Live action Pete's Dragon.

[Bluegrrl]

I've now seen several of the trailers + Elliott's design. My first response: that's not Elliott. It's just not. Fur? What??

And whatever this movie is claiming to be, it's not Pete's Dragon. Sure, it may be a cool story or whatever, but it's not Pete's dragon. It's maybe something like George's Dragon or how Disney trains a dragon or anything else.

The movie will likely make $$. And I'm not a huge Pete's fan or anything. But this is not Pete's.
Anyone else feeling like this? Like Disney made a whole different story, but kept the title?

 

[The Disney Movie Review]

Interesting take on that. I'm not a huge 'Pete' fan either so I never considered it. If they were going to make the movie, I feel like they had to update the story. Maybe make it grittier. And with the exception of Cinderella, this is what Disney has been doing with their live-action remakes. They take familiar elements we know, change story elements and slap a title on it that we grew up knowing.

I'm trying not to think of these as ruining the originals. Heck, Maleficent ruined one of the greatest Disney villains of all time. I'm trying to think of them as new interpretations of an old story, which is what Disney did anyway. Aladdin, Little Mermaid, Cinderella, etc. - none of them are new stories. They were just reinterpreted for animation. Pete's Dragon is just reinterpreted for a 2016 audience.

 

[Rhie]

I just see them doing what they always do: Re-telling stories, sometimes in such a new way that only the basic archetypes are recognizable.