Disclaimer: This site does not store any files on its server.

Watch Phoenix Wilder and the Great Elephant Adventure

Phoenix Wilder and the Great Elephant Adventure is a movie starring Elizabeth Hurley, Sam Ashe Arnold, and Tertius Meintjes. A lost orphan boy and a giant elephant team up to take down an elephant poaching syndicate.

Genres
Adventure
Director
Richard Boddington
Starring
Tertius Meintjes, Elizabeth Hurley, Sam Ashe Arnold, Hlomla Dandala

All Systems Operational

Product details

Genres Adventure
Director Richard Boddington
Writer Richard Boddington
Stars Tertius Meintjes, Elizabeth Hurley, Sam Ashe Arnold, Hlomla Dandala
Country Canada, South Africa
Also Known As Il ragazzo e il grande elefante, Against the Wild: The Great Elephant Adventure, L'aventure d'un éléphant, An Elephant's Journey, Phoenix Wilder: And the Great Elephant Adventure
Runtime 1 h 27 min
Audio Português  English  Deutsch  Italiano  Español  Français  Gaeilge  Svenska  Nederlands
Subtitles Português  日本語  Čeština  Australia  한국어  Filipino  Tiếng Việt  हिन्दी 
Quality 480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Description A lost orphan boy and a giant elephant team up to take down an elephant poaching syndicate.

Top reviews

Sunday, 13 Sep 2020 14:19

The Houghton Library in Vancouver, Washington, is hosting a two-day-long documentary festival, "Federation: The Story of the Elephant," a kind of alternate reality that audiences can experience, a spiritualized version of modern-day Thailand's Siam and the forests of Myanmar, both known for their elephants. The festival director, Phil Plait, describes this alternate reality as "like an African version of Avatar or (if you will) with black people as the Avatar." So you might think that this film is supposed to be a legitimate documentary, but it's more of a diatribe against the cruel Chinese ivory trade and Buddhism's role in the world's destruction of wildlife. Among other things, the film features interview with David Wenham, the author of the film's title, who argues that Buddhism is essentially the old answer to the problem. It's not only that he's running away from the realities of life, it's that he's doing so in the name of a "more pure" way of life. There is plenty of fuel for this criticism in the film. A Chinese elephant is seen stomping over a Chinese farmer's chest, and one of the (analyst) characters says that the elephant is "the eye of a blind man." Another character, in the movie's climax, says, "God is good and evil is good." This is an interesting video presentation of Buddhist beliefs, but it only makes one point. And it's just a point. I can't remember what it is. But whatever it is, it's pretty clear that most of the action takes place in the forest. There's some wildlife footage (including one scene of a brown bear), some Buddhist prayers, and a bit of drama involving the poor Chinese man's wife and children. But most of the focus is on Buddhism. There are plenty of devotees in this film, many of whom take vows of poverty, seclusion, and obedience, and to whom the Dalai Lama has just been introduced. As with the Indian films "Journey to the West" and "Journey to the West II," there's a party atmosphere in this film, and when the monks claim that the forest is "a spiritual realm," I was reminded of "The Matrix" movies. But you'll probably be happier to know that that's all going to be right. The film has some interesting twists. When a monk goes to the office of the chief inspector, he slips his shoes off and says he has been mugged. The inspector, the only man in the office, takes the pair of shoes, throws them out the window, and asks the monks to arrest the monk. In response, they strap the pair of shoes to his feet and try to drag him outside. They succeed. "This is the body of the monk!" they exclaim. The inspector, a man named Wong, who is in charge of enforcing Buddhist teachings, is forced to reconcile with one of the monks. A short time later, the latter is kidnapped, and before he can explain, he is shot. Wong is also tied to a pipe and shot. At this point, there is a power struggle between two of the monks, and Wong kills one. Wong and one of the monks work together to save the other's life, but things go wrong. Wong gets himself killed by one of the monks and his co-workers, and the other dies in the process. The whole film is a very bad joke. You see at least some of the big beasts of the forest during some of the action, but mostly it's the monks who are shown. They're nothing more than props. I've never been a big believer in Buddhism, but the story on this film is very appealing. It's also interesting that there are so many Buddhists who join the film festival. How they found out I'll never know. That's good news for those of us who find Buddhism attractive.
Saturday, 29 Aug 2020 13:01

I really enjoyed this movie,and had just watched it on DVD when I saw some people who said they found the book to be better than the movie. I think it was mainly due to differences in the main characters personalities. Reggie Bannister was much more intense in the book, but was much more emotion driven. Hugh Grant was much more witty in the movie, which is a bit much. Peter Sallis, who I love, was a bit too hokey for me, and didn't fit very well in the movie. Anthony Zerbe was a bit more reserved and thoughtful. He could be a bit more serious in the movie, and I think it would have worked a lot better. I also found the fact that the elephant was free to roam, to be a bit boring, in the movie, however in the book he was the one who wandered off and got lost. I found it kind of stupid, and the way they were talking about how the elephant was free to roam really irritated me. I also found it annoying, because, as in the movie, when the elephant was on his own he would get very territorial and be very much too aggressive. In the book the elephant kept a level tone, and was more a gentle giant. He was only aggressive when his people were attacked. The movie had a few different endings, and I really didn't like how Reggie Bannister was killed, and wasn't in the movie at all. I also thought the movie was a bit too long. I found myself bored for the whole movie, and didn't really care about anything. Some of the parts were cut out and most of the action took place in a flashback, but, in the book, they would have already known that Reggie Bannister died, and would have been fine with that. The movie also needed to have a bit more action, and was a bit slow. I think the movie could have used a bit more tension and action. The movie is also a bit confusing. I think I would have liked it a bit more if they had made the Elephant loose a couple of elephants at the end, which would have made the whole story a lot more complex. I also think the movie could have been a bit more black and white. I really liked the elephant, however in the book he was black and white, and this is why the elephant died. There was no doubt in the story. It would have been more interesting to have the elephant be one color. They could have had him be white or black. The movie could have had a bit more humor. Reggie Bannister had a funny tone in the book, but the movie didn't have the funny tone the movie was going for. It was mainly tongue in cheek. They had to pay homage to the book a bit, and there was a bit of references to the book in the movie. But I found the movie a bit more enjoyable, and thought it was a better movie, than the book. It was entertaining. It was a bit more entertaining than the book. It is a bit more clear and more complex than the book, and the movie had less action, less humor, and more action and suspense. I also found the movie to be a little too long and overlong. I think it was too long. There was too much action and too much suspense and it had a bit too much action. I also think that the movie was way too long. I think it could have been much shorter. It would have been more fun to watch the movie shorter. I have to say that the movie was a lot better than the book. It was more enjoyable and more entertaining. It is just a shame that the book is now considered the better book. I think the movie will always be better than the book, because it was more entertaining and more entertaining than the book.
Thursday, 11 Jun 2020 02:46

How could anyone forget Jimmy Stewart in 'The Country Squire' or any other charming British character actor. So in this new version of The Great Elephant Adventure, the Essex horse's owner, the Spanish painter and his wife, and a band of Indian warriors are transported to an Indian burial ground where they must battle an army of elephants to save their homeland. 'The Elephant Man' seems to be the latest in a long line of such British or foreign versions of any story. Although it's never really been forgotten, the story has been improved and adapted for modern times. Although still very accurate, some people may find the subject matter a little grating to have to listen to. The special effects were excellent for the most part, as the digital effects have yet to be done quite as good as they could be. And one of the most exciting parts of the movie is the chance to see the beautiful African landscape. Much of the music is composed by Michael Caine, who is one of my favourite actors. And he has a great vocal range. And then there is Paul Bettany as the central character. He is simply the most charismatic character actor in Hollywood. The costumes are wonderful and the shots are perfect. I'm a little bit concerned about the numbers of elephants in the film, but I suppose it's not too surprising because the story has to take place on a big scale. I liked the fact that the story is being improved because it involves a number of other historical events and it is important to keep the story and the characters real. But the special effects and the musical numbers may just be too much. Even though I enjoy the films they are based on, I have not been too impressed with movies based on books such as 'The Lord of the Rings' series. Still, 'The Elephant Man' is a good film, well worth watching, and it should have been a classic. But it's a good story, a good movie, and even though I may not have given it much of a 10, I think it deserves a 7 or an 8. If you're in the mood for a good British movie, this is the one to see.
Saturday, 06 Jun 2020 22:08

This has got to be one of the best documentaries I've seen in a long time. The movie is about an elephant who goes through an adventure of self discovery that is very uplifting and very emotional. While watching the movie, I didn't feel the passion or excitement of the adventure as much as I do with a modern day adventure movie like Disney's "Huck Finn", but it still doesn't matter that much as far as I'm concerned. The movie truly uses the main character of this elephant as a main character, and that is what keeps you hooked. Every elephant in the film is portrayed in a different and unique way, and this is what makes it so captivating. I also really loved the way the film shows you the unique way that people in the current society treat elephants. From the way the elephants are treated, the jokes and references that they make, and the way they behave. It really made me think and truly made me feel like I was in the movie. I also loved the fact that it really shows you the situation of elephants in their natural habitat. I also liked how it really showed how much suffering and pain is involved in being in the circus. You know, the wild animals in the circus and how they are treated as objects, rather than being treated as sentient beings. Overall, this is a must watch documentary that I highly recommend. It is really about how people treat animals and it shows the way that society treats elephants in a very nice way, and it definitely makes you feel good. Also, I think that the movie also gives us a nice perspective on animals in general.


Write a review