User reviews

British TV movie and mini series director Philippa Lowthorpe, films an adaptation of Arthur Ransome's popular children's book series 'Swallows and Amazons' set on a fictional lake but inspired on the Lake District and the Norfolk Boards. Admittedly, I haven't read the novels so it's hard for me to comment on the adaptation but it's a cute children's adventure with bravery, drama and some sibling rivalry.

We follow a cast of young unknowns, the Walkers, which are similar to the children from Narnia or the Famous Five; typically British for that era going camping, fishing and sailing that brought me back to my childhood of secret base building and wading in the local stream looking for sticklebacks.

The names we should recognise are Kelly Macdonald and Rafe Spall, with an up and coming Andrew Scott. Kelly playing the encouraging, free-spirited mother and Rafe playing a suspicious and mostly obnoxious character who's obviously got something to hide. But the kids steal the show, and rightly so, it's about them after all and they do a grand job especially the emotional and excitable Roger played by Bobby McCulloch. Have to mention Brit comedian Harry Enfield who plays Mr. Jackson which was a surprise to me but a delight in any case.

The scenery is lush and makes you proud of the British countryside which makes me wonder if people from the rest of the world see all this green and think "wow, that looks so beautiful." There's a great score from Ilan Eshkeri, (Stardust, The Young Victoria) that's enchanting and very fitting for the children's adventure adding dramatic effect and suspense.

It feels longer than the 97min running time and wavered slightly in the what felt like the middle of the story. I can imagine there was a lot of ground to cover and possibly a challenge to fit everything into the film, not that any part felt rush. It's well shot with some great camera work and is some light-hearted entertainment for the whole family, however it isn't a grand spectacle but then again I don't think it tries to be.

Running Time: 6 The Cast: 8 Performance: 7 Direction: 8 Story: 7 Script: 7 Creativity: 6 Soundtrack: 8 Job Description: 7 The Extra Bonus Points: 0

64% 6/10

This is a perfect summer film for the families that produced by the BBC. Based on the children's book of the same name. Frankly, I haven't seen the television nor the film adaptation of this. It looked very fresh to me, so I enjoyed it thoroughly. I'm a big fan of children's films and this one reminded my childhood vacation in the grandparents' rural. Surely everybody, I mean most of us had this kind of adventure, sometimes that ended very seriously.

This is mainly about a group of children and their summer adventure, especially sailing in a large lake and exploring an uninhabited island of it. Mrs Walker brings her four children to their grandparents' house in a small English village. The bored kids decide to go sailing on the lake nearby where their father promised to take them one day, but now he's out in the sea far away on the job. Somehow they manage to get permission from the elders and so their adventure begins.

They arrive on the island and claim it. But another group who already claimed it challenges them. So their rivalry begins which leads to some great adventures, day and night. How things going to work between them is told in the remaining. Though there are more that takes place alternatively, like the real spy-game of the grown- ups. How these two stories going to meet was revealed with a decent twist. But the thriller parts were compromised since the film is aimed for the little ones.

"I hereby name it Walker Island and claim it for our own."

Great quality, loved the production. The locations were awesome. Initially I thought this will going to take place in the real Amazon, Brasil, but still I'm satisfied with it. I don't know who is this director, but a well done job. I also don't know whether the story is from the book or just the characters, but expecting a sequel and if possible a film series. I'm not expecting the whole 12 books to be made into films, thought at least a trilogy, since it's a live-action and the kids would grow up fast, they have to hurry up like they did for 'Harry Potter' film series.

The story takes place in the summer 1935 and its atmospheres, especially the addition of the spy thing was a smart move as those times were tensed with the early stage of the World War II. Its stretch also gives the adults a reason to watch the film, but sadly that sub-plot was under-used. Anyway, I recommend it to all, since it falls into PG. But there was a scene when the kids decided to go find the source of the fire they saw afar, that part was so edgy. Like that, there are a few more which creates uneasy in the perspective of kids.

Overall the film looks like a non-magical version of Narnia with four siblings and their exploration turned into an unplanned adventure. Yep, it's not summer yet, off the season, but still I loved it. This is one of the first films to I watch in the 2017, but definitely first children's film. On so many levels, it was a very good film, particularly if you haven't seen the other versions like me and a kid's film fan, you will have a good time. But for the families, as I said earlier, it is not to be missed. It got mixed to positive response from both the film critics and the movie goers, but personally I think it's much better than what they have said. So go for it...

7/10

It is hard to say which is the better 'Swallows and Amazons' film between this and the 1974 film. Neither are without their flaws, both are in fact pretty problematic, but both have great charm and there are a number of strengths with both.

As an adaptation, it is understandable as to why some may like the 1974 film more. While lacking Ransome's evocative way of writing, which gave it a blandness, there is more of a gentle and nostalgic feel in that film than here, which is very loyal in spirit to Ransome's storytelling. Plus the production values and the music are wonderful, the main theme in the music being the most memorable element of the whole film and a pretty unforgettable theme in its own right. This said, the film did drag in places, due to some uneventful narrative, and had a miscast Roger (too gormless) and Nancy (too old and too posh), as well as Ronald Fraser overacting pretty badly.

This said, despite having its fair shares of alterations and feeling at times on the muddled side, it is easy to see why more modern audiences will like this more. The characters are more interesting in the source material certainly, and there are additions and omissions or things that are there but could have been done better. Generally, 'Swallows and Amazons' (2016) does a laudable job making a great story suitable for film and even more so maintaining the gentle and nostalgic essence in the scenes with the children and trying to give the pacing more snap and urgency.

Of course, not everything in 'Swallows and Amazons' is entirely smooth sailing. The spy subplot has been criticised by some here and for reasons that are understandable, and an opinion shared by me. Tonally, with the action being significantly intensified, it clashed too much with the rest of the story, there was too much of it and it made some of the story feel muddled. The script does feel awkward and repetitive too often, and it was sad that Susan's character is just so bland and with not much personality due to her being very underwritten.

'Swallows and Amazons' however is a treat to watch visually, being beautifully shot with even more splendid scenery. The music score soars thrillingly yet with also gentle playfulness, the element feeling and sounding the most cinematic. This said, while it is an excellent score nothing is quite as unforgettable as the main theme of the 1974 film.

Where 'Swallows and Amazons' scores with much more success in the storytelling is in the scenes with the children, which do feel natural in chemistry and are gentle without being overly-genteel or mawkish and quaintly nostalgic. That was a huge part of the charm with the source material and previous film version, so it was a joy for that essence to translate here also and so strongly. The direction does more than capably.

Regarding the acting, it was good, although Orla Hill isn't able to do anything with severely wanting material as Susan. Bobby McCulloch and Seren Hawkes prove to be much better casting as Roger and Nancy than in the 1974 film, Roger is not an annoying character this time and Hawkes is more age-appropriate and doesn't look as out of place in the setting. Rafe Spall's Uncle Jim is much more subtle than before, while of the children delightful Teddie-Rose Malleson-Allen is particularly strong. Kelly MacDonald is a charming mother figure, while Andrew Scott shows that he excels at playing villains and Jessica Stevenson and Harry Enfield portray the Jacksons well (was surprised at how well Enfield fitted).

Overall, 'Swallows and Amazons' is laudably brought to film in a problematic but worthwhile adaptation, that is best enjoyed as a standalone. 7/10 Bethany Cox

This is a real shame for me. I haven't read the book and went into this blind, but didn't enjoy it all that much. What's saddening about this film is that it's one of those films that gets everything right, from the beautiful cinematography to the amazing directing to the great casting, but with a lacklustre script. Maybe it's true to the source, but it comes off as awkward and fake, with pieces of dialogue not making much sense followed by the previous piece, and characters going from upset to overwhelmingly happy in a split second. It doesn't feel real. This is sad because the script is only one element of a huge project, but a film needs a good script to be great.

Overall, though, I did enjoy it. Not as high as other films released this year, but definitely not one of the worst I've watched. Children probably will enjoy it, as will fans of the novel from what I've read, but I'd recommend something else for others. If you're going for anything, it should be for the beautiful scenes and shots. Love the use of fog.

For many of a certain age, Swallows and Amazons is embodied in the 1974 film, shot on the lakes and around the towns that Ransome knew and with a script quite faithful to the book. John, Susan, Titty, Roger, Nancy and Peggy were all terrifically well spoken and there was never so much as a strong word shared between them. The lakes were sunny and idyllic and nothing, not even a false accusation and a burglary could really upset the peace. Let's be clear, this remake sheds much of this and introduces more peril and to be honest, a more accurate representation of sibling interaction the world over.

The saying in the Lakes is that they don't have poor weather, you just have the wrong clothing for the current conditions. Maybe in Ransome's memory, the sun did always shine, but for anyone who has spent any time in the area will know exactly how the lakes remain quite so full and the countryside quite so green. This is faithfully presented in this version and all the better it looks for it.

The writers have chosen to add slightly more animation to the original story line, but have done so in an innovative way by calling on Ransome's real past. He spent long periods in Russia during the Great War and it is widely understood he was a spy as much as a newspaper reporter. Bearing in mind that Ransome based Captain Flint on himself, this seems perfectly acceptable. Right from the off, the action steps up a gear and the finale is to be honest, a little contrived. It does however, add another facet to the story line, as well as a little more back story and purpose to Captain Flint's life.

The cast is generally very good and the kids do a great job of playing slightly restless, bickering siblings, exploring not only their surroundings, but also the limits of their capabilities. One thing Ransome was always very clear on was that there could not be any "frisson" between the older Swallows and Amazons and it is good to see that at least this aspect has been respected by the writers.

The scenery is still beautiful, the production values high and on the whole, the editing keeps the pace jogging along quite nicely. I do have a problem though. Just who is the film aimed at? No doubt a die-hard bunch of 50-somethings will watch it, dragging children and grandchildren along in tow, but compared to the current crop of fantasy action adventures, it still feels quite tame and slow moving.

One for a rainy afternoon maybe, but possibly not destined to become a modern classic.

This is the story of four siblings who visits their grandparents in rural for their summer holidays. So their adventure begins when they decide to camp on an island in the lake nearby. I like the locations in the movie and wish to go there for my holidays. The little boy was cute and good in acting. I particularly recommend this movie to watch together with your siblings.

The characters and plot have been changed. In the books the children are polite, show good sportsmanship and most of all, good seamanship. The children in the film are rude, whining, brats who can't sail or camp and keep arguing with each other. The plot of the books is a delightful innocent children's adventure, the film has added a spy plot that negates any sense of childish wonder or joy.

This was a nice little film. Iv'e never seen the original ,or read the book but I got what I needed to know from this film. It was interesting. I was also surprised to learn the four main children are all new to the acting scene and all did really good jobs with the characters and looked like they had great fun, especially in the swallow boat. Kelly mcdonald plays the mum and does well. Andrew the hot priest scott plays one of two detectives in pursuit of ralph spall. I did find the second plot to the movie a little strange and out of place. But overall it was a nice family movie and of childhood wondermant.

The story of 'Swallows and Amazons' occupies a small place in my heart. Every night, I used to read a little bit of a book to my kids when they were tucked up in bed. And one of these books was 'Swallows and Amazons' by Arthur Ransome. I thought it might be a nice read and so we launched into it. The book grabbed me as much as it grabbed my kids. Here, you see, give or take a few elements, was my own childhood transcribed in a book. The lake, the boats, the island, the camp fire, the fish, the adventure. The little story transposed itself effortlessly into the vivid geography of my own memories and validated the adventures of my youth.

So, this afternoon, I set off to see the brand new film that's just been released in cinemas. I'm glad to report that those places in my heart are safe and sound and, if anything, have been made just a little bit bigger.

There are additional story elements in the film, necessary to enable the transfer from page to screen in a completely engaging way, and these work admirably well. But it is the very 'outdoors'ey, adventuring nature of the book that weaves the main magic here. And that's the thing with Swallows and Amazons, it is a real accessible adventure. You don't need to be able to fly or leap tall buildings in a single bound to have an adventure. All you really need is a back garden, some conspirators, and a will to venture out.

That's why the kids at this afternoon's show remained enraptured. The parents might have been nervous on their behalf, for where was the million pixel animation and where was the primary-coloured super hero? These heroes point their bow to the centre of the deep lake and, before they are done, will hold real fire in their hands. These are adventures that can be carried out from the cinema and into the real world. Children can see all that. Children know.

In my own childhood adventures, I was definitely Roger. My elder brothers kept the knives, real and metaphorical, for themselves and always stood a little in defence between me and the world. You could see it clearly in young Bobby McCulloch's eyes, on screen. The burning need for acknowledgement, to be a bona fide big boy. I was Roger and he was me but each of the Walker children will find a soul mate in each darkened theatre where the film plays. Tatty is so wonderful, literate and feisty and the elder children carry the pressures and responsibilities that come with their station.

This is, at the end of the day, a story for children and there must be an element of gentle threat and conspiracy and ultimately a general 'winning of the day'. But lots of adults, like myself, will come to the picture house with their furtive popcorn and they, too, will find what they seek. A sense of the outdoor childhood that we all remember a little better than it actually was. A time of freedom and adventure. A sense of home.

I would highly recommend Swallows and Amazons. If you know the book and have some regard for it, or if you just want your children to see an adventure of the kind they could then go out and create for themselves.

...we're adding a whole new plot"

That's always a sign that a production is heading for disaster. If you think the book isn't exciting, don't use it; find some other material. If you think you don't have the ability to convey to an audience what you find exciting about it, find another career.

'Swallows and Amazons' works as a book - and still does, nearly 90 years after it was written - precisely because it is concerned only with the children and their doings. No adult POV is included to give us a perspective on the children's outlook, their emotions and imaginative world; we only see what matters to them and we see it with their eyes. This makes perfect sense to children, and it takes adults back to our own childhood when we too found our own fantasy games far more important and meaningful than anything adults did. I couldn't see how a subplot about 'real' 1930s Soviet spies could possibly be introduced into the plot without making the children's pirate adventures and sea battles seem suddenly trivial and, well, childish.

And sadly, that's exactly what happens. Philippa Lowthorpe works hard to create a sense of danger and excitement in the childhood adventure of unaccompanied sailing, and camping on an island, and very nice too. But the effort is pointless when you throw in real gun-toting nasties kidnapping people and chasing them along trains; that just makes the children's 'pirate wars' fantasy look piffling and tiresome.

A real pity. You wonder why they bothered, and why anybody didn't advise them not to.

It takes guts to remake a classic film. Unfortunately it takes talent too, and from the "writer" downwards the bunch behind this particular remake are sadly lacking in talent.

Honestly, it makes you wonder if they ever read the original stories. Sure, they're perhaps a little dated now, but I'm convinced it would have been possible to update them without ignoring everything that was good. They certainly did *not* need to rename poor old itty, or make the teenagers a bunch of inept yobs.

Ignore this, go watch the original 1974 version, then hunt out Sophie Neville's beautiful diaries of "The Making of Swallows and Amazons" (it's on Amazon) and let the love and respect for Arthur Ransome's work envelop you.

Seeing as though I've only recently watched Philippa Lowthorpe's most recent film "Misbehaviour", I thought I'd therefore check out her prior movie, an updated adaptation of an apparently beloved / classic novel (released in 1929) by author Arthur Ransome (whose works I personally haven't been acquainted with) "Swallows & Amazons"; an endearingly light-hearted & whimsical, quintessentially British tale set during the summer of 1935, capturing what are supposedly meant to be the unending joys of (& wonderful adventures caused by) wilful & criminal child neglect.

How utterly charming.

To elaborate, as the audience, we follow the story of the Walker family (separated from their father, serving in the military aboard a ship traipsing across another continent), a dysfunctional unit (comprised of an eclectic mix of posh stereotypes you'd associate with the period) who gleefully journey to the quaint, secluded retreat of Yorkshire's idyllic & sumptuous countryside (with sweeping shots of unending greenery) - led by their irresponsible mother (a morally ambiguous character played by actress Kelly MacDonald, doing her best to imbue relatability in to an individual so enamoured with the pursuit of her own tranquility / relaxation, her consequential passivity - in the face of any obstacle - results in the portrayal of a woman who doesn't even notice a grown man invading her train cabin full of vulnerable infants & manhandling her youngest son because she's too busy smoking a cigarette out of the window) who then (as if that instance wasn't bad enough) proceeds to intentionally abandon all 4 of her children on a rickety, wooden boat to haphazardly sail across dangerous waves described as "some of the most deep in England", leaving them nothing but a wicker basket full of rations to survive off of as they venture out on to the open waters unattended / unchaperoned, returning to the warm comforts of her rural escape, not even ensuring they make it across the lake without drowning first.

This is suitable for kids, I'm led to believe. Nobody contacts social services or files a report, bewilderingly.

There - upon their arrival at the shore of a secluded island in the middle of a forest - with the magical playfulness you'd ascribe to "The Secret Garden", "Nanny McPhee" or "Peter Pan" etc. We see the minors thoughtlessly play with sharp knives, bows & arrows, naked fire, nearly drown after falling overboard & being continually submerged & the eldest son's innocence is additionally nearly corrupted when he breaks & enters a neighbour's private property, steals his weapon & points a gun at another person, threatening to shoot them dead.

Spiffing.

If I'm being quite honest, I'm rather questioning Arthur's perceptions of healthy parentage, admittedly - as opposed to enjoying the gradual unfolding of the horrifying narrative... But sure. Play some lovely & fanciful orchestral music over the traumatic experiences & lense it as a character building exercise & I'm sure it'll all turn out nicely.

I have to be honest and say I always loved Swallows and Amazons. I read the whole series again and again until the spines fell apart. It was so real that I could imagine doing it (if only I had brother and sisters). I dreamt about story. Back in 1974 I persuaded my father to take us to Basingstoke to see the film of the book that had just it come out. I loved it. I got the record (showing my age here) and played it and played it. It was so perfect, from the story to the characters they got it absolutely right in every way.

So I was excited to see this remake - what could be better than introducing the new generation to this pitch perfect story.

But it's awful. I really cannot get over how truly bad it is. Apparetly the director felt that modern children would not enjoy the original story as it was too tame (missing the entire point that it is the realism and the plausibility that makes it so endearing).

So where the 1974 film got it so right, this gets it so very, very wrong its hard to know where to begin.

Compared to the book, the story takes place approaching a decade later (why?). The actors are wrong, do not interact at all well, and bicker and argue continually. John, Susan and the Amazons are all too old. The Walker family come over as being inept sailors (John excepted) and frankly incompetent in most things, which the Swallows were not. They look, sound and behave like 21st century city children suddenly dropped into the 1930s... apart from John's unaccountable ability to sail.

It gets worse when the Amazons come along. They do not both have red scarves (why?). One has the most ridiculous blonde dyed hair (in 1930s Cumbria). Supposedly sisters, they both have totally different - and very unCumbrian - accents, and when they are introduced the classic joke "My name is really Ruth but Nancy says pirates are ruthless" is dropped (again why?).

As for the adult actors, they are seen far too much, are woefully miscast (Harry Enfield FFS!), are clearly do not know whether to play it for a laugh or take it seriously.

Then there is the Russian spy nonsense, thrown in for no good reason other than the director having no faith in the original material.

It is a mess. A total, utter, travesty of a mess. Its Swallows and Amazons as written by Enid Blyton on an off-day, with the Famous Five playing the Swallows.

And if you have never, ever seen or heard of S&A before? Well, its okay I suppose - but hardly going to drag you into the cinema, ordrag you away from your console. And if you do like it heaven alone knows what you'll make of the books...

To me this was a perfect opportunity to create something special from something classic gone completely wrong. Some of the scenes were lovely to look at but overshadowed by the underwhelming story lines. The acting was completely wooden, the 2 smaller children were quite fun and played their parts well, the older ones however could really have learned something from them. Their characters were completely wooden, no personality, enthusiasm or expression. In the past few years we have seen some amazing child actors such as, The BFG, Pan and What we did on our holiday to name just a few. How then did this go so wrong? As a family we watch a lot of films , old and new, we also spend a lot of time going to the cinema , so pride ourselves in being able to appreciate all sorts of film genres. When we saw this advertised we were quite excited and thought it had a lot of potential. Sadly we walked out of the cinema after seeing this feeling totally unfulfilled.

A breath of fresh air in these CGI-dominated days. And in fact fresh air is something this film promotes. Getting the kids out and into nature.

For those unfamiliar with the story, it is from a classic book from the 1930s. Four children, the Walkers, are on holiday in the Lake District and plead with their mother to be allowed to sail alone on a lake and discover an island.

Reluctantly, after gaining permission via telegram from their father "Better Drowned Than Duffers. If Not Duffers Won't Drown" they set off on their adventure. The island, however has been claimed by two other children, The Amazons. The two groups decide to battle it out to decide who can call the island theirs.

In the meantime, the Amazons' uncle is a shady character who seems to be up to something. He is being tailed by two spies who want to get their hands on his secrets.

The two story lines collide and the children find themselves in a bigger battle than they first imagined.

Firstly, this film is beautifully shot and is a real treat for the eyes. The great British countryside, in particular the Lake District, has rarely looked so good.

Director Phillippa Lowthorpe has obviously realised how stunning the scenery is and made full use of it.

The child actors, too, are really great. They fight and squabble like all families do, but there is a real bond between them and I could see myself in all the children - particularly headstrong John Walker.

I also loved the Amazons. Two feisty, funny girls who don't need boys to help them. Great chemistry between them.

The adults, too, are fine support. I really liked Jessica Hynes as Mrs Jackson and Andrew Scott as a suave, sinister Russian.

The script is excellent. A story that gentle needs a little bit more to it. After all, kids just scooting about in boats in an attempt to win a small battle would not really do these days. The beefing up of the spy angle kept the pot boiling and apparently is true to the original author's life.

All the kids in the cinema loved it. There are a lot more laughs than you expect and the boy Roger Walker makes the most of them. Many of the children near me were glued to their seats and when the final, dramatic scene unfolded, they were gripped.

Overall, it is proper family film. Grandparents, parents and kids could all go and enjoy it for different reasons. I don't think this is a film for older teenagers or anyone in their 20s. It's not really for them, I expect, though.

I thoroughly recommend this charming and warm British film. I'm so glad I saw it.

It was somewhat hard to judge this film on its own merits, as the heavy-handed and wholly unnecessary additions to the the source material were so distracting. My wife and I were excited to watch this with our kids of just the right age, but were then left very disappointed. If the production team didn't believe that Arthur Ransome's wonderful book was sufficiently exciting, why film it?

Right from the first scene material is added. And it's counter-productive: the book sees the children into their special adventure within just a few pages, where the film takes twenty minutes.

For a child reader the novel is a pure delight, and the adventures real and thrillingly out of reach but still within the contemplation of children; there's nothing too scary or beyond their control, and the young reader desperately wants to be part of that freedom and excitement. The film, however, strays into very adult territory, with situations genuinely outwith the children's control and full of real danger, and children would not want to be there. Peat diggers and pretend pirates seem scary but aren't: men with guns are.

At one point my 6 year old buried her head in my chest and said 'kids films aren't supposed to have guns!' Too true.

Nonetheless it's not wholly without merit. If you don't know the books sufficiently to suffer these frustrations, it's still an exciting tale of childhood adventure that is unimaginably permissive from a modern perspective, set in the stunning scenery of the English Lake a District. It still has charm, just far less than it might have had. The six child actors are nothing special, with only the re-named Tatty really delighting, but their performances are sufficient not to get in the way, in contrast say to the 2005 adaptation of The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe.

In summary: passable, but fans of the book should avoid the film.

This rainy day emergency activity last weekend turned out to be the best decision of the holidays. Based on the Arthur Ransome classic with a slightly altered plot, it was a bit slow to get started, but once the main family arrive in the lakes the kids' adventure begins and my two were on the edge of their seats.

The scenery is breathtaking (without any special effects) and for the kids the sense of a REAL adventure must be inspiring. The Walker family children (Swallows) are allowed to go and camp on an island in the middle of a lake and basically fend for themselves. Once on the island it becomes clear that they're not alone and soon war is declared with two local pirate girls (Amazons). The kids catch fish, play with fire, shoot bows and arrows. There is no need to add superheroes or special effects, real life is adventurous enough.

There are some great funny moments, a couple of which had the whole audience in stitches.

Thoroughly recommended, even if it's not raining!!

Could watch only about a third. If you are a fan of the book, as I am, this story is very different. The characters and the atmosphere don't ring true to the spirit of the book. Beyond that, I found the acting or direction only fair. Some of the editing was bizarre...such as a sailboat suddenly appearing 50 feet away. Not that easy to sneak up on someone in the middle of a lake!

Not one to casually chuck out the "Childhood ruined" meme, but it is hard not to take the butchering of a treasured childhood story personally.

In fairness, you can see the thought process behind the production decisions. The renaming of Titty is a meeting I feel like I was present for it, is so easy to visualise. The addition of the international intrigue angle adds drama, and you can see a producer demanding it: "you want to make a movie where a bunch of wholesome middle class white kids sail round a lake for a week and then have a tea party? Where is the action? Where is the tension?" I can imagine the script writer going back to the source and coming across Arthur Ransome's Russian connections on wikipedia and having a lightbulb moment that powers them through a midnight rewrite session.

All this I feel could have been forgiven, and even set a little differently to a much better result: The movie could have been somewhat more meta: with the spy plot line going on in the background and the children oblivious to it. Its actually possible to re-read the events of the book as exactly this, with Uncle Jim's various activities made ambiguous, yet the events as perceived by the children remain untouched. This could have added that layer that a scene by scene retelling of the book would have needed to make it compelling on screen, but would have retained the original's charm.

The unforgivable sin of this movie is the degradation of the characters. Not one seems un-touched by a 21st century cynicism: All the adults are hostile, with the generational dynamic speaking more to that between baby boomers and millennials than the values of the 1930s.

The Blacketts have none of that self aware joie-de-vivre. In the books, Nancy is full of bluster, but always reconsiders when about to behave unwisely. In the movie she comes off as casually abusive, hostile and borderline a bully, becoming an ally to the Walkers in the final act with no apparent resolution to the earlier tensions.

The Walkers grieve me the most. They bicker and are incompetent, when in the books they are committed to performing practical tasks of camping and sailing diligently, capably and considerately, always eager to absorb more knowledge and skills and consumed by the learning of their crafts. This was such an inspiration to me as a child, and to see such fundamental carelessness from these loved characters truly grieves. John is abusive and a poor leader, written so purely to set up drama and conflict. Thrown by the wayside is his simple decency from the books, as well as the most interesting struggles with the expectations of his absent father.

I don't want to be unfair to the child-actors, but their performance is frequently painfully wooden, which I'd actually lay at the feet of the direction rather than the actors as even the adult leads fail to shine. Andrew Scott in particular is interesting to contrast with his role as Moriarty in Sherlock, where he is compelling every moment he appears.

For the most part the child actors are debuting in the film. I hope it doesn't stand as a black mark against their futures. In particular Dane Hughes (John) has to be given credit: I might hate the script, character notes and direction he was given, but he gives it his all and adds some believable nuance to his scenes that spoke to me even while I was hating the movie. Teddy-Rose Malleson-Allen (Tatty) also shines: her performance is easy and natural, and overcomes what should be the cringe factor of several of her lines by a number of notches with an innocent charm. Overall poor then. To be sure the source material being very difficult to simply translate directly to the screen is a hard starting place, but several bad decisions compound things, many of them being common irritating features of contemporary film making in needing to add tension and action. I feel as a fan of the source material that a good movie, retaining the innocence and themes of competence, duty and loyalty, is out there if better choices were to be made. Additions to fit the screen medium are of course necessary, but not these additions. Sadly I fear we may not see another attempt to make it work for another 43 years.