Watch The Borrowers For Free

Nice effects though.

Good concept, poorly executed.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

Pete Lender (Bradley Pierce) is sure that someone is causing things to disappear from his home. His parents dismiss him. In fact, a family of borrowers are living in the house. Pod (Jim Broadbent) and Homily Clock (Celia Imrie) are the parents to Arrietty (Flora Newbigin) and Peagreen (Tom Felton). The unscrupulous lawyer Ocious P. Potter (John Goodman) tells Mrs. Lender that without her aunt's will, the Lenders have to move. Potter is planning to demolish the house for new condominiums. Pete catches Arrietty and befriends the Clocks. He takes them along to the new home. However Arrietty and Peagreen fall off of the truck and they return back to the house. Potter comes over and finds the will in a hidden safe in the house. Arrietty and Peagreen manage to steal the will away from Potter.I don't like how this movie looks. It looks ugly. I don't like the reddish brown hue on everything. Their house looks ugly. The giant brand name products don't intrigue me. The Clocks don't enchant me. I don't find Pete adorable. Everything just irked me. The look is so unappealing that it distracts me from the story which is not that compelling anyways.

I've been interested in seeing this adaptation of Mary Norton's novels ever since I saw the Studio Ghibli adaptation, The Secret World of Arrietty, last February. As I expected, this is more of a comic adventure film, a pretty typical children's film for the time, as opposed to the serious and beautiful Ghibli version. I have no idea which is closer to the source material (I'd actually bet the 1997 version is; the other one is way too Ghibli-esque not to have been heavily changed). As it is, the 1997 version is a halfway decent children's films. Not good, not bad. If I were a kid, I think I'd enjoy it. It stars John Goodman and Jim Broadbent, so it at least has something going for it. The family is pretty similar to the Ghibli version, except for they also have a son (Tom Felton). Felton and Flora Newbigin (who plays Arrietty) get separated from their parents (Broadbent and Celia Imrie) when the house they live in is set to be bulldozed by evil land developer (is there any other kind?) John Goodman. There's no seriousness here. It's all just loud adventure type stuff as the borrower children outsmart Goodman at every turn (he could probably very easily defeat his nemeses here if he would just avoid those comic pauses every time they're about to get him). I'm surprised Newbigin didn't go onto anything better. She's a pretty good juvenile actress. I don't think this film was very successful. I don't ever remember it existing (I was in college at the time, so I wouldn't have had any interest). The special effects aren't too bad. The story was adapted just five years previous with Ian Holm starring in the Jim Broadbent role.

I haven't come to the film through the book, and so have no memories to spoil. Purely on its own terms I and my family greatly enjoyed this piece of family entertainment. Personally I rather liked the vaguely mid-Altantic fantasy universe which strangely encompasses the whole of the 20th century, a rather dowdy place where the policemen look Edwardian but people might wear 1930's clothing while speaking on their mobile phones, yet drive 1960's Morris Minor cars on the right despite road markings on the left. Yes, mainly slapstick with flimsy screenplay (and occasionally flimsy acting too, though it's rarely awful as some suggest). In no sense is it deep, but none the worse for that. It's entertainment pure and simple, and on that level it succeeds.

I get really irritated by reviewers intellectualising kids' movies. Not for one second do I think children should be patronised by being offered crap (such as TV rubbish designed to suck out their brains, eg the Cow and Chicken cartoons). However, I do think we adults should be a little more understanding that films made for children not only don't need to be deep and meaningful - but they must not be deep and meaningful. By definition! This movie is silly, and fun, and clever, and it has several important messages about tolerance. How much more deep and meaningful do you need a movie to be?!