BootDigest Such a frustrating disappointment

Stevecorp Don't listen to the negative reviews

Humaira Grant It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

Brendon Jones It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

rjun67 This film is a gorgeous little gem from a more innocent age, the landscapes, the characters, and the horse itself, all blend to make an extremely watchable, and yet short film. Many user reviews have been dismissive of this film due to the differences between it and the original novel. But I say, who cares! I have never read the book, but I have seen a 1990's film version which is more faithful, with the inclusion of the Ginger story line, so go and watch that and stop moaning! I found this an incredibly moving story and I thoroughly enjoyed Black Beauty's journey, which goes full circle in a sad but slightly rewarding way, which is enough to leave you with a sense of satisfaction, albeit with a tear in your eye. This movie crams a lot into its 90 minutes, and the pace is fast, but somehow gives the viewer time to soak up the emotional road our equestrian hero is thrust along, including all the ups and downs he has to endure. Highlights for me are when Beauty ends up on the Continent after being sold to a travelling circus, and thereafter gifted to a humiliated hussar by his estranged lover, becoming in the process a war hero, after the horse charges with its mortally wounded master into the enemy cannon. More sad times follow as Beauty is brought and sold, finally almost expiring due to his ill treatment, but just as the old horse drags heavy coals up a steep road, and the tired animal is close to death, redemption comes at last. The final words are very sad, as it gives you the feeling that so much of the horse's life has been used without any real joy, and yet we see the old warrior sent to pasture in a field where horses live out their final days. I wish more films were made like this today, the music is very good and invokes the broad hills and mountains that feature so prominently (Ireland and Spain were used as the filming locations)

duncanlsu I'm slightly shocked at a few reviews who imply that this film remains in any way faithful to Anna Sewell's excellent book. It absolutely does NOT. Nothing remains of the book but a few character names and the fact that Beauty is black with a white blaze on his forehead. It's misleading to even associate Sewell's name with this movie. It's quite obvious that several reviewers have either forgotten everything they ever knew about the book, or (more likely) never read it at all. If you are looking for a movie version of the book to watch, look elsewhere. So, it's just a film about the life of a horse, and as such, it is so-so. The beginning of the movie does have some beautiful shots, set as it is in the British countryside somewhere. But it pretty much goes downhill after that, becoming a series of vignettes about Black Beauty's various owners, with little in the way of real depth, and even less focus on the horse himself. It's reasonably entertaining for a rainy day. Older children would likely enjoy it most. I am personally unlikely to watch it again, and will be checking out the other versions in the hopes of finding something resembling a reasonably faithful adaptation.

kcminer78 Why oh why did they decided to throw away the classic story and come up with their own version? It feels to me they just stole the title and thought whoever wrote the script can do better than Anna Sewell. My daughter just read the classic story and wanted to watch a movie version. What disappointment we had when it was apparent that we weren't watching 'Black Beauty' but a bastardized story with less than good acting. All through the movie we both wondered aloud whether we had ordered a wrong movie by mistake. Almost all of the characters in the book are absent and the most egregious omission is that the horse is not the narrator. The top billed Mark Lester was less than himself and only in the movie briefly. The other characters are mostly one dimensional and their stories are only glossed over. Of course this is not a miniseries and probably couldn't delve into all of their stories but some story transitions leave me wanting something more. ********* Spoiler ********** I thought I heard the soldier who briefly owns Black Beauty volunteered to go to India but in the battle scene it is clear that the people he is fighting are not Indians. Oh, and how did this movie got a 'G' rating with such violent battle scene? Someone should have warned me and my eight year old daughter. Viewers who want to watch a movie based on the book should be warned that this one ain't so.

UnicornMaiden This is a movie that can be looked at one of two ways. You can look at it as an adaptation of Anna Sewell's classic novel, or you can look at it as a story about a bunch of people who all happen to own the same horse. I'll do both.As an adaptation of the novel this movie disappoints terribly. The plot bears almost no relation to the original story. Classic characters like John Manly, Reuben Smith, and Jerry Barker are cut out completely. New characters are often shallow and one-dimensional. Ginger, one of the most important horses in the story, acting as a foil for Black Beauty and with her own heart-wrenching story is turned into a gelding, given about three seconds of screen time and has no involvement in the actual story. The plot, particularly the ways in which Beauty passes from owner to owner, often seems contrived. On more than one occasion Beauty is simply standing around in the middle of nowhere and someone comes along and finds him. Other times he performs some heroic deed which would merit his owners deciding to keep him forever and the next thing we know he's being sold again. While the novel deeply explores the society of the time and the effects of that society (for better or for worse) on both the humans and the animals this movie disregards that aspect entirely. It portrays some rather stereotypical views. Worse, some of the bad guys are just that: bad guys with no depth or personality. Take for instance the young squire who is cruel for no reason and loves to hurt horses just for the fun of it.As a movie with complete disregard to the book it isn't half bad. The story as it is presented here is not about the horse; it is about all the different people who own the horse. Beauty isn't a character so much as he is a plot device. If you don't mind the focus shifting from animal to human it is an enjoyable sequence of stories. I stand by what I said earlier about many of the characters being one-dimensional, but when the entire cast is reviewed as a whole it displays a wide range of personalities and backgrounds. There is a good balance between kind and cruel owners. Pacing was fairly good. The movie had a nice balance with enough action but not too much. Cinematography was very nice. Many of the shots of the countryside were beautifully done (if occasionally somewhat overdone). Most of the stories were fairly standard plots (a decent farmer at the mercy of a heartless bank, young lovers forbidden from meeting) but some, such as the circus family were rather creative and even the recycled plots were well done. Acting was good overall.My conclusion: A good animal and people story, but if you want something closer to the source watch the 1994 version.