Just perfect...

hyped garbage

It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

SWALLOWS AND AMAZONS is the best-remembered film adaptation of the classic Arthur Ransome novel. The plot is simplicity in itself: in 1929, a group of siblings and their mother go on holiday to the Lake District, where they are given the freedom to spend their days boating around the lakes and setting up a camp on a wooded island. While there, they meet up with some rival adventurers and a rich man who lives on a house boat at the edge of the lake.I've never read the book, so I can't comment on how close an adaptation this is, but as a film it's serviceable enough. It ably captures the spirit of a bygone era, where children were left to their own devices in the great outdoors and all the better for it. It's hard to dislike a movie where much of the time is spent on minor intrigue and plotting the intricacies of getting one over on rivals.There's a small adult sub-plot in the film, involving the belligerent house boat owner (played by the affable Ronald Fraser), and this sub-plot particularly reminded me of the writings of Enid Blyton. SWALLOWS AND AMAZONS might be slimly-plotted and rather simplistic in tone, but for its depiction of a forgotten world it's hard to beat.

Wishes do come true, after all...When, as a boy, I read through every one of Arthur Ransome's novels, I dreamily wished that somebody would adapt them to film. It took longer than I'd hoped, but at least today's children can see something of Ransome's stories, even if they don't read any of his books (although, that is a shame).Sure, the plot has been shortened significantly but you expect that when four hundred pages of novel are adapted for the screen. Still, the screenplay even manages to include the charcoal makers, Old and Young Billy (Jack Woolger and John Franklin-Williams), which surprised me.In short, the story is about the four Walker children (John, Susan, Titty and Roger) holidaying on Coniston Water, sailing on the lake, camping on Wildcat Island (Peel Island, actually), meeting and clashing with the Blackett sisters (Nancy and Peggy), and finally performing a valuable service for Captain Flint, uncle to the Blacketts. It's nostalgic; it's inoffensive; it's family fun for families; it's a perfect story for all children.For myself, I thought Kit Seymour (playing Nancy) lacked the strength of character evident in the stories; looked a bit too old for the part, also. The Walker children were well cast and acted their parts beautifully, I thought. Virginia McKenna, appearing only briefly as Mother, was suitably adult for the times. Reginald Fraser as Captain Flint was okay; Robert Morley would have been a better choice, I think.Being somewhat of a purist, I would have preferred black and white cinematography as a better mood setter. However, the colour print certainly enhanced the beauty of the lake and surrounding area. Overall, I can't complain. I'm looking forward to experiencing the TV stories of the Coots on the Norfolk Broads. And, with fading hopes, I'm wondering when a benign producer will put the money up to adapt Peter Duck or Missee Lee for the screen. Hope never dies, however...Recommended for all children from seven to one hundred and seven.

Like many of the other reviewers of this film, I read all the Arthur Ransome books when I was young, and also saw the film when I was around 12 years old.It's interesting to read some of the reviewers wondering if the film could appeal to today's children in the age of Shrek and the Incredibles. Well, my two daughters just watched it this afternoon (too young to have read the books) and they were both glued to it and the oldest enthusiastically grabbed the books when I pulled them down from the shelf.Of course, the acting is awful. You ask yourself what on earth Virginia McKenna is doing in it, and Ronald Frazer (on paper) should be a good Captain Flint, but isn't. The children are almost universally awful. The Walker children's received RADA/Children's Film Foundation pronunciation is just about forgivable, but Kit Seymour as Nancy Blackett is so, so wrong, talking like some posh bird instead of the tomboy Northerner she should have been.But, ah, Kit Seymour where are you now? I had such feelings for you when I was 12. Your posh accent didn't matter to me then, and I carried a flame for you for a long time...

Although no one would accuse this film of being great art, it is a delightful, wholesome and reasonably accurate (albeit simplified) rendition of Arthur Ransome's wonderful book. It is nearly impossible these days to find any movies where the children are kind to one another, the parents are loving and the adventures are free of violence. If you love sailing, old boats, and a pleasant easygoing story, Swallows and Amazons isn't a bad choice. It is one of our family favorites.