directing the 145th iteration of “Peter Pan,” after 144 of them flopped miserably. Damn you, Hollywood – stop turning ambitious directors with great potential into millionaire robots who churn out sequels and remakes, forgetting one of the most important aspects of what makes cinema great: a distinct voice.
In theaters August 12th
