Type in any movie or show to find where you can watch it, or type a person's name.

User Reviews for: Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children

basicsith-deleted-1584196160
CONTAINS SPOILERS4/10  8 years ago
The premise of this film makes no sense. They're stuck living in a timeloop, living the same day over & over in the same house with the same people, with their day scheduled to the very second (to the point they're berated for being literally seconds late for something), & that's supposed to be a paradise? Yay! You're free to be yourself! Just so long as you accept that you have no free will! Especially as one of the kids is clearly a serial killer in the making.

(Also, how does this loop even work? A squirrel falls out of its nest every day & a phone call is received every day, but a letter can arrive that didn't arrive before, & the kids cause different disasters in the local village which result in different consequences, & Jake can visit the loop more than once without running into himself. And how come at the end, it's revealed that his grandfather never died, because they killed the villain in 1943 so he never did it, but it was the grandfather's death that sent Jake on his search to begin with so he never would have killed the villain & arrgghhh paradox paradox! Yes, it's fantasy, but a fantasy universe should have some internal logic to it, however bizarro it may be.)

I guess being stuck in a timeloop would be worth it in order to hide from monsters hunting you - after all, a restricted existence is probably preferable to death... But then it's revealed that they were doing that before the monsters were a thing (it's mentioned they got sick of living in loops), & it's revealed that Jake & his grandfather are Peculiar but lived in the normal world just fine (yes, his grandfather was hunted down, but he managed just fine for his whole life up until then, & considering all the eyeballs being consumed, it doesn't look like the loops are very safe). And thy find the body of someone who has had his eyes removed, so presumably he was Peculiar but lived outside a timeloop. So why go to the trouble of establishing timeloops in the first place, rather than just find an isolated place & chill out there? Or even live in the ordinary world, if the person can blend in well enough?

The finale was a hell of a lot of fun though, & I enjoyed that bit a lot. The visuals were pretty great too, & it was nicely shot. But everything else was eh.

I haven't read the book, so for all I know, the premise & explanations for everything might be way different & actually make sense there. But I haven't read the book. I watched the film. And the film makes no sense. Suspending disbelief only works if there is something to suspend it from.
Like  -  Dislike  -  94
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Reply by bajos
7 years ago
the book, at least the first one is TOTALLY different. they explained the loops things very well... i mean, it doesn´t make much sense, but you kinda get the logic while reading it.... I guess TIm Burton read the second one and thought it was crap, and decided to change the hole story in order to only make one movie and not a trilogy.
Reply  -  Like  -  Deslike  -  10

Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Reply by gabrielbartz_-deleted-1503410157
7 years ago
@czol So a lot of your questions are actually explained in the movie, but let's do this in a more pragmactic way. The Peculiars used to live in the normal world, because the island they lived was a VERY isolated place (hence why that peculiar man, whose body they found, was living there even in modern days), the rift was created in an emergency, to prevent the children to die from the bomb that dropped in their house in 43. Emma explains that for Jacob after he meets Viktor (the eyeless dead boy). (In the books there is no peculiars living in the island, and Viktor is actually killed outside the rift, tho it is not explained how)<br /> The loop repeats what happened in the day that it was created, Jacob was not present that day, so when the loop is reset his presence is erased, that's how he never finds himself as constantly explained by all of the peculiars during Jacob's time with them. (there is no difference in the books and movies concerning this part)<br /> The Daily tasks (squirrel example) are exactly that, daily tasks, things that happen in a certain time that need the peculiars attention, but other than that they are free to do other things, like when Emma takes Jacob to the ship, or the tricks some peculiars play on the villagers as exposed by Miss Peregrine's right when they arrive with Jacob the first time. (In the books children do not have daily tasks)<br /> Jacob's grandfather was an Ethereal hunter, that's why he lived outside the rift, and he was indeed hidden, given the peculiarity that he and Jacob have, pretending to be human is not that hard, as their peculiarity is basically being able to see the Ethereals, as opposed to be light as a feather or having bees living inside of you, that is something you can't easily hide. (In the books, he was not in the house when it was exploded, so he joined the army to get revenge for the death of the peculiars, also, people need to leave and enter the rift from time to time in order to keep it's entrance open, that's how letters arrive in the house).<br /> Most of the loops were created a long time ago, and they explain what would happen if after living so much time in a loop they decide to leave it, flower scene and Emma also explains that for jacob.<br /> I understand the confusion on Jacob's grandfather being alive, but when they travel to London to rescue Miss Peregrine they are actually inside the loop yet, not in modern times, what happened is that since the loop was not reset, the days will start to count again, so instead of living constantly the third day of september, the time will start to pass now and the children will start to age gradually, but they are still living in 43. What they do is enter another rift in London, where Miss Peregrine and the other Ymbrines are kept prisioners and in that rift Jacob's grandfather was still alive, so that's why Jacob is capable of meeting him, and then he jumps from rift to rift until he founds another one that was created in 43 so he is able to reunite with the peculiars. (In the books is explained that if the loop on a rift is not reset it's entrance is closed forever, so Jacob is not able to go back to modern day unless he finds a rift that was created in that year).<br /> The problem is, most of those things were said way too fast in the movie, and I got most of them the second time I watched it, it's a movie for people that know the history, that's a fact, but is still enjoyable.
Reply  -  Like  -  Deslike  -  20

Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Reply by basicsith-deleted-1584196160
7 years ago
@gabrielbartz_ Dude, none of that shit was explained in the film &amp; some of it straight up doesn't fit with what was presented. Maybe it was in the book &amp; you've applied it to the film, but like I said in the last paragraph, I don't care about what might or might not be in the book. I watched a film, &amp; it was a crap film that made no sense. Deal with it.
Reply  -  Like  -  Deslike  -  10

Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Reply by TheNyghty
7 years ago
@gabrielbartz_ Thanks for all this info, really enjoyed the movie without reading the books but the extra info you give is great. Will have to rewatch with that in mind for sure.
Reply  -  Like  -  Deslike  -  00

Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
CinemaSerf
/10  12 months ago
This reminded me a bit of the "Golden Compass" (2007) as Asa Butterfield ("Jake") finds himself drawn to a sleepy island where he encounters the eponymous, magical, Eva Green who hosts a group of children of all ages with special quirks who live in a time loop - the same day from 1943 - which should ensure that they remain safe from the predatory "Barron" (a wonderfully over-the-top Samuel L. Jackson) and his menacing monsters who are bent on capturing "Miss Peregrine" and eliminating the youngsters. It's a bit too long, but once it gets up an head of steam then Butterfield is an engaging hero well supported by the odd appearances from Dame Judi Dench, Rupert Everett, his father Chris O'Dowd and his inspirational grandfather Terence Stamp. The stories are enjoyably episodic, each child has their five minutes of fame to demonstrate their skills and personality, there's a soupçon of romance, a bit of mischief, teenage jealousy and yes, even the usually rather wooden Eva Green brings a little charisma to the screen with her Sherlock Holmes-style pipe before a denouement that knits it all together nicely. I like that this is trying to be a more sophisticated story for younger folks. Some of the issues - i.e. WWII - have resonance beyond the frivolity of the story and the increasing sense of menace is well developed by Tim Burton without becoming the stuff of sleepless nights.
Like  -  Dislike  -  0
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Filipe Manuel Dias Neto
/10  one year ago
**Despite the flaws, and some less than positive interpretations, it is a good film.**

Tim Burton has already accustomed us to a surreal and fantastic style, and he almost always gives us very good films. This movie is no exception, giving us good entertainment. It's based on a book, which I've never read and I don't know what it's like, although I've heard that it's frankly more interesting than this movie. However, Tim Burton has already shown that he doesn't care much about this, in previous works that we have seen.

The script is surreal and fantastic, based on a teenager's trip to the British Isles, to see his grandfather's place of origin, recently deceased. There, he discovers the ruins of the orphanage where his grandfather grew up, destroyed by German bombing and never rebuilt. And later he discovers that his childhood friends and the orphanage's governess are still alive and living in a time loop created the day the house was razed. And that there is a danger that will threaten them all.

Overall, the film is quite satisfying, entertains quite well, and has a beautiful, well-written story. This is due, in large part, to the way in which he tackles difficult topics such as mourning and the family relationship between a father and a son. There are some little-explained details, loose ends, situations that don't get the attention they could have, and I thought the film takes a while to "gear" and really capture our interest.

Among the cast of this film, no one stands out like the impeccable Eva Green. The actress has what it takes for the character that fits her, and she knows how to make the most of her charisma and the good quality of the material given to her by the screenwriter. Terence Stamp was also in good shape and did a good job. Among the younger actors, it is Ella Purnell who stands out the most on a positive note, although Finlay MacMillan and Lauren McCrostie also give us very satisfactory performances. Unfortunately, as far as the cast is concerned, everyone else can't achieve such a good performance: Judi Dench, Rupert Everett and Chris O'Dowd have neither characters nor screen time to allow them to do something really interesting. Despite having achieved some good moments, Samuel L. Jackson looks like a fish out of water in this work. But the one who really deserves a boo is Asa Butterfield. It was a bad choice, a casting error. The actor doesn't have charisma, he doesn't have the capacity to deal with the protagonist, and he wasn't very lucky with the material he received either (and here, the fault lies with the screenwriter and the way he conceived and worked his character). Far from capturing attention and holding our interest, the actor fades away from any of his co-stars.

Another of the strong points of this film are the visual effects and the excellent CGI used. The house, for example, couldn't be more realistic, and the skeletons and ship look great on screen too. The cinematography was very well worked, the camera does a good job, the sets and especially the costumes and hairstyles are excellent and automatically transport you to the 40s. I really liked some of the places where the film was made, highlighting In particular, there is a famous Belgian mansion near Antwerp, which has been in ruins since the Second World War and which was demolished shortly after this film was released. The soundtrack does an effective job, but it doesn't bring us any surprises.
Like  -  Dislike  -  0
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Andre Gonzales
/10  6 months ago
A bunch of teens and children with weird special abilities like superheroes all in one house. Miss Peregrine is pretty much there mom. I hope they make a sequel because I would like to see more of there abilities then they showed in this movie. It feels like it was like a tease showing us as little as possible at what they can do.
Like  -  Dislike  -  0
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Gimly
/10  6 years ago
_Miss Peregrine's_ could have done with a little more peculiarity. I understand that the lead is our door into this fantastical world, but a character can be relatable without being downright boring. Not an outright bad movie, but certainly not the one to put Tim Burton back on track.

Eva Green is golden but under-utilised, Sam Jackson can barely talk through his fake teeth, the creature designs are fantastic but pulled off with some very poor CGI. There is a little stop-motion to counter this, but again, it's not used to the degree it should have been. Which is really an apt description for the whole thing. Over an over, _Miss Peregrine's_ hints at a great movie buried somewhere within it, but what we end up with is an ill-paced mess. The only truly engaging character momets of the whole story are dropped as soon as they crop up in favour of the "Good VS Evil" rhetoric you've seen a million times before.

_Final rating:★★½ - Had a lot that appealed to me, didn’t quite work as a whole._
Like  -  Dislike  -  0
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Back to Top