Horrid Henry: The Movie

I seem to have found myself reading a lot of other reviews for Horrid Henry the Movie and the general consensus is that it's only an 'okay' film at best.

Much of the criticism comes from the fact that (apparently) the child actors portraying the characters in the original Horrid Henry books/TV cartoons, don't look anything like the source material. My argument to that is - this is a film, with REAL people. If real children looked like the caricature-like drawings in the books and cartoons then I would be seriously worried about which freak show they were drafted in from! Then much has been said about how (apparently) it doesn't stay true to the 'spirit' of the original source material. My argument would be that this is a FILM. If you like the books - great - they're books. If you like the cartoons - great - they're cartoons. Keep on reading and watching them. A film cannot be like a book and, unless it's a cartoon-film, not much like the cartoon either. The film takes many of the ideas and inspirations from the book and cartoon and expands on it. It has to. How else would it be able to stretch it out to an hour and a half? Also, people have said that the plot/story isn't up to scratch. I feel I have to spell it out - it's a KIDS' MOVIE. If you want plot twists and character development followed by shocks and surprises, watch the DaVinci Code. This film is aimed at children. Therefore, it has a story that they can understand.

Did I like it? No. But then I'm nearly thirty-five. However, my six year old daughter dragged me to the cinema twice to watch it (the second time I even fell asleep). Now Horrid Henry the Movie is on my television screen at home and my daughter is demanding it for her birthday. In short, let the kids be the judge of it.

Note: special kudos to Anjelica Huston for her great performance as Miss Battle-Axe.

I love the books and the TV series, and although I was very dubious of seeing Horrid Henry:The Movie, especially after hearing it had 3D and Dick and Dom, part of me was eager to see it. So I did, expecting an entertaining enough movie on its own terms.

What I got was a real disappointment. It wasn't horrid, but overall it was the weakest films I've seen so far this year and one of the most disappointing. The only good things for me were Theo Stevenson's spirited performance and the jaunty soundtrack.

Firstly I didn't like how the film looked. It was certainly colourful but also in a sense over-saturated. Horrid Henry:The Movie was quite badly edited as well, constantly it felt very awkward and rushed.

The costumes are also rather cartoony in style. I wasn't happy that Horrid Henry:The Movie would have 3D effects, I frankly didn't think it needed it, and after seeing I still wasn't happy. I still think they were unnecessary, and the lack of clarity and sharpness in the effects themselves cheapened the film for me.

The story was another minus, overall I found it very rushed and predictable with little of the charm and simplicity that the books and TV series had. The only thing I liked about the story was the lack of the over-sentimental(or it can be) "I love you son" sort of ending.

The writing was messy, the dialogue is often weak and the laughs feel forced. When I saw it the closest the audience came to laughing were a couple of barely audible giggles. Kids either had a sort of amused expression or a sense they weren't sure whether they were supposed to laugh but a lot of adults looked as though they wished they had a triple detention instead.

The cast are talented, but at least to me the film just seemed like an excuse to bring in as many British or TV personalities as possible. Many of them try hard and overdo it, Richard E.Grant definitely applies here, or are wasted, Jo Brand, or don't try, Matthew Horne.

I know they deliberately exaggerated Miss Lovely's character, or so it seemed, but the characterisation was a little too over-eager and sugary for my tastes. Anjelica Huston fares better, she is a wonderful actress and while she overdoes the accent she clearly seems to be enjoying herself. If I had to ask myself what was the most painful bit about this movie? I'd say aside from the poor writing and the unnecessary 3D, it has to be the abysmally unfunny appearance of Dick and Dom.

All in all, a real disappointment. 3/10 Bethany Cox

England's very first Kids 3D film turned out to be Horrid Henry The Movie. The Horrid Henry books became a big success in the UK alone. They created an animated series in 2006 and now they have created a movie in 2011.

I am a fan of the Horrid Henry books. I also thought the series wasn't too bad either. Then when the film came out I thought it would be good to go and see it.

The characters looked great. But the way the actors performed them was very disappointing. I would call this bad acting. The way they performed each role was very poor. Each one did look like the characters in the books and series, but most of them didn't feel like it was the characters you know in the books. The actual plot was poor as well. It felt like a plot that you would see in an episode of the cartoon series. They could have thought of something much better than what they chose.

I would say that there was one actor in this that did fit the part of her character. That person is Anjelica Huston who played the part of Miss Battleaxe. She really did play the part of Miss Battleaxe really well. She was only on for a few scenes and I think she needed to be in this film a bit longer than she was.

I would not say this is a family film. I would say this is just for kids younger than 8. It might be more entertaining for them than it is for anyone older. It was very disappointing for me; it was actually an insult to the books. I hate saying stuff like that about movies, but I'm afraid I had to say it.

Written By Jamie Foster

I took my 8 and 6 year old children. My 8 year old is usually quite forgiving of a bad film if she has popcorn. We watch and enjoy a lot of children's films - this was the worst for a long time, since Space Chimps probably, and made worse by that it could have been so much better with a little craft to its direction. And from a director with so much experience as an Editor, it was really badly edited.

My 6 year old thought it was OK, but there lies the problem - the film is obviously aimed, in its semi-high-school American 'teen rock' music pretensions, at a much older audience. A porous plot, even to an 8 year old, and the embarrassing potential of the cast falls extremely flat. Mathew Horne seems only to have two expressions in his repertoire and is in extreme danger of having a bit part comedy career fade fast. Anjelica Huston's Scottish accent was insulting and embarrassing - like a sheltered American impersonating Mrs Doubtfire. Horrid Henry clean cut and Americanised, really wasn't very menacing at all. I was surprised we were spared the sentimental 'son, I got it all wrong but I will always love you' ending: it would have completed the American airbrushing.

Firstly, Angelica Houston is in this film. Just let that fact permeate your mind, then watch as your sense of reality untangles itself and pours out of your ears and onto the floor in a pool of brain soup.

Angelica Houston is in this film. How on earth did that happen?

Now for the film: A group of reactionary and psychologically abusive adults spend 90 minutes shouting at their children until they morph into a clichéd group of personality disorders.

The kids are either good or bad, horrid or perfect. And they've learned to shout and scream at each other because they find certain behaviours unacceptable. It's a Freudian car crash.

No doubt these poor kids are destined for a life of depression, alcoholism, and dysfunctional relationships. At least one of them will be arrested; another sectioned under the Mental Health Act; several will go onto psychologically torture their own children.

It's not my cup of tea, but I'm not the intended audience. I'd rather watch Koyaanisqatsi. So I'll be fair and score it 5/10.