Two orphans join forces with a family of magical animals to save their city from the powerful Mr. and Mrs. Twit, the meanest, smelliest, nastiest people in the world.Two orphans join forces with a family of magical animals to save their city from the powerful Mr. and Mrs. Twit, the meanest, smelliest, nastiest people in the world.Two orphans join forces with a family of magical animals to save their city from the powerful Mr. and Mrs. Twit, the meanest, smelliest, nastiest people in the world.
- Directors
- Writers
- Stars
Johnny Vegas
- Mr. Twit
- (voice)
Margo Martindale
- Mrs. Twit
- (voice)
Emilia Clarke
- Pippa
- (voice)
Sami Amber
- Jeremy
- (voice)
Alan Tudyk
- Sweet-Toed Toad
- (voice)
Ryan Anderson Lopez
- Bubsy Mulch
- (voice)
- (as Ryan Lopez)
Phil Johnston
- Mr. Napkin
- (voice)
Riley King
- Tuna Remnant
- (voice)
Zarah Kulczycki
- Harold Hulse
- (voice)
Mark Proksch
- Horvis Dungle
- (voice)
Nicole Byer
- Beverly Onion
- (voice)
Charlie Berens
- Gorb Klurb
- (voice)
- Directors
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
4.73.4K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Featured reviews
After the first 5 minutes...nope.
Just terrible. How could this (ab)use the Roald Dahl name? I guess its just now part of the Netflix sausage machine.
I can sort of understand "Americanising" the original story but this just ends up weak and too mangled with annoying characters. My 8 and 11 year olds were pretty bored throughout. The only saving grace I can come up with is the animation is ok.
I can sort of understand "Americanising" the original story but this just ends up weak and too mangled with annoying characters. My 8 and 11 year olds were pretty bored throughout. The only saving grace I can come up with is the animation is ok.
Horrible
When the original material is a revered classic, why mess with it? Turning The Twits American, then tossing in Johnny Vegas, makes no sense. The charm, the bite, the Dahl-ness... all gone. Roald Dahl would emphatically not have approved. An utterly joyless and soulless reimagining that misses every mark.
Is this for children or adults?
It is very confusing that the animation sometimes feels like it's for adults not for children. Sometimes disturbing scenes and not funny at all. We couldn't really connect and after some time it just became a video for the background we started doing different things. And like is it a musical animation or not? It's so mixed up with everything that i just couldn't connect. Good potential and good idea but nope they mixed up so many ideas and the plot became so boringly confusing.
devoid of all charm
Everything that makes a Roald Dahl story fun, from the characters to the world building to the dialogue, has been surgically removed from this absolute train wreck of a film. One of the worst screenplays I think I've encountered in the past few years. Is Meg Favreau Jon Favreau's daughter? Is that how she got this gig?
Disorganized from the start, it begins in medias res but in a way that does not add any tension or suspense. We are repeatedly told-not-shown, and not even in a fun Dahl-ian way, just in characters robotically stating "this is good" "this is bad" "I like her because she is nice and cool." Despite treating its audience like babies, the script jumps all over the place in a confusing and jarring way with no control of tone. Visually, it promises to be a feast, but the faces of the clearly-meant-to-be sympathetic characters are so disturbingly and poorly done I don't want to look at them and instinctually I find myself wishing ill upon them. It's just not nice or fun to look at.
A disaster on every front, it begs the question, why was this an adaptation at all? I have no issue with updating and changing source material but even tonally, thematically, this is unrelated to the original Twits. The answer is likely "this was the only way we could trick people to watch it."
My four year old got bored of it and asked to switch it off within three minutes. Let yourself have fun and go watch The Boxtrolls instead, which feels like a closer relation in terms of tone and quality to the original The Twits than this putrescent adaptation does.
Disorganized from the start, it begins in medias res but in a way that does not add any tension or suspense. We are repeatedly told-not-shown, and not even in a fun Dahl-ian way, just in characters robotically stating "this is good" "this is bad" "I like her because she is nice and cool." Despite treating its audience like babies, the script jumps all over the place in a confusing and jarring way with no control of tone. Visually, it promises to be a feast, but the faces of the clearly-meant-to-be sympathetic characters are so disturbingly and poorly done I don't want to look at them and instinctually I find myself wishing ill upon them. It's just not nice or fun to look at.
A disaster on every front, it begs the question, why was this an adaptation at all? I have no issue with updating and changing source material but even tonally, thematically, this is unrelated to the original Twits. The answer is likely "this was the only way we could trick people to watch it."
My four year old got bored of it and asked to switch it off within three minutes. Let yourself have fun and go watch The Boxtrolls instead, which feels like a closer relation in terms of tone and quality to the original The Twits than this putrescent adaptation does.
Not a patch on the wonderful book.
The Twits do all they can to get their theme park, Twitlandia, open. Kids from the local orphanage attempt to rescue magical creatures from the Twits, creatures that power Twitlandia.
By far and away, my favourite book as a child, packed with wit, the grotesque, plus a side of compassion mixed in with all of the nastiness. A book for all ages. I wanted to love this film. I didn't hate it, but sadly it's not very good.
As soon as it begins, you'll get a sense that it just doesn't feel right; the story, the artistic choices- I couldn't help but feel that it was some sort of poor man's Wallace and Gromit.
The source material is magical; it's so funny! Why the need to totally reinterpret it? I did enjoy the presence of Johnny Vegas, though; I just felt he needed better material. I don't know about Mrs. Twit, though; I'm not feeling it.
Not terrible, just not very good either.
4/10.
By far and away, my favourite book as a child, packed with wit, the grotesque, plus a side of compassion mixed in with all of the nastiness. A book for all ages. I wanted to love this film. I didn't hate it, but sadly it's not very good.
As soon as it begins, you'll get a sense that it just doesn't feel right; the story, the artistic choices- I couldn't help but feel that it was some sort of poor man's Wallace and Gromit.
The source material is magical; it's so funny! Why the need to totally reinterpret it? I did enjoy the presence of Johnny Vegas, though; I just felt he needed better material. I don't know about Mrs. Twit, though; I'm not feeling it.
Not terrible, just not very good either.
4/10.
Did you know
- TriviaBased on the 1980 children's book "The Twits" by Roald Dahl. This is the first adaptation of the novel.
- SoundtracksRainbows Are Back in Style
Written by Dave Burgess
Performed by Dean Martin
Courtesy of The Dean Martin Family Trust and Sony Music Entertainment
By arrangement with Sony Music Entertainment
Everything New on Netflix in December
Everything New on Netflix in December
Wake Up Dead Man: A Knives Out Mystery premieres! More "Stranger Things" is here! See the entire lineup of new and returning movies and series streaming on Netflix this month.
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Los Cretinos
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime
- 1h 38m(98 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.00 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content




