Swallows and Amazons

British TV movie and mini series director Philippa Lowthorpe, films an adaptation of Arthur Ransome's popular children's book series 'Swallows and Amazons' set on a fictional lake but inspired on the Lake District and the Norfolk Boards. Admittedly, I haven't read the novels so it's hard for me to comment on the adaptation but it's a cute children's adventure with bravery, drama and some sibling rivalry.

We follow a cast of young unknowns, the Walkers, which are similar to the children from Narnia or the Famous Five; typically British for that era going camping, fishing and sailing that brought me back to my childhood of secret base building and wading in the local stream looking for sticklebacks.

The names we should recognise are Kelly Macdonald and Rafe Spall, with an up and coming Andrew Scott. Kelly playing the encouraging, free-spirited mother and Rafe playing a suspicious and mostly obnoxious character who's obviously got something to hide. But the kids steal the show, and rightly so, it's about them after all and they do a grand job especially the emotional and excitable Roger played by Bobby McCulloch. Have to mention Brit comedian Harry Enfield who plays Mr. Jackson which was a surprise to me but a delight in any case.

The scenery is lush and makes you proud of the British countryside which makes me wonder if people from the rest of the world see all this green and think "wow, that looks so beautiful." There's a great score from Ilan Eshkeri, (Stardust, The Young Victoria) that's enchanting and very fitting for the children's adventure adding dramatic effect and suspense.

It feels longer than the 97min running time and wavered slightly in the what felt like the middle of the story. I can imagine there was a lot of ground to cover and possibly a challenge to fit everything into the film, not that any part felt rush. It's well shot with some great camera work and is some light-hearted entertainment for the whole family, however it isn't a grand spectacle but then again I don't think it tries to be.

Running Time: 6 The Cast: 8 Performance: 7 Direction: 8 Story: 7 Script: 7 Creativity: 6 Soundtrack: 8 Job Description: 7 The Extra Bonus Points: 0

64% 6/10

How sad that someone's sensitivities (who's?) were considered so important that Titania's original name was changed to 'Tatty' for this film. The character's name is Titty, and has been since 1930 - a very long time - and I consider that the producers should be ashamed of themselves for giving in on such an insignificant matter. Do they not know the expression 'to Roger someone'? Do they not know what a 'John' is in certain societies? Where does all this lunacy stop?

Perhaps the film lacks the intensity of modern, CGI, 'shoot 'em up' films, but the pleasure should lie in the bucolic idealism that Ransome illustrated in all his books. Oh, and the basics of how to sail, alongside other matters naval and historical. Fortunately interest in such activities remains high and will probably remain so for the next few centuries, unlike passing fads passed off as 'entertainment' but actually merely being another vehicle for profit.

This is a perfect summer film for the families that produced by the BBC. Based on the children's book of the same name. Frankly, I haven't seen the television nor the film adaptation of this. It looked very fresh to me, so I enjoyed it thoroughly. I'm a big fan of children's films and this one reminded my childhood vacation in the grandparents' rural. Surely everybody, I mean most of us had this kind of adventure, sometimes that ended very seriously.

This is mainly about a group of children and their summer adventure, especially sailing in a large lake and exploring an uninhabited island of it. Mrs Walker brings her four children to their grandparents' house in a small English village. The bored kids decide to go sailing on the lake nearby where their father promised to take them one day, but now he's out in the sea far away on the job. Somehow they manage to get permission from the elders and so their adventure begins.

They arrive on the island and claim it. But another group who already claimed it challenges them. So their rivalry begins which leads to some great adventures, day and night. How things going to work between them is told in the remaining. Though there are more that takes place alternatively, like the real spy-game of the grown- ups. How these two stories going to meet was revealed with a decent twist. But the thriller parts were compromised since the film is aimed for the little ones.

"I hereby name it Walker Island and claim it for our own."

Great quality, loved the production. The locations were awesome. Initially I thought this will going to take place in the real Amazon, Brasil, but still I'm satisfied with it. I don't know who is this director, but a well done job. I also don't know whether the story is from the book or just the characters, but expecting a sequel and if possible a film series. I'm not expecting the whole 12 books to be made into films, thought at least a trilogy, since it's a live-action and the kids would grow up fast, they have to hurry up like they did for 'Harry Potter' film series.

The story takes place in the summer 1935 and its atmospheres, especially the addition of the spy thing was a smart move as those times were tensed with the early stage of the World War II. Its stretch also gives the adults a reason to watch the film, but sadly that sub-plot was under-used. Anyway, I recommend it to all, since it falls into PG. But there was a scene when the kids decided to go find the source of the fire they saw afar, that part was so edgy. Like that, there are a few more which creates uneasy in the perspective of kids.

Overall the film looks like a non-magical version of Narnia with four siblings and their exploration turned into an unplanned adventure. Yep, it's not summer yet, off the season, but still I loved it. This is one of the first films to I watch in the 2017, but definitely first children's film. On so many levels, it was a very good film, particularly if you haven't seen the other versions like me and a kid's film fan, you will have a good time. But for the families, as I said earlier, it is not to be missed. It got mixed to positive response from both the film critics and the movie goers, but personally I think it's much better than what they have said. So go for it...

7/10

To me this was a perfect opportunity to create something special from something classic gone completely wrong. Some of the scenes were lovely to look at but overshadowed by the underwhelming story lines. The acting was completely wooden, the 2 smaller children were quite fun and played their parts well, the older ones however could really have learned something from them. Their characters were completely wooden, no personality, enthusiasm or expression. In the past few years we have seen some amazing child actors such as, The BFG, Pan and What we did on our holiday to name just a few. How then did this go so wrong? As a family we watch a lot of films , old and new, we also spend a lot of time going to the cinema , so pride ourselves in being able to appreciate all sorts of film genres. When we saw this advertised we were quite excited and thought it had a lot of potential. Sadly we walked out of the cinema after seeing this feeling totally unfulfilled.

Not one to casually chuck out the "Childhood ruined" meme, but it is hard not to take the butchering of a treasured childhood story personally.

In fairness, you can see the thought process behind the production decisions. The renaming of Titty is a meeting I feel like I was present for it, is so easy to visualise. The addition of the international intrigue angle adds drama, and you can see a producer demanding it: "you want to make a movie where a bunch of wholesome middle class white kids sail round a lake for a week and then have a tea party? Where is the action? Where is the tension?" I can imagine the script writer going back to the source and coming across Arthur Ransome's Russian connections on wikipedia and having a lightbulb moment that powers them through a midnight rewrite session.

All this I feel could have been forgiven, and even set a little differently to a much better result: The movie could have been somewhat more meta: with the spy plot line going on in the background and the children oblivious to it. Its actually possible to re-read the events of the book as exactly this, with Uncle Jim's various activities made ambiguous, yet the events as perceived by the children remain untouched. This could have added that layer that a scene by scene retelling of the book would have needed to make it compelling on screen, but would have retained the original's charm.

The unforgivable sin of this movie is the degradation of the characters. Not one seems un-touched by a 21st century cynicism: All the adults are hostile, with the generational dynamic speaking more to that between baby boomers and millennials than the values of the 1930s.

The Blacketts have none of that self aware joie-de-vivre. In the books, Nancy is full of bluster, but always reconsiders when about to behave unwisely. In the movie she comes off as casually abusive, hostile and borderline a bully, becoming an ally to the Walkers in the final act with no apparent resolution to the earlier tensions.

The Walkers grieve me the most. They bicker and are incompetent, when in the books they are committed to performing practical tasks of camping and sailing diligently, capably and considerately, always eager to absorb more knowledge and skills and consumed by the learning of their crafts. This was such an inspiration to me as a child, and to see such fundamental carelessness from these loved characters truly grieves. John is abusive and a poor leader, written so purely to set up drama and conflict. Thrown by the wayside is his simple decency from the books, as well as the most interesting struggles with the expectations of his absent father.

I don't want to be unfair to the child-actors, but their performance is frequently painfully wooden, which I'd actually lay at the feet of the direction rather than the actors as even the adult leads fail to shine. Andrew Scott in particular is interesting to contrast with his role as Moriarty in Sherlock, where he is compelling every moment he appears.

For the most part the child actors are debuting in the film. I hope it doesn't stand as a black mark against their futures. In particular Dane Hughes (John) has to be given credit: I might hate the script, character notes and direction he was given, but he gives it his all and adds some believable nuance to his scenes that spoke to me even while I was hating the movie. Teddy-Rose Malleson-Allen (Tatty) also shines: her performance is easy and natural, and overcomes what should be the cringe factor of several of her lines by a number of notches with an innocent charm. Overall poor then. To be sure the source material being very difficult to simply translate directly to the screen is a hard starting place, but several bad decisions compound things, many of them being common irritating features of contemporary film making in needing to add tension and action. I feel as a fan of the source material that a good movie, retaining the innocence and themes of competence, duty and loyalty, is out there if better choices were to be made. Additions to fit the screen medium are of course necessary, but not these additions. Sadly I fear we may not see another attempt to make it work for another 43 years.