Stevecorp Don't listen to the negative reviews

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

Hayden Kane There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

Calum Hutton It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

Jeremy Bristol Gorgeous scenery and decent child actors (at least for Nello) make this better than a lot of live action children's movies, but it's no Old Yeller or even a Fly Away Home. It doesn't have the period depth that the book had, and at times the characters seem to have societal views out of the 1990's (such as Alois saying that "Money doesn't make people happy," even though at that time people without money (to summarize one of Samuel Johnson's essays) had no leisure time to find happiness, as they were too busy furnishing themselves with what they needed merely to survive). I would have preferred they kept a little truer--allowing children to make comparisons between their society and past societies lets them use their minds to make their own decisions, something a lot of children's movies don't allow (you listening, Eisner?).There are some good things, though. The relationship between Alois and Nello is less platonic than any of the other versions, making the father's reaction (fear that Alois will end up marrying Nello) more realistic--in the dubbed Japanese anime version released a year or so ago, I couldn't help thinking they seemed more like brother and sister than potential lovers. In this version, they seem only a few couple years away from sexual awakening--they finally seem like the young adolescents they're supposed to be.Spoilers: Probably the biggest change in this version is the ending. Oh, sure, they still go through the motions of Nello's death, but he has a new age vision of his funeral and then returns to his body. Now here's the quandary--is it okay to do something like that? Sure, many literary and film critics have panned Oui'da's story and its ending as being fundamentally flawed--basically, just a glorified tear-jerker that is a sort of children's version of Dicken's A Christmas Carol. But it is also a religious story (in some way Nello and/or Patrasche are supposed to represent Jesus (the dog was whipped, after all), and Reuben's was famous for his religious paintings), so removing the death sort of removes the soul of the piece and renders it more palpable to our current PC/ACLU/Amnesty International public consciousness. It should be noted, though, that Kevin Brodie hints at the ending during the lovely Gypsy scene: when the fortune teller reveals that they have known each other in past lives (i.e. the earlier movie incarnations that were true to the original ending), she says something like, "You will finally find happiness in this life."

cardhu2 I rented this film thinking it was the sobbingly sad 1959 version I saw as a kid. It was not. I was therefore very disappointed with what I felt was marginal acting, poor character development, and most of all, failure to highlight the relationship between the boy and his dog. In this version... the "Dog of Flanders" is just a cute "aside" to the movie. Get the 1959 version!

Jon Torino I don't know why they named this "A Dog Of Flanders" because the dog doesn't really have the lead in this movie. I think they used it to make people think it was a "Lassie Come Home" kind of movie. Yes, the dog is 'whipped' by a cruel master in the beginning and he does stay by the side of the little boy throughout the story but he doesn't do anything so outstanding that the movie should be named around his character. SPOILERS Be that as it may - I cried with this film and really didn't want to rent it because all animal/child stories can make me cry. I hate to see any animal or child mistreated and I figured that might happen. The little boy is orphaned by his dying mother and raised by his Grandfather in a poverty shack with a landlord who is your typical Simon Legree. The dead mother was a talented artist and the boy inherits the gift. He works to become a famous artist and falls under the wing of a rich art/patron/teacher who keeps running off to Rome. There are false accusations against the boy over the burning of a barn, the landlord tosses him out of the shack after his Grandpa dies, the dog does cause the accidental death of his original cruel master when the cruel master tries to take him away from the boy. The end is sort of hokey but caught me off guard because I really thought the kid died. By the end of the film I was crying like a baby and applauding the movie itself. I recommend it if you're in the mood for a good 'break my heart' movie.

Schlomo4 Upon going into the theatre to see this film, i had my doubts as to its quality; it was after all billed as somewhat of a childrens film. My original reason for seeing this movie was because i own a Bouvier des Flandres; the breed of dog featured in it. All i can say now is its a good thing i bought a Bouvier or i would have missed one of, in my opinion, the best films in years. Go on all you want about whatever other films you enjoyed in the past few years; for me "A Dog of Flanders" tops them all. Not in a long time has a film touched me emotionally as well as "pleased the eye". Im not a great reviewer of movies, but i know a good one when i see it and this is definately one of this years best.