I enjoyed this as a child - the horses are beautiful, the music is pretty and memorable, and the plot was appealing. However, even back then I could see the flaws. I knew that "Black's" sire, apparently so fast and swift, was a stocky, powerful Friesian. I could see that "Black" changed genders throughout the film, despite the "Taming the Stallions" special feature on the DVD, which is about training the (mostly female) horses. I knew that the acting wasn't great and the plot could be more interesting and unpredictable. As I grew up, these flaws became more and more obvious to me. Yet I still think of it as an enjoyable family film.Some of the flaws do irk me, however. Why do all the black horses in every other film you see have to be Friesians? Sure, they're powerful and majestic, but when the fictional horse is supposed to be faster and finer than all the horses on Earth ... just don't. Even if the film has a streak of fantasy like The Young Black Stallion, it's still distractingly unrealistic. It's like producing a fantasy film and giving a huge elephant tiny wings to fly with and then expecting everyone to take it seriously. Face it - as stunning as it looks, a horse who has the build of a light draught horse is NOT going to breed a champion racer.Next, the whole gender thing. Why name a special feature about training the movie horses "Taming the Stallions", when half the time the Black is acted by a filly or a mare? It sounds impressive, but no horses were tamed and most of the stunt horses were female. This also really peeves me off.The acting could have been better, but since the two main characters were acted by pre-teens(?) it was reasonable.The plot itself was short and basic, but the idea of taming a wild creature and having it listen to no one but you is appealing to most children. However, I think it would be better if the film had focused a little more on the taming and training of the Black. No wild, unbroken young horse is going to be so tractable that quickly. For example, when Neera and the Black are reunited after spending a year apart, the Black rears and runs to greet her and Neera hops on his back and canters him home. If you're a horse person, you're probably snorting with laughter at that. It just wouldn't happen - for one thing, horses don't greet people by rearing. If your horse ever does that to you, especially if he's wild and you haven't seen him for over a year, I would advise you to run. For a second thing, how does that wild colt automatically know the cues for cantering, turning and halting? He stands as blithely as a beach donkey for the girl to get on his back and then behaves like the perfect riding school horse all the way home. Considering that he's supposed to be only two or three years old, that is the equivalent of having a seven-year-old knowing how to solve high school maths without even learning the basics. There's also the race. It's full of mature, well-developed Arabians who have been training for years to stay the distance and have the heart and speed to challenge the leaders at the end. Then that little black colt crashes the party. Beside them, he should look scrawny and goofy and gangly, but naturally the "stallion tamers" replaced him with a more mature horse. Obviously, I have no problem with that - if they had an actual two year old acting as the Black in that gruelling race they would have probably ended up getting a vet. But while it could possibly be faster than the older horses, a two year old wouldn't have the stamina or strength to finish the race, let alone spend the entire time running flat out to catch up with everyone else and then challenge the leaders at the finish. But it's a typical underdog story. Of course it's going to have a happy ending.Lastly, all those fake neighs in horse films really annoy me. Horses don't neigh, snort or grunt constantly, and besides that they all have their own individual voice. Having the Black rear up when he sees a noisy truck and neigh incessantly with different voices is unrealistic. I can understand why the producers would have him voice out his shock - him making goggly eyes and running away in silence would look strange on a film - but it just looked and sounded so fake. I don't have any solutions for it, but I just want to point out that adults watching this film will see how fake these neighs are too. It's distracting. They don't need to neigh so much. But other than that, it really is an enjoyable film. The horses are talented, the soundtrack melts my heart whenever I hear it, and the scenery is stunning. It's quite quick for a film - around an hour if you also watch the prologue, which I think is the best bit despite that unrealistic Friesian - and I think most children would enjoy it. I definitely did.

I understand that this movie is made for kids and as a parent I have sat through many movies that don't particularly hold my interest, but I can appreciate from a constructive point of view in how it is being received by my children. Parents are supposed to be encouraged after all to take part in their children's activities and to monitor the quality of the entertainment that they view so there should be something that appeals to an adult audience on some level even in children's movies. Disney has always understood this which is why it is so hard to fathom how it could allow such a complete piece of drek to bear their name.Technically, the sound editing is horrible and all dialog sounds over-dubbed and unnatural. Personally I hate that, but it was doubly awful considering the dialog itself seemed as though it was written by a 12 year old for a school project. The "acting" reminded me of a school play and none of the child actors had any range of emotion in their voices. Thankfully it was a very short movie.Now, before I come off like a video-geek measuring a kids movie with an adult yard stick, the one thing that can save even the worst children's movie is a positive message. Far be it from me to determine how a message has to be delivered so long as the right one is. Let us take a walk through this film to see what messages are given: If you are lost, don't worry, you will inevitably find your way home.Approach wild animals without any fear.You can win any competition just because you "know" you can.and my favorite, the final message left in the film: It's okay to disobey authority figures and do what you think is right.

I LOVED this movie. I also as some other people thought it was slow-going and it actually bored me at first, but then at the ending really intense. I also thought it was much too short. I said at the end of the movie "It's over?, well that's stupid." They should have made the training part much longer. All they showed was when she was riding him then riding him with a saddle.I also loved the scenery.It was beautiful.I thought there was too many different horses playing the same part. I was reading in a magazine there was like 9 different horses playing it. And not only that you could tell very well that they were different breeds also.But after those mistakes I loved it, it was a touching story.

OK, I have been a huge fan of the Black for a long time and was DISGUSTED after seeing this film. Let's name the problems...First this film has much of the same crew that the first two had. It has also been called the PREQUEL to the original Black Stallion. Why is it that they can't get Shetan's dam's name correct or her color?? In The Black Stallion Returns, we learn the Sagr was the Black's CHESTNUT mother and in this film she is a gray mare name Jenny?!?!?!?!? WTF? And it's set in Africa in 1946 and 1947...I could be wrong but the first one was set in the 1940's as well when the ship wrecks. Time line doesn't sound quite right to me. Also, as a goof, there is a friesian in the beginning of the movie that is supposed to be Shetan's father...upon further notice it appears to be a gelding. Ben Ishaak is the only character that remained to even make this film appear to be related to the previous two in any way. Might be a cute family film to some but it's my biggest movie disappointment of the year.