Arthur did as a boy what only grandpa, a fellow nature buff, did as an adult: pass, as white man, the Bogo tribe's tests of harmony with the natural worlds of trees, minerals and animals. To answer a mysterious call fro help from the Mimimoy people, he enters their world miniaturized. By the time he works out with friends it was a trick, the mastermind has already escaped, ready to strike in our world. Written by
Arthur and the Great Adventure is actually a UK only release, an edit of the second and third films, Arthur and the Revenge of Maltazard and Arthur and The War of The Two Worlds See more »
(at around 51 mins) In the kitchen Archibald tells Armand, that all animals and insects are to be respected around his home. Yet when Arthur and Betameche are escaping the Unicorns under the house, there are rat traps. See more »
The bad omens start even before the beginning of the movie: the original title Arthur et la Vengeance de Maltazard assumes that we know or we are interested in who the mentioned Maltazard is. I guess that he was the villain in the original Arthur et les Minimoys, a movie I did not like and which I immediately erased from my memory. The only thing I remember about that film is my huge disappointment of thinking that that would be "director Luc Besson's last film", who obviously went out of retirement in order to keep torturing to those of us who once enjoyed films like La Femme Nikita and The Professional, which (in my humble opinion) changed the face and the popular perception of French cinema.
Arthur et la Vengeance de Maltazard is a genuinely atrocious and execrable film. The animation is very badly done, and the design of the characters is disgusting and unoriginal. But the biggest problem from this film is the disastrous screenplay, full of dull dialogs, weak action routines and antipathetic comedy. Worse yet, the abrupt ending is to be continued, in order to get solved in the third movie from this franchise. That feels like an authentic slap in the spectator's face, specially after the film makes us to loose a lot of the time with irrelevant scenes. What was the purpose of all that filler? Wouldn't have it been better to cut it in order to tell all the story into one movie? Well, I guess the answer to that questions is simply due to marketing reasons.
In summary, Arthur et la Vengeance de Maltazard is an incredibly vomiting and pathetic movie, which belongs to the collection of indulgent whims created to please the sons of famous directors. Or at least, I think that is the explanation why pieces of crap like Hook (from Steven Spielberg), The Adventures of Sharkbboy and Lavagirl 3- D (from Robert Rodriguez), How the Grinch Stole Christmas (from Ron Howard) and Arthur et la Vengeance de Maltazard were made. Messrs. directors: next time, it would be better if you bought a bike, an iPad, or a private jet to your sons, and avoid us the torture of watching your "family projects" if you do not know how to make them.
7 of 22 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?