5 chicos & esto

A few weeks ago I picked up a very charming children's book called 5 Children and It. Written by E. Nesbit and originally published in 1902 or thereabouts, it's a remarkably modern-sounding tale about a family, with maid and cook, who go to the country for the summer. The father has to work in the city, and the mother is called away on some business, and the children are left to their own devices under the care of the maid and cook, who are happy as long as the children stay outside all day and don't mess up the house, and show up for meals and bed on time. So far an extremely believable story that anyone who has rented a summer place can relate to. The children discover a magical creature called a psammead ("sammyadd") which grants them one wish a day. Minor misadventures ensue, with each succeeding day another chapter in the book. The children learn to be careful in their wishes and to think ahead. A good life lesson. Then they made a movie. Movies can't be about ordinary people because then we would all start thinking we're equal. This family has sent Father off to World War I as a flying ace, Mother as a dedicated volunteer nurse, and the children go to a large country home on the cliffs of Dover to stay with their batty uncle, evil cousin and a mysterious woman who is neither the uncle's wife nor just a housekeeper. It doesn't matter because she just provides plot devices necessary to carry along the movie version which is wholly different from the book except for the character's names and two of the wishes. Imagine if the movie version of Harry Potter had included Dr Xavier and the X-Men characters and been set in wartime because some pinhead producer felt that J K Rowling's story didn't have enough flash and mawkishness. If you've seen the movie, read the book. If you've read the book, skip the movie. There was a BBC version made in the early 1990s. I'm going to find a copy of that and have a look. This book was that good.

I found this film utterly charming. I had to almost force my daughter to see it (she wanted to see The Princess Diaries 2 (shivers!!!!). But once the children found the Wishasuraus she was transfixed.

It is a film very much of British and of the Railway Children type. and will sadly be missed by many because of the Steam Roller Hype of Shark Tale. But this is a real FAMILY film.

The beginning has a distinct Harry Potter feel to it, The theme tune is clearly influenced by HP. Kenneth Branagh is the quintessential English Eccentric but unlike the Hollywood stereotype this is a British film that has it's tongue firmly in cheek. Zoe Wannamaker as the caring housekeeper who knows more that she lets on is wonderful.

Eddie Izzard as the voice of the Sand Fairy is perfect.

This is as British as Brighton Rock and Whelks in a tray at the sea side. And I loved it.

Five children go to the country to stay with their uncle during the First World War. While exploring the house they come upon a secret door which takes them down to the beach where they meet a "sand fairy" who agrees to grant one wish a day for them. The wishes all go horribly wrong, but in the process the children learn something.

The Jim Henson Company produced this adaptation of the E Nesbit story and its not one of their better works. The film looks like any other children's book adaptation you can think of to the extent that you could probably inter-cut scenes from this film with any other similar children's film and not be able to tell the difference. Its not bad, but it doesn't have anything unique about it...

...well actually it does, It has two excellent performances that keep this film from sinking to the bottom of the children's film adaptation barrel. The first is Kenneth Branagh as they kids crazy Uncle Albert. he isn't in it all that much but while he's on screen he chews the scenery looking like a deranged Jim Broadbent. He is charmingly scatterbrained as a man who doesn't know what day it is and who wonders where last October went to.

The other joy is Eddie Izzard, in his best role to date as the voice of the sand fairy, the "It" of the title. This is Izzard at his free-form best as he bounces off the walls of sanity in a steady stream of nonsense. Izzard's portrayal is a kin to an evening of his best stand-up comedy but in the context of the story, where anything can and will come out of the mouth of a little creature with a mobile home. Its one of the funniest things I've seen on screen on long time and he's the real reason to see the film.

Over all a completely average children's film made more than watchable thanks to Eddie Izzard's vocal performance as It. Worth a rental or a viewing on cable, especially if you're a fan.

I would think that this was one of those films whose director hadn't read the book it was based on, were it not for the fact that they are just slightly similar. It is certainly possible for a great film to be "based" very loosely on a book and this was certainly the latter but not the former.

There were a number of flaws. One was that it tried to be too much like the Railway Children, probably because adults would expect this, being from the same author. Another is that it also sought to be too like Harry Potter, down to the music and in overemphasizing the setting. I have nothing against J K Rowling or the films but the book is just nothing like the Harry Potter ones. I thought the Psammead, though very well voiced by Eddie Izzard and in character too, was almost gratuitously in a totally inappropriate environment. I may have missed something here, as the comments made about one of the characters' own books may have been a reference to the inaccuracy of the adaptation. There was also no need for the extra characters, and today's special effects could easily have been used to tell the story as it was written, but they weren't.

I saw this film with my two children, one of whom knows the book and the other of whom doesn't. The one who does know it thought it was all right but wasn't as enthusiastic as the one who doesn't. I'm not sure what this means.

FIVE CHILDREN AND IT is the perfect way to trash the memory of the classic Edith Nesbit novel by turning it into something soulless, trivial, and trashy. Although the premise of the the film and the novel are the same, both veer off in very different directions and it has to be said that this bears little relation to the characters or events of the book's storyline.

Firstly, the setting has been changed to WW1 from the Crimean War; I'm not sure why, except maybe people don't know or care about the Crimean War these days. Instead of the likable, inventive children of the Nesbit story, we get a bunch of screamers, whiners, and - in the case of Freddie Highmore - oddly creepy kids and the stock fat cousin character who of course turns out to be evil. God knows what all that monster stuff in the basement laboratory is supposed to be about.

The famous Psammead, voiced by the irritating Eddie Izzard and animated via rubbishy CGI, is a far cry from the excellent puppet utilised in the old BBC TV series version of the tale. Elsewhere, we get horrible CGI dinosaurs, CGI flying people (to cash in on HARRY POTTER, of course), and dumb comedy in the form of fart and burp jokes. The director is so inexperienced he even uses cheesy slow motion in the sentimental interludes. Elsewhere, viewers are stuck watching the likes of Kenneth Branagh and Zoe Wanamaker mugging for all their worth. Stick with the BBC show!