Operation Stormbreaker

What a load of rubbish. The basic story seems OK but as it unfolds we are expected to known certain bits of information (I specifically remember the kid fighting in a scrap yard with some thugs who attack him for no apparent reason, he then starts doing loads of martial arts and weapons training moves which were never mentioned before). The "comedy" bits are just cringe induceing (the pigeon falling to the ground when a shooters bullet go's astry), and the acting leaves a lot to be desired.

I know its aimed at kids, but film makers should know that older children and adults will be watching as well. Just avoid this mess.

Firstly, let me make it completely clear that my review is biased because I have read the Horowitz book and I enjoyed it, and a film is never going to be exactly the same as the book it is based on.

Now that is said I can get on with the merciless savaging of one poor director's best efforts.

I notice that CBBC has done a review of this film and said the 'acting is great' and this is a 'fun film about a teenage spy'. To be honest this is a typical example of CBBC. They patronise their young viewers so much so that kids could understandably grow up thinking that when you talk to someone you should keep eye contact always, smile constantly, and bob your head as you slowly pronounce each syllable. It is pathetic that they, in fact I will save that for my CBBC review.

Anyway, this review might be difficult because I vividly remeber my anger as the film finished and I started saying how terrible it was. But since then my head has filled with self doubt because 'surely no one can make a film that bad without trying to?' I shall stick to my original impressions nonetheless though.

Firstly I will say that I have grouped stormbreaker in my mind surrounded by other films in its genre, such as Casino Royale, The Bourne Identity etc etc. But now I think about it, it occurs to me that this film might have been made especially for young children, despite the universal appeal of the books. This would definitely explain a lot.

As is often an issue in books with children having main parts(though strangely never in american films) the kids can't act!

Also, integral plot details are unneccesarily messed with. For example, in the book the MI5 offices is diguised as an ordinary bank building, and it is the events that take place in the building that act as Alex's final test to prove to MI5 that he is suitable. But in the film there is a big underground lair instead. Why would you do this? part of the appeal of the book is that it is all very realistic and plausible, so what do they do? they plonk a secret lair down below the train station to house England's Security service.

I don't think my temper will permit me to go any further because I really will get angry so I will just say this: The best work of a brilliant writer will in twenty years be masked and forgotten about because of a bad, ill conceived film, rushed into the cinemas to maximise profits before the the public eye focuses on something else.

Firstly, let me make it very clear that the actual book is fan-super-tastic. Alas, as we have seen on countless occasions, the brilliance of a good book does not always translate onto the screen (Harry Potter springs to mind, as does the recent Pride and Prejudice). The overall impression I got whilst watching the film was that the director must have simply dismissed any credibility for the plot and characters, as it is just intended for stupid kids who do not know any better. Well who do the makers think read the story to the stupid children?! Throughout the film I wished I had been on set - I would have done this smashing story the justice it demanded and what a film it would have been. In conclusion, do not invent a 'redikuuulousstoopid' underground lair thing with a photo booth for an entrance, OK?? Anthony Horowitz - loving your work, keep it up x