Alex Rider: Stormbreaker

not inspired story. but it is an adaptation.not new special effects. but oldies are goldies. a film like many, many others. Alex Pettyfer charm and his unrealistic experiences, fight scenes and presence of Mickey Rourke are good points for a teen story in which basic source of humor is the exercise to be serious. short - all action film ingredients. a great show. and that is all. a teenager James Bond and the surprise to not be real boring. not for new tricks or for great acting but for the complicity of public and enthusiasm of fans. a nice film. and beginning for a series. so, nothing new. but nothing disappointed.

Stormbreaker was a decent film; this is an opinion coming from someone who has little knowledge of the books. It isn't as innovative as Spy Kids, but it is decent. The special effects and the action are above average, the performances from Mickey Rourke, Ewan McGregor and Bill Nighy are great and Alex Petyfer is an appealing enough lead, the soundtrack is nice and the film goes along at a fast pace. However the storyline is very predictable and sometimes ludicrous, the script is a bit weak in places, I found Alicia Silverstone surprisingly irritating here and the cameos from Stephen Fry and Robbie Coltrane are too brief to allow them to shine properly.

Still, it is a fun and mildly enjoyable flick. 6/10 Bethany Cox

I came to watch this film because I have been a fan of the Alex Rider books for many years. However, I was rather disappointed by the film. The main problem was that the film was very different from the book, with many parts of the story changed and with parts added. The ending was entirely made up for the film. I disliked the way that many of the actors chosen had no resemblance to how the character was described in the book.

I also felt that many of the action and fighting scenes were overdone and the superfluous parts annoyed me. The acting, particularly from the person playing Herod Sayle, was boring and unimaginative. The film was very jumpy in places, and I thought that people who had not read the books would have been confused by the ending. I thought that some of the lines in the film were quite strange and didn't really fit in with what was being said/going on!

However, I still gave the film a 4 out of 10 rating because of the many (usually unintentionally) funny scenes. I was particularly amused by Bill Nighy's acting in the role of Alan Blunt. Stephen Fry also added some comedy to the story in his role as Smithers. The film is reasonably watchable, probably because it only lasted 90 minutes.

When teenage Alex Ryder's uncle Ian dies, Alex not only loses his adult guardian but also learns how little he knew of his uncle's "boring" job. For, you see, Ian was a top British spy and very good at his job (well, apart from the last twenty seconds of it). Ian's final mission is not complete though and his employer Alan Blunt needs someone to complete the undercover operation. Realising that Ian had been grooming (sorry – "training") Alex, Blunt sends him undercover as a student computer geek into the organisation of American Darius Sayle and his mysterious and "Stormbreaker" devices.

From the very start it is clear that this is going to try and be a James Bond film for children and this in itself was not a real problem for me. That said though I did think that some of the action was sailing very close to being silly from the outset. This continued into the plot as what is delivered is a quite unremarkable affair that serves as a way in to the character as well as a spy story that puts children at centre stage as the targets. It doesn't serve up a great deal but I suppose it did just about enough as a story to be able to hang a film round it. The action has clearly been given a limited budget but you can see they are trying to make the most of it.

However lack of budget isn't really the problem I had with this – it was the tone. One side of the cast and crew genuinely seem to be trying to make a semi-serious spy film for kids, while the other half are convincing that it is actually a bit silly and, although not playing it for laughs, are obviously trying to have a bit of a wink at the camera and fun with the audience. Either approach might have worked and my personal preference would have been for the latter, but this mixed approach just doesn't work. It is hard to describe cause at times we have people like Nighy producing ham that would suit a slightly "cheeky" spy film, but in a scene that is delivered as dry as you like; then conversely we have some action scenes delivered "seriously" where really the silly action would have benefited from a more "fun" delivery to prevent us viewing it with serious eyes.

I'm not sure where the failing lies but certainly a lot of it rests with director Sax for not managing to put his stamp on it and make it his own. Pettyfer is also part of the problem I'm afraid. He has the looks but it is charisma and presence where he falls down and he is unable to really get the tone of the film right. The support cast is mixed but mostly wasted. McGregor seems to enjoy playing James Bond but is only in a small part of the film. Nighy is stiff but hammy, Okonedo is crisp and quite sexy, Fry does his best Q impression, Pyle is rubbish, Carr is mercifully limited to a few seconds and Coltrane is given a poor Tony Blair joke to fluff. Lewis is hampered with a bad accent but is still a solid presence but it is Rourke that makes for a lack of villains in the film and he is too silly to buy into. Walters and Serkis are OK in small roles but god knows what Silverstone got out of it apart from a paying job and maybe a shot at being a bigger character in a sequel.

Despite all this it is actually a reasonably OK spy film for tweenies unable to get into a "proper" film. It should have been better though and the mixed tone and lack of genuine fun is what limits it and probably means that there won't be a sequel anytime soon.

For a relatively unknown spy action thriller, 'Stormbreaker' is a surprisingly entertaining film, even if it does try a little too hard to be the kids' version of James Bond. As you would expect, this film is full of gimmicks and never takes itself too seriously, with a bunch of over-the-top action sequence and a shallow plot that feels like it is almost entirely built around the action.

It does serve a purpose though and it's an ideal choice to pass some time. If you can see past the many plot and character flaws, there is sufficient entertainment from the action scenes alone, and that's what most people want to see from a film like this. 'Stormbreaker' is a passable family spy action film - it won't leave you bored but it won't leave much of an impression either.