ChicRawIdol A brilliant film that helped define a genre

Lidia Draper Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

Lucia Ayala It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

Cassandra Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

TheLittleSongbird This did have the potential to be really, really good. But as an adaptation of the wonderful story by Norman Lindsey, it does fall short, and the result is a rather disappointing animated film. My main problem was the story. A lot was left out from the original story, and replaced with some very slow and pointless scenes and contrived sub plotting. The songs were unnecessary and rather uninspiring, none of them are memorable in any way, and the lip syching, especially with the character of Bill Barnacle, was very distracting. Not to mention the script, that was quite poor even for a kids movie, it just lacked a sense of fun, despite the valiant attempts of livening it up. However there are a number of good points, namely the terrific voice cast, that includes John Cleese(a bit loud at times but fine overall), Geoffrey Rush, Hugo Weaving, Sam Neill and an unrecognisable Jack Thompson. Another was that I personally thought the animation was pretty good, with the lovely Australian backgrounds, and the characters are at least likable. All in all, watchable but disappointing. It had the potential to be wonderful, but due to elements that didn't work, it is a hit-or-miss really. 5/10 Bethany Cox

MKZaa And so you see the time is ripe/ To send this twaddle up the pipe/ It had to go/ It had to be/ And very soon you're going to see...Hopefully a better version of the beloved masterpiece. One comment, what faithfulness did the film show to the book? I'm waiting! Seriously, I found this nonsense disgraceful, loud, noisy and unacceptable as a rendition of a classic piece of Australian literature.Honestly, how could anyone like it? The best part? THE CAST, NOT THE FILM, JUST THE ACTORS PROVIDING THE VOICES!In fact, my rating doesn't even appear on the register - I give it 0.01 - WOEFUL!

aplord You know a film is in trouble when a character in children's classic written early last century utters a line like " It'll destroy the very fabric of the universe!" That line - or something like it, gets a workout towards the end of this crude updating of the Australian Classic.Of course, you won't have to wait until near the end to realise that this film is in trouble. The first few minutes will be all it takes.Assemble a fine cast, spend millions and adapt the Australian Children's book that's in the same league as the "Wizard of Oz", "Wind in the Willows" or "Alice in Wonderland". A recipe for success you would think.Instead this is a disaster.Why? Because the makers simply didn't trust the strength of their material. Norman Lindsay wrote the book to prove that kids like hearing stories about food. It was a bet. Someone else had offered the opinion that what children wanted to hear about was "fairies and elves "."Nonsense," said Lindsay and wrote the Magic Pudding to prove it.The Magic Pudding is loud, fast, broad, satirical and the book they invented the word "rambunctious" for.The film is mild, meandering and with a moral about friendship and not being greedy. It comes with extra characters to give it cuteness, extra plot to give it relevance and extra gags "for the kids".Sad sad sad. Read the book. Read the book aloud. Read it aloud to kids. Don't bother seeing this movie.

snowyguineapig I watched the first half hour of this thing on Showtime this morning before I switched off the TV. The best bits were the water colour backgrounds. Story was s***e. No direction. Lots of meaningless action. All wasted and futile. The people that made this need to go back and Learn the craft of Storytelling. Moral: Don't try and upgrade a classic.Funniest bit: John Laws trying to act. Hilarious!