This movie was a very good adaptation of the book, and this coming from someone who is very critical. I have, like most, read the book many times, which I think makes it harder to like any film adaptation. However, the movie follows the book very well, omitting small things that really didn't have a lot to do with the plot-line. I would say the movie had a little more of a religious slant than the book did. The acting was nice. I would say the major criticism would be they didn't really get into the dog's personalities much. The book did a great job of showing Dan as a clutz with a big heart and Ann as the smart one. However, I would recommend this and it was a million times better than the original movie adaptation.
19 Reviews
stick to the book!
donaldricco27 August 2017
Well, in all truth, I rented this because of Dave Matthews, because I love his music. I didn't know what to expect. And while he was OK, and this is a star filled cast, I did not like the movie. Very cheesy, very boring. And everyone looked way too clean for an old Oklahoma farm family setting. Definitely not my cup of tea.
Review on the movie
trevorrathburn17 May 2019
The movie is about a young boy named billy and his 2 hunting dogs. The boy loses bets and saves a life his friends bet him and he lost. He enters competitions to earn money for his family to move. He loves his dogs then one day that all changed the movie makes people cry. Billys grandfather runs a store and makes billy do a bet they called his grandfather pops or gramps. His store sells everything. Billy got into a fight with the whole towns boys. Billy works his butt off to buy his 2 dogs little anne and dane. The movie is a very said movie but i would highly recommend the movie
If it ain't broke...
english6623 April 2005
The problem with this movie is the pacing. I was, perhaps foolishly, anticipating something grand when I rented the DVD, since I love the book and quite liked the original 1974 film. I had been told that the 2003 remake was accurate to Wilson Rawls' novel. Strictly speaking, this is true, but therein lies it's downfall.
Movies adapted from books often have to have sections removed or characters cut because, unlike films, no book is designed to be enjoyed in a single sitting. In this movie the acting is beyond hurried as people race through their lines, desperate to include every utterance of the novel in less than two hours. The results are dismal. The only time I've seen worse butchery of a good novel was the atrocious movie version of "The Hotel New Hampshire" by John Irving.
If you love the book, read the book; or maybe get nostalgic and rent the original. Don't rent this version unless you just need something, anything, to sit some kids in front of for an afternoon while you balance your checkbook.
Movies adapted from books often have to have sections removed or characters cut because, unlike films, no book is designed to be enjoyed in a single sitting. In this movie the acting is beyond hurried as people race through their lines, desperate to include every utterance of the novel in less than two hours. The results are dismal. The only time I've seen worse butchery of a good novel was the atrocious movie version of "The Hotel New Hampshire" by John Irving.
If you love the book, read the book; or maybe get nostalgic and rent the original. Don't rent this version unless you just need something, anything, to sit some kids in front of for an afternoon while you balance your checkbook.
Two thumbs down!
terrillwhite-127 December 2004
To start, I am a huge Red Fern fan. I have the first one on DVD and video and also have read the book several times. I am from Tahlequah, OK where the movies were filmed and so it does strike a home chord for me. I finally purchased the remake today and I must say that I am so disappointed. Usually remakes kind of mix things up a little bit to make it a little more interesting than the first . . . this is exactly like the first, almost word for word and the acting leaves you wondering where they come up with these people at. Dave Matthews should stick with his singing gig and the boy that played Billy Coleman was awful. Also the movie was very unrealistic. I have been coon hunting several times and you let the dogs do the hunting and just wait until they bark treed. This poor kid is running all over the woods right behind the coon. UNREALISTIC. Also, I love how it is pouring down rain and they are fogging up dust. Poor special effects! Dust doesn't fog up in the rain! This movie was a good waste of $21 and also a good waste of Tahlequah's money since most of the bills were left unpaid here by the production crew! BAD MOVIE!
i love this movie
j-pompa111 April 2012
Where the Red Fern grows is a heart warming movie, this movie reminds me of my childhood. I miss the days when i ran wild and free and kept in touch with nature, i didn't need a cell phone, TV or internet to be entertained. Billy had a innocent up bringing he is persistent and a hard worker. The Coleman family were respectful and had good morals. Billy got a pair of dogs which he loved and also teaching him responsibility, he spent most of his time with his dogs hunting racoon's, keeping him busy and out of trouble. This movie taught me material things don't always make u happy and also to be grateful for my family and for the things I have
The same as the first.
dudemark21 April 2012
After watching this movie I only have one question: why did they make it again?...
Seriously, this movie is identical to the 1974 version, and its not as if its challenging movie as far as effects go so there wasn't even the excuse of remaking because the technology had improved.
Also The actor who played the main character was just awful, and Dave Mathews.... What was he doing in this movie?
Definitely left me shaking my head. It amazes me that films that are this useless can still get the green light. I think of how many people had to read this script before it was filmed and say "yeah that sounds like a great movie, we have a lot to add on the 1974 version" its almost comical... I give it 1 out of 10.
Seriously, this movie is identical to the 1974 version, and its not as if its challenging movie as far as effects go so there wasn't even the excuse of remaking because the technology had improved.
Also The actor who played the main character was just awful, and Dave Mathews.... What was he doing in this movie?
Definitely left me shaking my head. It amazes me that films that are this useless can still get the green light. I think of how many people had to read this script before it was filmed and say "yeah that sounds like a great movie, we have a lot to add on the 1974 version" its almost comical... I give it 1 out of 10.
I saw the film May 3, 2003 at it's World Premiere/Tribeca Film Festival, New York
mooneyhanfilms7 May 2003
I had the privilege of being at the World Premiere of "Where The Red Fern Grows" May 3, 2003 at the Tribeca Film Festival in New York. I have worked for three years to help bring the film out of the financial problems that has kept it from being finished and released. There were many others who dedicated so much of their time doing the same thing, one of which was not fortunate enough to make the credits, Julie Davis. We owe her great gratitude. There were so many who did all they could to see the film come to fruition. All believed in this film and the final product speaks for itself.
Joseph Ashton, who played the lead role Billy Coleman, did a fantastic job. I spoke with him at the premiere and, not only is he a great actor, but he is an extremely nice young man. Joseph definitely has a great future in the film business. Also the rest of the cast gave great performances. Dave Mathews was perfect in his role and showed that he too has a great future as an actor in the film biz if he so desires. A damned good job for the first time out.
Lyman Dayton, who was the producer on the 1974 version of "The Red Fern" was the beginning director/producer/screenplay writer of the new version. He was with it when it fell into financial troubles and tried constantly to save the film. I presented the film to a fine producer/businessman Bob Yari, and after a couple of years of various negotiations, he brought in Crusader Entertainment(who had tried to make a deal before) and the film was brought out of financial problems and made ready to finish. Sam Pillsbury, a well respected director, was brought in to finish "The Red Fern". Sam did a fantastic job finishing the film and taking it to the silver screen. The extraordinary contribution of these two great directors, that led to the finished product, can be seen and felt throughout the film.
At the premiere, everyone was struck by the emotions, humor, suspense, and the heart felt feelings experienced from this film. And at the end I will guarantee you that there was not a dry eye in the audience. Yes, "Where The Red Fern Grows" will finally be on the big screen, and is destined to be a Classic Family Film for many years to come. I am extremely proud to have the credit as one of the executive producers.
Wayne Mooneyhan Executive Producer
Joseph Ashton, who played the lead role Billy Coleman, did a fantastic job. I spoke with him at the premiere and, not only is he a great actor, but he is an extremely nice young man. Joseph definitely has a great future in the film business. Also the rest of the cast gave great performances. Dave Mathews was perfect in his role and showed that he too has a great future as an actor in the film biz if he so desires. A damned good job for the first time out.
Lyman Dayton, who was the producer on the 1974 version of "The Red Fern" was the beginning director/producer/screenplay writer of the new version. He was with it when it fell into financial troubles and tried constantly to save the film. I presented the film to a fine producer/businessman Bob Yari, and after a couple of years of various negotiations, he brought in Crusader Entertainment(who had tried to make a deal before) and the film was brought out of financial problems and made ready to finish. Sam Pillsbury, a well respected director, was brought in to finish "The Red Fern". Sam did a fantastic job finishing the film and taking it to the silver screen. The extraordinary contribution of these two great directors, that led to the finished product, can be seen and felt throughout the film.
At the premiere, everyone was struck by the emotions, humor, suspense, and the heart felt feelings experienced from this film. And at the end I will guarantee you that there was not a dry eye in the audience. Yes, "Where The Red Fern Grows" will finally be on the big screen, and is destined to be a Classic Family Film for many years to come. I am extremely proud to have the credit as one of the executive producers.
Wayne Mooneyhan Executive Producer
Heartwarming? Uh, Perhaps if You're A Hillbilly...
SusieSalmonLikeTheFish1 September 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Years ago I read the novel of this film in school and hated it beyond belief, almost as much as I hate the Hunger Games series. The plot follows a redneck boy with his equally hick family and the boy acquires two dogs, Old Dan and Little Anne, hunting dogs, no less. Still think it is heartwarming? Well, at the end of the movie...
SPOILER ALERT!!! The two dogs die in a pretty nasty way. The novel is indeed more graphic but the film is still pretty bad. The soundtrack is horrible, the acting is bad and the plot is pathetic. I'm not some animal rights activist and there is no animal cruelty in the film save for hunting, but the death of the two dogs was disgusting and could be very frightening to many children, I imagine.
SPOILER ALERT!!! The two dogs die in a pretty nasty way. The novel is indeed more graphic but the film is still pretty bad. The soundtrack is horrible, the acting is bad and the plot is pathetic. I'm not some animal rights activist and there is no animal cruelty in the film save for hunting, but the death of the two dogs was disgusting and could be very frightening to many children, I imagine.
GREAT MOVIE!!!!!
jeff-71316 November 2004
Warning: Spoilers
This is my favorite movie. It is well done and especially well put together. Since I have a dog, I can personally empathize with dogs dying. The part with Beatty and Mathews in it was great!! Dave Mathews should make more movies - He's very underrated (as an actor)! There were three or four parts to this movie that I thought were as good if not better than any movie I have ever seen. They should make a novelization of this movie - it has all of the elements of a good book for children of all ages. This movie blew my pants off. One of my friends started watching this movie with a hat on and ended the movie without a hat on!
The best part of this movie though was the ending. When the movie ended, I cried.
4 out of 5 stars
The best part of this movie though was the ending. When the movie ended, I cried.
4 out of 5 stars
Good acting, terrible everything else
tavverin19 November 2023
Warning: Spoilers
This was terrible. I'd heard it was good and faithful to the book. The dogs had no personality and barely looked or acted different from each other and the really hard hitting scenes that made the book special, were completely gutted. The deadly blizzard from the trophy tournament was made into a brief thunderstorm. Also instead of Billy legitimately winning the tournament they gave it to him as a pity win. WHY? It would have been just as easy to do it the right way.
The acting was quite good in my opinion, but why even make a movie like this when it's so terribly dumbed down.
I don't understand the good reviews for this movie at all.
The acting was quite good in my opinion, but why even make a movie like this when it's so terribly dumbed down.
I don't understand the good reviews for this movie at all.
Wonderful adaption of Wilson Rawls book.
marcchoover-5697731 January 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Normally when i see a movie after I've read the book, i'm usually disappointed because my imagination is usually bigger than what they can put on the screen with time limitations and budgets - but not this movie. The minute i started watching this movie i was hooked. I haven't read the book in years, but I've read the book at least two or three times, and this movie brought back some great memories, and certain parts of the movie was almost exactly like i imagined (especially the coon contest).
Set in the Ozarks in the 1930's, this movie shows what kids did before computers, cell phones and video games. It also shows that life is very fragile, with Rubin Pritchard dying by simply trying to break up a dog fight and falling on his hatchet. But overall this is a feel good movie for the whole family, even though both dogs die in the end - it ends nicely with a nice montage of Billy Coleman and his dogs, and knowing that Dan and Lil' Ann will live for eternity through the book, this movie and where the red fern grows.
Set in the Ozarks in the 1930's, this movie shows what kids did before computers, cell phones and video games. It also shows that life is very fragile, with Rubin Pritchard dying by simply trying to break up a dog fight and falling on his hatchet. But overall this is a feel good movie for the whole family, even though both dogs die in the end - it ends nicely with a nice montage of Billy Coleman and his dogs, and knowing that Dan and Lil' Ann will live for eternity through the book, this movie and where the red fern grows.
Garbage. Stick to the Original.
magoomj28 May 2023
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is TERRIBLE. I love the book, and the 1974 film adaptation did well for its time. This remake is completely pointless! The pacing is bad, the dialogue is rushed, and Dave Matthews' acting is even worse than his music, which I would not have thought possible. This has none of the heart and emotion of the book or the first movie. Small changes from the book and the first movie make no sense. The coon hunts supposedly happen at night, but it's bright as midday. During the storm it's supposedly raining very hard, yet there is a ton of dust kicked up. The modern music in the soundtrack is very jarring and doesn't fit the scenes or the time period. The dogs are great, but even they couldn't save this train wreck. All in all it hits like a poorly-made-for-tv movie. Complete waste of time.
this movie got to me
yoda_kota12 March 2006
Warning: Spoilers
this is a great movie but when old Dan died and then little Anne died why did they move they should have stayed in the Ozark mountains where the dogs were. When they died i cried and cried. If you are reading this and have not seen the movie yet i have something to tell you. Get a box of Kleenex's right beside you and believe me it is a really sad movie. I have watched this movie a lot of times and every time i still cry i even cry when i think about it because i have three dogs my self and one of them is a hound. When he grew up he should have gone back to the Ozark mountains to see there grave. This movie really is a heart warming movie so make sure you have that box of Kleenex's by you because you will need them.
NOTE:Listen to every word they say and make sure you look at how cute Little Anne and Big Dan.
NOTE:Listen to every word they say and make sure you look at how cute Little Anne and Big Dan.
Really enjoyed it.
graeshadowe-24-6766032 March 2019
Its not better. It's not worse; it's just different enough to make it as enjoyable and powerful as the original.
Dave Matthews impresses with his believable portrayal; as does the rest of the cast.
Dabney Coleman, who's characters are usually sleazy, did excellent and likable work.
More "historically " accurate than the original movie, it seems. From the costumes to sets, to the acting.
Only reason i gave it an 8 is so many tiny details overlooked that could have been included with little trouble.
Amazing
cvfontan10 March 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I read the book when I was in the fifth grade and I am in my third year of college now. I remember the book as if I just read it yesterday because I loved it so much, I am a huge fan of dogs. Now, I just finally found the movie and just finished watching it just five minutes ago. I am currently crying my eyes out because I too lost my dogs and it just breaks my heart to see two beautiful Red Coon Dogs go when their owner loved them so much. Just as much as I loved my dog, Princess..
Great movie, very accurate to the book. Not line by line, but the story all together, the details... Dave Matthews is the father, I knew I recognized him from somewhere...
But it's amazing, to all those who disagree, I will never understand you.
Great movie, very accurate to the book. Not line by line, but the story all together, the details... Dave Matthews is the father, I knew I recognized him from somewhere...
But it's amazing, to all those who disagree, I will never understand you.
3 Positives and 1 Negative, With Summary/Opinion
sopy-7229220 May 2019
Warning: Spoilers
The Director of this film is Sam Pillsbury
The release data was May 3, 2003
Two of the main actors were Joseph Ashton and Dave Matthews.
Positives-
1.In the movie it shows how a boy will do anything to get his own dogs and will be willing to help his family out.
2. This movie is a great movie, mainly because it made during the great depression and it shows how families lived in that horrible time.
3.The last positive is how the boy has to witness death in his life and how its always going to be apart of life.
Negative-
1.In this movie compared to the older one it feel like it was better and less anti-climatic than the new one.
Summary-At the beginning the young boy wanted to get hunting dogs. So the boy works and works, maybe for months. He get 25$ saved up to get 2 dogs. He then trains them and gets them hunting ready. The boy hunted raccoons and has gotten good at it. The boy wanted to enter a hunting contest. So he did the dogs were in tiptop shape, so they went to the contest. The dogs got 3 raccoons in a tree, but his grandpa had fallen down the hill and the dogs could only get his sent. They only got 1 raccoon that night. They lost the contest but the man who won it gave them the win because the would have won if the grandpa wouldn't have fallen. So they won the cash prize and the cup. They go home and about 2 weeks later they are hunting and see a bobcat. The dog Dan gets killed by the bobcat and gotten buried on a hill. The other dog Ann was heart broken and passed away next to Dan's grave.The boy was heart broken by his dogs dying. But he was happy because he saw the red fern growing between them.
They should be making more films like these perfect for the whole family to watch. Great movie!
karakas-9180923 June 2016
They should be making more films like these perfect for the whole family to watch. Great movie!, was watching it with my nephews and nieces and they all loved it. Im still trying to find some more films like these.They should be making more films like these perfect for the whole family to watch. Great movie!, was watching it with my nephews and nieces and they all loved it. Im still trying to find some more films like these.They should be making more films like these perfect for the whole family to watch. Great movie!, was watching it with my nephews and nieces and they all loved it. Im still trying to find some more films like these.They should be making more films like these perfect for the whole family to watch. Great movie!, was watching it with my nephews and nieces and they all loved it. Im still trying to find some more films like these.
This movie is exactly what it needs to be
joshuabowersco26 April 2023
I first watched this movie when I was a child probably around 2004 or 2005 whenever it was on DVD. It inspired me, enthralled me, and broke my heart. The first movie I ever cried watching and rewatching it today it still makes me cry.
The movie doesn't dilly-dally too much with a brief 85 minute runtime. But it certainly takes you through a whole world of emotions, a wonderful journey of boyhood and expression of love and family. I'm not religious, never have been, but even the religious themes present are wholesome and certainly not jarring.
I have never read the book or seen the 1974 movie so I have no biases going into this other than nostalgia. But trust me when I say this is required viewing for families of animal lovers as it tackles some heavy subjects in a way that will stick with kids, and can even help adults as well.
The movie doesn't dilly-dally too much with a brief 85 minute runtime. But it certainly takes you through a whole world of emotions, a wonderful journey of boyhood and expression of love and family. I'm not religious, never have been, but even the religious themes present are wholesome and certainly not jarring.
I have never read the book or seen the 1974 movie so I have no biases going into this other than nostalgia. But trust me when I say this is required viewing for families of animal lovers as it tackles some heavy subjects in a way that will stick with kids, and can even help adults as well.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
