Reno
⭐ 9/10
December 24, 2015
> Growing up is not the problem. Forgetting is.
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 …
read the rest.
> Growing up is not the problem. Forgetting is.
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
show less
Vinicius Monteiro
⭐ 6/10
June 8, 2026
Have you ever felt like adulthood slowly turned into an endless spreadsheet of chores and schedules? That's exactly the main question posed by The Little Prince (2015). It's a movie that invites us to rescue our inner child, who's been buried under bills, goals, and robotic routines. Let's dive into how one of the greatest classics in world literature was reimagined for the big screen-a visual journey that promises to make even the most cynical a…
read the rest.
Have you ever felt like adulthood slowly turned into an endless spreadsheet of chores and schedules? That's exactly the main question posed by The Little Prince (2015). It's a movie that invites us to rescue our inner child, who's been buried under bills, goals, and robotic routines. Let's dive into how one of the greatest classics in world literature was reimagined for the big screen-a visual journey that promises to make even the most cynical adult rethink their priorities.
One of the best things about the movie is how the art direction works to tell the story; it's not just there to look pretty. Using two totally different animation styles perfectly separates the two worlds. The modern world of the Little Girl and her mom is done in traditional CGI, full of straight lines, sharp angles, cookie-cutter houses, and a dull, oppressive gray color palette. On the flip side, when the classic story of the Little Prince kicks in, the movie switches to a gorgeous, tactile, and organic stop-motion. Using papier-mâché, clay, and wood textures to mimic Saint-Exupéry's original watercolors, the film visually separates the mathematical rigidness of the adult world from the magical fragility of a child's imagination, bringing out an instant wave of nostalgia.
The script takes the social critique from the book and hits hard by bringing it into the 21st century. The movie's point is crystal clear: adulthood, when stripped of imagination and free time, is basically a sickness. This is perfectly captured by the terrifying "Life Plan" the Mom makes for the Girl-a giant magnetic board that literally schedules every single minute of her life until she's old. It's a sharp jab at how modern society doesn't prepare kids to actually live, but to be efficient little cogs in an exhausting capitalist machine. The movie feels like a manifesto against living on autopilot, reminding us that the real tragedy isn't growing up-it's forgetting.
At the emotional core of the film is the Aviator. He isn't just the narrator of the classic tale; he's the living proof of resistance against this gray world. Living in a quirky, colorful, run-down house right in the middle of a perfectly standardized neighborhood, the Aviator represents the kind of elderly person society often throws away for not being considered "useful" or "productive" anymore. The friendship that blossoms between him and the little girl-who's been totally boxed in by her mom's rules-is the real heart of the film. Through their bond, the movie tackles generational clashes and shows that true wisdom isn't about racking up data and diplomas, but keeping your ability to look at the stars in awe.
A Little Prince adaptation wouldn't be complete without the heavy hitters. Thankfully, the Fox and the Rose are brought to the screen masterfully. They aren't just standalone fables; they directly mirror the Girl's real-world struggles. The classic idea of "taming"-building deep connections and taking responsibility for the people we love-is unpacked gently and carefully through the girl's bond with her elderly neighbor. The movie manages to take one of the most repeated (and sometimes cliché) metaphors in literature and gives it its genuine emotional weight back, helping kids understand that loving deeply also means dealing with the pain of saying goodbye.
As a reviewer, I found the clash in the script's structure super interesting. Antoine de Saint-Exupéry's original book is episodic, made up of a bunch of philosophical little vignettes without a traditional central conflict. To adapt this into a feature film and make it work for mainstream audiences, director Mark Osborne brought in the classic three-act hero's journey. The movie shows how these two styles-introspective European poetry and fast-paced American storytelling-fight and embrace each other throughout the runtime. For the most part, this narrative tension is brilliant, successfully expanding the universe to give it cinematic momentum without ruining its soul.
However, this mashup of styles is exactly where the movie hits its biggest snag, leaving me a bit torn on the final structure. While the first half of the film is a masterclass in subtlety and contemplation, the third act takes a nosedive into commercial territory. Suddenly, the story turns into a frantic rescue mission on a "planet of adults," complete with chases, escapes, and over-the-top villains. While this choice is visually exciting and clearly designed to keep kids glued to the screen, this shift in tone sacrifices the melancholy and quiet reflection that made the first two acts so powerful. The script ends up spoon-feeding its message a bit too much, turning into a standard blockbuster in its final minutes and underestimating the audience's ability to figure out the ending for themselves.
Even when the pacing stumbles, the soundscape holds everything together emotionally. The original score by Hans Zimmer and Richard Harvey steers clear of loud, epic movie tropes, going instead for soft piano melodies, acoustic guitar, and traditional French songs that elevate each scene without overpowering it. On top of that, the original voice cast is absolutely fantastic. Jeff Bridges delivers amazing dramatic weight, bouncing perfectly between youthful excitement and old-age frailty, while Rachel McAdams gives the Mom a very real humanity, keeping her from just being a cartoonish villain.
Despite the generic adventure sequence at the end, it's impossible to finish the movie without feeling moved by its artistry. When the textures of sand, paper, tape, and stars hanging by string fill the screen, you're looking at pure visual poetry. And it's through this gorgeous, handmade art style that the director nails his final point, backed by the famous quote that "what is essential is invisible to the eye." The movie succeeds by proving that what really matters in cinema-and in life-is the invisible emotion that images and people can wake up inside of us.
The Little Prince (2015) is a rich cinematic experience. Even with some pacing hiccups in the final act to please mainstream crowds, it absolutely nails translating a universal feeling into stunning visuals. It's a movie about the need to keep our curiosity alive in a world that constantly demands we act like machines. I highly recommend you set some time aside, watch this with an open heart, and let yourself experience the Aviator and the Little Girl's story. You'll definitely walk away different from when you hit play.
show less
