Matrixston Wow! Such a good movie.

ManiakJiggy This is How Movies Should Be Made

Roy Hart If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

Skyler Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

Gavin Cresswell (gavin-thelordofthefu-48-460297) Several years ago, Disney released their second animated feature length film Pinocchio in 1940, based on a book by Carlo Collodi and was considered as one of their most darkest films ever made before The Black Cauldron (which became a failure for Disney in 1985). It was also well-received by critics and people all over the world as one of the best films that touched their hearts since Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. Years later, New Line Cinema made their own adaptation of the story and it got seriously panned by critics while resulting in bombing at the box office, but some people actually liked it and I'm one of those people. Sadly, I never read the book, but I'm planning to someday.I used to like this as a kid, but as a young adult, this isn't in the same depth as the Disney version. It's pacing is pretty slow at times, but the stiff character animation of Jiminy Cricket and the underused villain are even bigger flaws than the pacing. Flaws aside, this is a pretty good adaptation. In fact, it's actually more faithful to the book compared to the Disney version. Don't get me wrong. Their version had charm and darkness that wasn't presented here, but this version has some elements from the book. With that said, there are some good aspects that made this worth-watching.Jonathan Taylor Thomas' voice over for Pinocchio made him likable as did Martin Landau who brought sadness to his role as Gepetto. David Doyle did great as Jiminy Cricket despite it's stiff character animation and Rob Schneider and Bebe Neuwirth did very decent Volpe and Felinet. Udo Kier, although underused, did great as the villain Lorenzini. The cast isn't the only strongest aspect, however. The mixture of animation and live-action with the help of the Muppet creator, Jim Henson, captures the spirit of the book perfectly well and the CGI effects on Pinocchio is creative to look at you can feel like thanking the company for doing such a fine job. The visuals are magnificent and the cinematography is imaginative. Rachel Portman's music is dynamic and fitted quite well with the movie's slow moments and the pop songs, although not the greatest, are at least worth-listening to.The Adventures of Pinocchio may not be the kind of family movie you've expected it to be, but due to it's faithfulness to the story with a likable cast, fantastic visuals, and solid CGI effects, this is a worth-watchable film to not only fans of the book, but to families young and old.

Electrified_Voltage I remember back around the time this 1996 version of "Pinocchio" was released (not sure whether it was around the time of its theatrical release or its home video release). I saw the promotional image of a wooden Pinocchio looking at a real version of himself like a reflection in the water, and later saw a trailer for this adaptation of Carlo Collodi's story on TV. Even though I was very familiar with the classic 1940 Disney version, I never actually saw this movie when it was new, not that I was missing much. Well over a decade later, I finally saw it just last night. By this point, I knew it wasn't a very popular film, so my expectations weren't very high, and it's a good thing they weren't, since I found "The Adventures of Pinocchio" to be below average! Pinocchio is a wooden puppet carved by a woodcutter and puppet maker named Geppetto. Soon after he finishes making this puppet figure of a boy, it magically comes to life! Even though Pinocchio is still wooden, he can now move and talk, but doesn't know much about the world around him. He wants to be a real boy, but has a lot to learn before that can happen. While walking out with Geppetto, he meets some schoolchildren and wants to go to school himself. He also catches the attention of two criminals named Felinet and Volpe, and is soon wanted by the evil Lorenzini! At school, Pinocchio punches a classmate and lies to the teacher about it, causing his nose to grow longer with each lie, and after he finally confesses, he is kicked out of class. He then goes to a bakery, where he causes chaos, and for this, he and Geppetto are both taken to court! They will both be sent to prison unless Gepetto can pay for the damages, which he can't, so Lorenzini offers to pay, but only if Pinocchio is given to him. Eventually, Geppetto reluctantly gives in and Lorenzini gets the puppet, but it turns out Pinocchio is not safe with him! The living wooden puppet finds himself on an adventure full of danger, with a wise cricket named Pepe often appearing to give him advice! This film adaptation begins with a poor opening narration from David Doyle, which turns out to be the voice of Pepe the Cricket. This character is supposed to be funny, but he fails. The same goes for the rest of the film's humour in general, in scenes such as the havoc Pinocchio wreaks in the bakery. It's not funny when it tries to be. Also, it seems Felinet and Volpe are supposed to be funny, but they also fail miserably, unlike Honest John and Gideon in the 1940 version. Some of the characters in this 1996 version may get a little annoying at times, including the title one, and I think this is when they're trying to be funny. The poor humour isn't the only problem here. "The Adventures of Pinocchio" seems rushed, going too fast and seeming to just throw in characters without taking enough time to introduce them, making them seem very insignificant. Geppetto certainly doesn't seem very surprised when he sees Pinocchio alive for the first time. The lack of focus even makes the story seem almost meaningless, even though it does include the morals of the story, but in a very ineffective manner! The film fails both at trying to be funny AND trying to be touching, except maybe near the end. I also didn't care for the design of the wooden Pinocchio's face and his facial expressions.I have never read the 19th century book, "The Adventures of Pinocchio", by Carlo Collodi, but have been familiar with the animated 1940 Disney flick from a very early age, so it's obviously hard for me not to compare these two films. I can't forget the times I saw the 1940 version as a kid, and I still thought that film was great when I watched it again a couple times in 2007, my first viewings of the classic piece of Disney animation since my childhood in the 90's. It has excitement, poignancy, and some good humour, and all this is more than I can say about the 1996 version. This movie does have some nice visuals, but that's the only positive thing I can think of to say about it, and that's certainly not enough to make it worthwhile. Some movies can improve with a second viewing, but I can't imagine how I could ever warm up to this mess of a live action adaptation of Collodi's story, so I don't intend to watch it again. If the screenplay had been better written, it could have made a really good family movie, but due to its poor quality and lack of focus, the film's results were disappointing.

Arlis Fuson So a man loves a woman and she loves the mans brother, he is hurt by this but will forever love her and even carved their initials in a tree. Many years later this hopeless romantic has grown old and now carves dummy puppets out of trees to keep him company. He carves a boy out of this log which bared his initialed heart and has no idea the tree was magical. The dummy he carves comes to life and starts causing innocent trouble all over town. The old man loves the boy, but he cant control it. There is a man in town who does puppet shows and wants this amazing puppet for his act and blackmails the old man to get it. The puppet runs away and soon finds the evil theater man is turning young boys into donkeys, and he almost gets turned himself in his quest to become a real boy. He has a cricket companion named Pepe and Pepe tries to teach the boy what real love is and convinces him that his creator is the one person who loves him, real or not. He goes off to find the old man and even more adventures occur as they are swallowed into the belly of a whale. Soon Pinnochios flaws help them escape and a lesson is learned and eventually the love between these two make Pinocchip a real boy.I have actually never seen any version of this film before to my knowledge. It is possible that I have watched the cartoon, but forgotten. This movie was way too cheesy for me. I hated the cheesy music, I thought the villain was not mean enough. I didn't like the C.G.I. cricket and thought that was a bit too much. The effects looked bad and I just wasn't impressed. I like Martin Landou and he's about all I tolerated. I don't like Jonathan Taylor Thomas and hate Rob Schneider so casting was bad.Maybe kids would like it, but I just thought it was boring, not colorful or exciting and way too sappy and slow. 2/10 stars

soranno The world famous fairy tale, "Pinocchio" is a story that is better suited for animation formats when it comes to film adaptations. This 1996 New Line Cinema version makes its first mistake by casting "Home Improvement" costar Jonathan Taylor Thomas in the title role and it makes more mistakes by not entirely sticking to the true storyline much of the time. However, Martin Landau makes a believable Gepetto and his performance prevents this film from being a complete waste of time.