I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Why so much hype?

It's funny watching the elements come together in this complicated scam. On one hand, the set-up isn't quite as complex as it seems, but there's an easy sense of fun in every exchange.

The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

Why such a low rating? A movie with such good intentions and well made characters deserve more love. I was so into the idea from the start, and the message about facing your own fear was well woven into a classic fairy-tale trope of going through 3 tests. Of course you'll get the most out of the movie if you know all the references to classic books like Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde, Treasure Island, Alice in Wonderland, The Hound of the Baskervilles, Moby Dick, etc., but I think that's what makes The Pagemaster a good family movie. Kids can get entertained by the lively animated characters and relate to Macauly Culkin's role while adults can enjoy the clever use of historic literature. The different segments of literary genres could've been both deeper and wider had the movie been just fifteen or so minutes longer, because honestly, it was a little rushed at times, but that's my only complaint about it. The segments were fine as they were, but could've made more out of its source material. The animation was pretty good at times. Also a little dated sometimes, but the horror segment and that of fantasy actually had a grand feel to it. The dragon was my favorite simply because of the massive presence it had. It really felt BIG. The anthropomorphic books were also cute and clever in their interactions. Some may find them annoying, but Whoopi Goldberg,Patrick Stewart and Frank Welker brought them to life with exellence. An underated family movie which deserves more attention. Entertaining, educational and heartwarming

Now this was popular with Cartoon Network, when I was growing up this was always a classic movie special for the channel, and as a kid I do have some fond memories of this film. But as an adult I can see the problems of which there are many.What's the marshmallow? Macaulay Culkin plays Richard Tyler, a nervous and awkward child who allows statistics to control his life, meaning he never does anything sporty or risky like other kids. This all changes though when he enters a creepy library to escape a raging storm, and is soon thrown into an enchanted animated world where he has to locate the exit. On the way he picks up three books, Adventure, Fantasy and Horror, who help him embark on his quest through the library and all the mysterious and strange wonders it may entail.Now, the problems. It is quite slow in places which even as a kid left me rather turned off to it. At the same time there are quite a few little holes in the story that do make you scratch your head in confusion. Another problem I found as a kid was the fact that it only dabbled in three genres of literature. What about Science Fiction, Non-Fiction, Action, Celebrity Autobiography? I realise they're trying to keep it simple, but it didn't have to be as simple as that! Also, it's simplistic nature does cause some issues when they come across literary legends as they're literally just glanced over! If it weren't for the fact that I'd heard of these icons of novels already, you wouldn't know who they were or what stories they were from as the movie never takes the time to explain them properly!But on the plus side, the animation is very good, with some lovely colours and an interesting art style. As a kid I never had any complaints on that front. Another good thing is that the story, while as mentioned slow in places, does keep you gripped long enough to watch it.On the whole, a lot of problems with the film, but at the same time some good things that will keep you entertained. Perhaps for younger kids I'd say this movie is recommended, but for adults you'll probably find yourself disinterested.

When I was a little girl, I used to love this movie and I truly believe it deserves a better rating. I haven't watched it in years and yet, I still remember the huge library, the three different books (Adventure, Horror and Fantasy if I remember well), their related stories and universes. I remember understanding the cowardice of the boy (why are heroes always so confident?) and how he overcomes it. And as a French student of English literature, I believe it's a nice way for a child to approach some classics of British literature. It could even be used in schools (am I going too far? aha). Perhaps that if I watched it now, as an adult, I'd hate it. But does it really matter? It's meant for kids anyway!

Why is the movie telling kids to read more? Wouldn't that hurt your movie profit if all the children are reading books rather than watching your mediocre movie? I guess, I know why this movie bomb when it came out. Still, to me, personally. This movie isn't half bad. It's pretty OK to me. Take a look, it's in a book! Reading rainbow starts out, oops I meant, Page master starts out with ten year old Richard Tyler (Macaulay Culkin) who fears everything. By everything, I meant everything. He doesn't seem like not a real life character anyways due to his overused of statistics and encyclopedia size facts that come out of nowhere. I don't know why the movie choice Richard to be the main character, because he's probably had read some kind of book before. He had to get find those facts somewhere. He's already a book worm, but the movie is making him look like he never read a book before. One day, Richard gets caught in a harsh thunderstorm on a bike trip and takes shelter in a library. Here, he is met by Mr. Dewey (Christopher Lloyd), an eccentric librarian who tries to find a book for Richard and gives him a library card. Christopher Lloyd over acts and is somewhat creepy in this scene. Richard wanders off and finds a large rotunda painted with classic fictional characters that he supposing don't know of. Richard slips on some water that had dripped from his coat and falls down, hitting his head and knocking him unconscious. He awakens and finds the rotunda paintings melting, forming a wave of color that transforms him and the library into illustrations. This is where Director Jon Johnston ends, and directors of the animation parts, Pixote Hunt and Glenn Chaika start. Richard is approached by the Pagemaster (Also Christopher Lloyd) who sends him on a journey into the fiction section to find the "exit". It's funny how the Page Master puts Richard in life threating danger just to prove a point that he has courage in him. It's like putting a young baby in a lion cage and tell it to grow up. It's not like reading will make you brave, anyways. Only survivoring through those life threating events can do that. Reading about interesting characters in books isn't truly living, folks. Being a interesting character in real life and living through something is truly living. Along the way, Richard befriends three anthropomorphic books: Adventure (Patrick Stewart), a swashbuckling pirate like book; Fantasy (Whoopi Goldberg), a sassy but caring fairy tale book; and Horror (Frank Welker), a fearful "hunchbook" with a misshapen spine. I'm surprise that Sci-Fiction wasn't part of the group since a lot of children, I know. Read that. I guess nobody heard of that genre in Richard's world. At less, they didn't jump into young adult novels like Twilight. That would be horrible. The three agree to help Richard to find his way out if he checks them out with his library card. Together, the quartet encounter classic fictional characters and worlds on their way to the exit. I like how they try to put as much literature works into the film, but I have to question that most of the works they did put in, aren't technically for children. Example: the Hounds of Baskervilles has one of the hardest reading levels of all, due to its large amount of vocabulary, use of the English language, and large amounts of geographic and science facts. Not only that, it has a large amount of drug use, sex, and violence that isn't suite for children. Moby Dick wasn't written for children at all as well due to Melville employs stylized language, symbolism, slang language and the metaphor to explore numerous complex themes that would be way too complex for the normal ten year old first time reader. Still I like the fact, that they meet Dr. Jekyll (Leonard Nimoy) from the book Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Then Long John Silver (Jim Cummings) from Treasure Island. It's sad to say that both those classic animation characters are nothing like the literature in which they came from. Example: Dr. Jekyll, for example, isn't creepy and homicidal. He's just a scientist addicted to a potion that frees him from his uptight persona. It's only Mr. Hyde that acts upon crude action. It's ironic and hypocritical that the movie writer tries to use classic literary characters to make kids read books when the writer himself didn't read the books either. The characters were brief and unexplained, but also inaccurate. I do like how the majority of the cast has appeared in some form or another on Star Trek. The animation was pretty well. The paint dragon was badass for when this was made. If you look close, you'll find out that in the worlds are practically everything is made out of books. The rocks, the stairs, the houses. It's a nice little detail which the animators inserted. I love the soundtrack by James Horner. I thought the music in here was fantastic and often use in other film trailers and commercials. I find it weird that a movie is telling children to read, rather than schools or even the parents. I think the best way to get children to read is to turn off the television and read to them. Then allow them to read to you. Simple like that. You don't need this mess. movie to do that.