Alex Rider: Stormbreaker

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.

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.

I watched this again after enjoying the series. The ensamble cast are a collection of incredibly famous and popular actors with a deep and rich talent pool. I can only assume that someone made a deal with the devil to get this made. The story has every trope and cliché you can think of. The acting is horrendous and most of the interactions make you cringe and roll your eyes so hard you could power a small English village with the static electricity generated.

Skip this and watch the new series instead

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.

The Alex Rider books have been very successful so therefore it is a shame that they couldn't have been converted into a franchise. All the signs are there in this film that the production company wanted it to be one but sadly box office takings meant that dream faded fast. As a stand alone film Stormbreaker is good but fans of the books will know there was so much more we could have seen in later films had they been made.

Spy Kids and Agent Cody Banks set the bar for young spy films very high and despite some big name British actors jumping to appear on screen this film was not a hit. Everyone tries hard but there obviously was something missing.