The actors and the lines were simply weak and almost empty. The story itself was mostly there. The dinosaur and effects were the most Interesting part. My problem was the kids gets the dinosaur to "safety", leaves and then suddenly it's running through the street being chased by government. It's like the filmmakers as whole just skipped a chunk of the plot line altogether and then all characters are suddenly on a mission together. The story fell off the tracks. Overall it was making sense till that point and then got repetitive and random. I'd say skip this movie as you don't miss anything.

Story is great really enjoyed it but the acting was really poor. Needed more character back ground for all main characters so the audience feels emotional involved. Characters that I believe need the back ground depth are the friendship group and the bond/relationship between the main character and the dinosaur.

This film has so much potential it is a shame it wasn't executed well. Poor edit, band actors and no character depth.

The clever and fitting Title Card is possibly my favourite thing about this movie.

The strength of Matt Drummond's first film, DINOSAUR ISLAND, was originality. It didn't hold back in its vast imagination, allowing a climactic clever plot development, all which flew above seeming unbelievability. It was bold and clear while perhaps being the most mysterious world in a film, dreamlike in fact.

The weakness of MY PET DINOSAUR is plagiarising ET. The film's lowest point, the kid saying, "I'm keeping him," is a lack of that same imagination, and was the original film's high point. ET phoney home. If at least he said, "I'm not keeping him." It's a dinosaur! That could have been dumbly clever and allowed a totally different dynamic, and humour - stolen but paid for - especially if the only lonely dino sadly wanted to keep coming home to his little "mummy" who didn't want him. The dino needed more personality like that. The connection between the excellently animated main character and his only friend seemed missing, causing the kid to painfully force emotion, too many times. Well he tried hard.

The writer/director/producer/cinematographer/art director/visual effecter/lead animator tries hard too, to fill the film in all ways, firstly characters and happenings. Another weakness is that because this film is set in reality, the way the dinosaur is created, and other creatures, though intriguing, makes his last film's reality seem rock solid, and it jars. The best part is the lead character's sudden growth spurts - not the kid the dino - half original because in the film it comes from, 20 MILLION MILES TO EARTH (1957), the monster grew gradually.

The humour at home alone with the new pet is perfect, which is reflected by a later scene in bigger proportions if you make the connection, which I didn't. The UFO part mirrors the less-than-real military presence whose purpose, like creature creation, is never explained. It didn't have to be though, did it. Because it's inevitably ALIEN again, by fault, and again makes no sense. There's barely a carnivore in sight. Instead of that so-overdone-it's-black plot point, surely something thoughtful would have been better, such as scientists wanting to learn what magical power of creation they have unexpectedly unleashed, providing a sense of wonder and breakthrough. Military is totally the wrong department, so again there is a gap. Imagine a film without a bad guy. Unthinkable. His first film.

Another difference of the two films is this has fake American accents, filmed in Australia as some vehicles' steering betrays. It loses honesty points, and charm which it has plenty of. ET go home.