Kidskycom
It's funny watching the elements come together in this complicated scam. On one hand, the set-up isn't quite as complex as it seems, but there's an easy sense of fun in every exchange.
Bumpy Chip
It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.
Cristal
The movie really just wants to entertain people.
Neil Welch
The Clock family are Borrowers - small people living in hiding and borrowing full size human stuff for their homes. Dad Pod Clock has kept his family at home, so daughter Arietty and son Peagreen have no idea of a wider world, they only know that the first rule of being a Borrower is not to be seen by the big people. But Arietty is not only seen but captured by young Pete Lender, which coincides with the lenders being forcibly (and illegally) evicted by wicked property developer Potter so that he can demolish their home.This film has an air about it of using the original idea (I have not read the source material, so I don't know) and then doing its own thing with it: if so, it's not bad. The story fairly whizzes along, with John Goodman's Potter a suitably cartoon villain (just as well, given the Wile E. Coyote-type retributions he suffers for his wickedness). Production design is intriguing: the Borrowers world is nicely realised, and the larger world is based on 1950s Britain, but with many stylistic weirdnesses: heavy urban industrialisation, driving on the right, everybody in Morris Minors, mobile phones and monochrome TVs, and a colour palette comprising saturated secondary colours.The cast is good, and it is interesting to see a very young Tom Felton, unrecognisable under corkscrew ginger wig and huge false gap teeth. Only Flora Newbigin as Arietty disappoints, with some line readings which ring false.
adrianmatt
I haven't come to the film through the book, and so have no memories to spoil. Purely on its own terms I and my family greatly enjoyed this piece of family entertainment. Personally I rather liked the vaguely mid-Altantic fantasy universe which strangely encompasses the whole of the 20th century, a rather dowdy place where the policemen look Edwardian but people might wear 1930's clothing while speaking on their mobile phones, yet drive 1960's Morris Minor cars on the right despite road markings on the left. Yes, mainly slapstick with flimsy screenplay (and occasionally flimsy acting too, though it's rarely awful as some suggest). In no sense is it deep, but none the worse for that. It's entertainment pure and simple, and on that level it succeeds.
beguynuy
A movie is set in England. It about friendship between the borrowers - the Clock family and the lenders. At first, they don't know about each other, but then, because of the curiosity of Arriety - Pod's daughter, Arriety and Pete become good friends. After that, Arriety and her brother - Peagreen - accidentally take part in an adventure when they fall out of the lorry while they are moving with the lenders to the lender's new house. Arriety and Peagreen save the house from being demolished by an evil lawyer named Peter. At the end, the Clock family and the lenders become close-friends and they live happily together. A movie has special effects and a good cast...it's a great movie for your weekend with your family.
nb_23
I get really irritated by reviewers intellectualising kids' movies. Not for one second do I think children should be patronised by being offered crap (such as TV rubbish designed to suck out their brains, eg the Cow and Chicken cartoons). However, I do think we adults should be a little more understanding that films made for children not only don't need to be deep and meaningful - but they must not be deep and meaningful. By definition! This movie is silly, and fun, and clever, and it has several important messages about tolerance. How much more deep and meaningful do you need a movie to be?!
