Touches You

Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Not for kids... Some point this is very sad. And horrifying.

The Good:This movie is gorgeous. As I was watching it with my younger brother (James) and my mom, Mom would comment how you could tell that they sometimes used actual footage and put animation over it. It's so good she was convinced that some of it was real. While I must give the character models award to Zootopia, that movie is edged by the landscapes and nature that play such an integral role in this film.The story-telling is at its best when it relies on the visuals. The middle of the movie basically serves as a quest to return home while Arlo and the boy Spot bond as they meet new dinosaurs. With this bare plot-line, usually something like dialogue or actions is used to make up for it. And this movie takes a WALL-E approach to dialogue and storytelling for the most part, and scenes such as at night in the riverbed when they talk about their families with the sticks and hardly a word spoken, that is the type of moment that engages the audience and proves that Pixar knows how to please people of all ages.It is during these scenes that the hilarious triceratops and cowboy-like t-rexes are met and enjoyed. They add the differing animal backgrounds well enough like Finding Nemo to keep the ball rolling through the minimal plot. Plus, Steve Zahn (Thunderclap) is always a welcome addition.The boy and dog dynamic is a really neat idea introduced after the 30-minute mark, and it not only plays off well, but it also makes sense. What this does is add more progression to the character development, which is one the movie's main focuses.The Bad:Sadly, the story-telling doesn't work very well when it isn't relying on the visuals. The first 20-30 minutes of the film are disappointingly conventional, and add nothing new to the mix (except for eye-popping visuals). Furthermore, there is a much larger sense of predictability that doesn't matter as far as kids are concerned, but older members of the human species will know exactly what to expect.The main character Arlo is honestly a little too annoying. Of course over the span of the movie he is supposed to grow up and overcome his fears, but the transition happens quickly (the movie is just over 1 ½ hours) and without much effectiveness.A third act I would kind of compare to Ice Age has a weird sense of wanting to be emotional and dramatic and powerful, but I think even the filmmakers knew it wouldn't have the lasting impression that their other films achieved. And this goes back to both the predictability and the lack of a consistent base throughout the film.The Ugly:This movie suffered through production Hell. The story wasn't quite right, the release date kept being pushed back, and people were fired and had to be recast. Luckily, it isn't some Batman & Robin disaster of a film-- but it still does suffer.Even with an improved story, it is still one of the weakest in that area as far as Pixar movies are concerned. On the bright side of that, however, that's not the focus of the film. And what it does focus on, the two main characters, it doesn't succeed to the level we expect, and also what it simply needs to be. Basically, it falls flat in most areas. But what is not ugly is the visuals. And this goes beyond just what you see on the screen. This takes into account the genuine moments of the film that don't require clunky dialogue to get the point across. It's just a disappointment that there aren't enough of these moments in the film.You can find this review and dozens of others at gillipediamoviereviews.blogspot.com

The person who made this was on a bad acid trip. That's the only excuse I can think of for this thing with horrible story elements! What the producers were thinking when they read the script makes me think the whole crew was stoned. Maybe it was a bet, "I'll make the stupidest movie, sell it under Disney's Pixar, and people will love it!" The premise ... a mentally evolved dinosaur at the dawn of mankind. Man, though he wears clothes and has the hands and dexterity to use tools ... is a dog. Literally. The dinosaur, who can only use his mouth to manipulate tools and items, somehow has ropes and creates baskets, thatched roofs, etc.... somehow creates a farm dwelling in the middle of nowhere, with no other dinosaurs around, in the mountains ... growing corn. Yes. Corn. The cowardly dinosaur falls into the river and gets swept SOOOOO far away that he takes days to get home. But when he falls down a huge swollen waterfall, he just ambles out just a tiny bit winded. I think of all the Disney productions I have ever watched, this is the worst. I would have given it ONE star, except the CGI was really good. Especially with the vistas. The character design ... well, certainly not Pixar's best, that's for certain. So, I gave it 3 stars because kids will enjoy it and visually adults will be good with it ... though I expect most to be as disgusted with the story elements as I was. IF you are going to watch it, I hope you find it for free as I expect you'll be severely disappointed if you pay to watch it.

'THE GOOD DINOSAUR' was directed by Peter SOHN and stars Raymond OCHOA, Jack BRIGHT and Steve ZAHN. ​Luckily for young Arlo, his parents (Jeffrey Wright, Frances McDormand) and his two siblings, the mighty dinosaurs were not wiped out 65 million years ago. When a rainstorm washes poor Arlo (Raymond Ochoa) downriver, he ends up bruised, battered and miles away from home. Good fortune shines on the frightened dino when he meets Spot (Jack Bright), a Neanderthal boy who offers his help and friendship. Together, the unlikely duo embark on an epic adventure to reunite Arlo with his beloved family.When I say this movie is a technical marvel, I genuinely mean that. I recommend the movie purely to witness the masterwork that is the animation and cinematography because that is where this movie thrives.Pixar is known for two things: stunning animation and brilliant story. As stated prior, it achieves the first part 10 fold, it is in the latter where this falters. Pixar plots have mostly been very well written and contain a great moral. Toy Story, Up, Finding Nemo, Inside Out etc - all these movies have fantastic plots and morals and all of them are at least good movies. Plot is where this movie fails.Expanding on that point is the lack of a strong moral in this movie. Ratatouille teaches that every dream is possible and Inside Out teaches that sadness is a valid emotion. The Good Dinosaur dabbles in the admirable concept that fear is a valid thing. And that is something I would definitely be behind. Alas, they abandon this moral swiftly after it is established and that seems counter productive to me. I am very disappointed by Pixar here. It may be my fault for having high standards but I don't think that that is down to me, and more down to Pixar's previously consistent quality.Raymond Ochoa was perfectly passable as Arlo but passable is where it ends. He doesn't shine and he is pretty much the only real character in the film. Combine that with a poorly written character and you have a lack of sympathy from me. Jack Bright's performance is impossible to give a proper critique on due to its nature thus I wont comment on it much. I can, however, comment on the character he portrayed. Spot was a very entertaining character and can probably create a few laughs but he lacks a driving force to make him compelling. Granted, a lack of the ability to speak can stump a character's growth but I still didn't feel a connection to him at any point and that is definitely an issue for the film; I did not care.I should do a full segment on the villain but Steve Zahn's 'Thunderclap' was so weak and disappointing that I just had to google the character's name. My time is best spent on other aspects of the film so all I will say is the villain is awful.Side characters, such as Sam Elliot's Butch or Jefferey Wright's Poppa, were fine and interesting enough but they merely served as plot points and thus had negative time to blossom.I want to praise this movie because it definitely excels in some aspects. It is a masterpiece of technical film making. If you want evidence of it, just google 'The Good Dinosaur Water' and find a YouTube video of it. It is beautiful and magnificent to behold. I am happy I saw it just because of how spectacular the animation is for this movie and I recommend it entirely for that. Combine this amazing animation with jaw dropping cinematography and you have a technical masterpiece.This movie is pretty funny and I laughed at a few jokes. I will at least give it that. But a good animated film will include both good humour and good heart. This movie lacks true heart and emotion. They try REALLY hard to squeeze emotion out of me, and I have previously been happy for Pixar to milk money out of my eyes but this time it didn't work. The blatant and non-ironic use of Disney clichés make this movie just seem like it is trying to evoke emotion and that just doesn't work. Disconnection to the characters means I don't care about their fate and that means I can't enjoy a film. A conclusion is just as important as the journey, but if the journey is weak; the conclusion is meaningless.I do recommend this movie. As much as I critiscise it, it is one of those rare movies I can recommend purely for one aspect of it. I'll rate the movie 5 'DEBBIEs' out of 10 and a fair recommendation. Just don't expect Pixar to be at the height of its' power.