Railway Children (2022) User Reviews

You can miss this train

[danchilton-71955 · 5/10 · 24 July 2022]

As you might expect from an attempt to re run a beloved classic there is a certain air of somewhat cynical box checking about The Railway Children Return but some charm does manage to sneak through.

This time round children are sent to the country to escape the blitz rather than just having to slum it with the yokels because daddy has legal problems. This set up allows Jenny Agutter to return as the grown up matriarch of a family taking in the new generation of railway kids. She seems to be enjoying herself but doesn't really have much to do. This is the same for most of the adult characters in the film, thinly drawn but likeable (apart from one insufferable old uncle who turns up purely to spout ra ra nonsense).

This makes sense as it is the railway "children" after all. Some of the child acting is, to be kind, a mixed bag but it never derails proceedings and there is only so much a young actor can do with insightful lines like, "I hate war, I hate it!"

The plot, such as it is, involves a runaway soldier and institutional racism. Fortunately, only the American military are racist (although they still promote black soldiers far up the ranks so i guess we are meant to think they aren't all bad) as the citizens of a quant English village would never indulge in such behaviour. To call the events of the movie a plot is actually a bit of stretch, things happen for a while and then just sort of resovle themselves without much explanation of how everynody came together.

The Railway Children Return isnt a complete waste of time but is likely to be quickly forgotten. Probably as soon as the credits roll.

A mediocre sequel.

[katienutts · 5/10 · 16 July 2022]

Living in Haworth and being a massive fan of the original film, I had high expectations for this film.

Although the cast are great, the plot is thin and I struggled to be kept entertained.

I was disappointed that only a couple of the original characters made an appearance especially considering that several are still around today.

There's no mention of past characters nor whether Bobby married the boy stuck on the tunnel from the first film. In this film, her husband has passed - a casualty of the war. No mention of Perks either and there must have been plenty of opportunity to include him I the story.

I felt a little let down by the writers tbh, it could've been so much better and Unlike the original, I wouldn't rush to see it again.

It is though, beautifully shot and will be a massive tourism boom for the locals of the Yorkshire villages of Haworth and Oakworth.

Sweet but lacklustre

[scottdance-35809 · 5/10 · 20 July 2022]

There is nothing inherently wrong with this film, it is very sweet, quaint and positively intoxicating with its timeless charm of trains in the Yorkshire countryside. But the audience need something more to keep The film from being boring; it is simply not enough to recycle the same locations and the same plot points because from very early on this film just becomes a predictable tribute to the superior 1970s version.

An interesting point to note is how everyone from film critics to members of the public have complained about the secondary theme regarding racial inequality. Nobody was expecting nor wanted this theme in the film and subsequently it is quite jarring and feels out of place according to many people. I for one argue that in order for a period film to be successful nowadays it has to carry social related issues such as racial inequality in order for it to be able to relate to the wider public. After all, we are now so much more aware of racial related issues, ignoring it is hard to do.

In spite of the beautiful shots there was a really terrible continuity errors that were next to unforgivable and the hammy acting. Of the children left much to be desired when it came down to the casting director's choices.

This film will mostly have a fondness towards it, but it's destined to be consigned to TV as a Sunday afternoon filler.

Shocking

[sparkey1967 · 19 February 2023]

I gave up half way through & I rarely do that, some part of me has faith that things will improve, they really didn't!!!

I can't remain PC & give this my honest opinion, but do anything with your time rather than spend it watching this!!

It does of course have Jenny Agutter, but she should not have lowered herself to be involved!!! Lionel Jeffries would be turning in his grave.

I'd watch the original any time, but not this ridiculous pile of ****!

Didn't even see much in the way of actual trains or railways to be honest, just some carriages in a siding!

I wanted it to relight the childhood feelings that the original did, I wanted it to be at least watchable & ideally good, alas no!!!!

Do yourselves a favour and don't bother!!

Stop comparing it to the original and take it on its own merits.

[trevorwomble · 6/10 · 24 July 2022]

Part of the negativity here is that some people seem to be reacting like it is blasphemy to make a sequel of sorts to a stone cold classic like the 1970 version is. Yes, its not one of those rare beasts (like Star Trek - The Wrath of Khan, Godfather II, or The Empire Strikes Back) that manages to pull of the impossible and be better than the classic film before it, but its not as terrible as some here would have you believe either. In fact if you can just forget for one second about the huge shadow Lionel Jeffries beloved 1970 film, this is actually quite a watchable and entertaining film. And to those who have been saying this film is ruined by woke politics....well I hate to break it to you but the basic background of black American G. I.s being given a particularly unjustified hard time by their own side during WWII is actually based on fact (look at the Jim Brown character in 1967s The Dirty Dozen to see the same type of thing). In fact I think this is a decent effort to tell a story about an injustice just as the original film did.

The cast are fine with Beau Gadson as Lily being a standout. Sheridan Smith turns in a good performance too as Annie, although Tom Courtenay seems like he's been squeezed into the plot and Jenny Agutter seems to have not a lot to do (which is odd because she was the heart and soul of the original). The impact of war on the children is reasonably well dealt with too in a way that isn't patronising for youngsters.

My only real grumble is a technical one. The overuse of edits and of hand held camerawork in the first half of the film was really annoying, especially as the original had a much more natural flow to the visuals which i'm surprised teh director here didn't try and emulate. Also the colour palette is strangely muted here with greens and browns overwhelming the picture. Admittedly that may have been intentional considering that this is supposed to be wartime, but maybe that was intentional? I also found the language felt out of place. Lionel Jeffries would never let coarse words like 'Fart' into his script and it felt like unnecessary pandering to a young audience.

This is not a bad film. Actually it's quite a decent one (even if it lacks an ending as powerful and tear-jerking as the original). A film about people for a family audience that offers the viewer something more traditional than yet another comic book adaptation or another CGI animation film. After seeing yet another soulless American multinational corporate feature film last week, to me it was nice to see this as it wasn't trying to sell me a toy, a happy meal or hook me into a franchise. For that I was thankful. Sure, films with Minions have their place but its nice that there is a humanity to a film like this. However the film never quite escapes the massive shadow of it's 52 year old forebearer (which people forget did have some cheesy moments). This film shouldn't be criticised just because it exists, I am just acknowledging its flaws. We should be happy that this is at least something different as opposed to the filmmakers not being silly enough to attempt to remake the original.

To sum up then, this is an inferior if watchable sequel to one of the most beloved films ever to come out of the UK. It is not great but nor is it terrible, it's just not going to be as memorable and celebrated 52 years after it was released (unlike the original which was lightning in a bottle).

Not as bad as many of these reviews would tell you

[adight-50880 · 6/10 · 22 September 2022]

Is it as good as the original? Not by a long chalk.

Is it trading on the love of the original, and of Jenny Agutter? Undoubtedly.

Is it completely woke and rewrites history, spinning a 21st C perspective? No (but yes, as it's made in the 21st C!) On the history side, the Snowdrops (US Army military police) did storm into a Lancashire pub as black GIs were fraternising with the locals. The locals stood up the GIs, the MPs discharged a weapon and a black soldier was killed. (Search Battle of BamberBridge) As for a Black US General, we'll Brigadier General Benjamin O Davis Sr was the first black man to hold that rank. In WW2 he held a troubleshooting role to assist the expanded role of African Americans, in segregated units. In 1944 he was stationed in Europe, so not a stretch of imagination to place him on a train in the north of England.

Essentially, this would've made a good 6 part, 30 minute series for CBBC, with no mention of The Railway Children.

Shameful Hack

[hilary_mae-912-80561 · 3/10 · 25 July 2022]

Who is the audience supposed to be? I thought this would be a family movie, and expected a weak version of the original, but the writers have ruined a wonderful original tale and filled the film with unpleasant characters, racism, bigotry and bad mannered children.

Yes, the issues of racism do need to be told and historically remembered, but this is not the film for it. The Railways Children was a lovely, charming and heartfelt story of a family in crisis and how loving children helped their mother and each other. This is not the platform for a socially conscience lesson.

Write a new movie if you want that; don't leach off a gentle story.

Really enjoyed it.

[uum-30420 · 7/10 · 25 August 2022]

First off I will admit that I haven't seen the older adaptions, but I found this movie to be really watchable and heartwarming.

The acting was amazing, and for a movie about war there were many funny moments that made me connect with the characters. I enjoyed the fact that there was one actress who was in two former adaptions of this story, she really seemed to love her role and gave a great performance.

There are many reviews here that decry this movie as 'woke', but I thought the inclusion of the issues facing black soldiers fighting on the side of the Allies added a facet that I haven't seen before.

A solid 7/10, thoroughly enjoyed it.

Ruined a classic with woke racism

[proberts-31623 · 1/10 · 27 July 2022]

Weak script, with poor acting and brainwashing the audience with woke rewriting of history. It has no business using the name of a classic film. Avoid at all cost.

An interesting story but..

[hillww · 6/10 · 19 July 2022]

This was a really interesting story based on a true but relatively forgotten part of WW2 history.

I could cope (just) with the 2022 wokeness and the extremely dodgy CGI but the film was completely overwhelmed by the mediocre, loud and intrusive music that was everywhere.

Have the Producers not heard of the phrase 'less is more' or considered allowing the audience to decide its own reaction to the events on screen.

Doubt I shall want see it again, even for free.

Truly Awful

[malcolmgsw · 2/10 · 21 July 2022]

Trading on the goodwill generated by the original,this quickly dispels any such feeling. A plot which has little of the warmth and charm of the original. It then tries to copy the climax of the original. The music is overbearing.

Interesting to see Tom Courtney,other than that a total non event.

Not quite worthy follow up.

[mick-meyers · 8/10 · 27 July 2022]

The film as a stand alone,is a good effort,but it will be derided by many as with all sequels as a failure.nit to be missed especially for those that miss the innocent days of childhood.shame there wasn't a nod to Bernard Cribbens who's was down to appear but due to health reasons couldn't.there could be a worse way to spend an afternoon.

Ignore the right wing trolls

[dellis-71445 · 7/10 · 17 August 2022]

This is a solid family film and not a superhero in sight. Sure, the ending is a little unbelievable but overall I enjoyed it and there are some good young actors here too.

Abysmal

[georgesim-99600 · 1/10 · 18 July 2022]

I do wish Film Producers would leave classic cinema well and truly alone, this movie comes nowhere near the original, it is so badly scripted that even the superb acting skills of Jenny Agutter, Sheridan Smith & Tom Courtenay can't rescue it. By the way, when evacuations during the Second World War began the Americans weren't even in the war??..

Railway Children

[elainehowell · 22 November 2022]

I have just watched this as a TV movie. Thank goodness I didn't pay cinema prices for myself and family. Absolutely dreadful. Seems to have been totally rewritten and so many deviations from the lovely original story. It's a party political broadcast in so many parts . I certainly don't recall so much violence and rude children . Plus Americans written into the story line. A lot of these film re writes should just be left as they are rarely anywhere near the original. The scenery is of course beautiful, the old trains amazing, some of the actors just about OK but in general very poor. Very surprised Jenny reprised a role. In all very disappointing.

pseudo-sequel

[ferguson-6 · 6/10 · 27 September 2022]

Greetings again from the darkness. We probably need more family-style movies covering serious topics and worldly events in a style that makes it amenable for kids to watch and learn. I tried to keep that in mind while watching this film from director Morgan Matthews (A BRILLIANT YOUNG MIND, 2014) and co-writers Daniel Brocklehurst and Jemma Rodgers. It should be noted that it also serves as a pseudo-sequel to the classic 1970 film directed by Lionel Jeffries, which was adapted from the beloved novel by British author Edith Nesbit.

An opening at the Train depot in 1944 finds many mothers tearfully hugging their kids goodbye as they help them board. It's war time and parents will do anything they can to protect their offspring - even if it means an unknown future and the chance they will never see them again. We follow three particular siblings: Lily (Beau Gadsdon), the eldest; Pattie (Eden Hamilton), clever but not as old as she wishes; and Ted (Zac Cudby), the youngest. The three are from Salford and headed towards the safer countryside, where bombs aren't as likely to rain down.

Upon arrival, the kids are taken in by Roberta "Bobbie" Waterbury (Jenny Agutter) and her daughter Annie (Sheridan Smith). Ms. Agutter reprises her role as "Bobbie", which she played in the original film some 52 years ago. She's now grandmother to Annie's son Thomas (Austin Haynes), who quickly bonds with the new arrivals. Annie is also the local schoolmistress charged with making sure the kids keep up with their studies.

Lily carries the weight of being the oldest child, and the others look to her for direction when they stumble upon Abe (KJ Aikens), an injured young American soldier gone AWOL. He's hiding out in a disabled train car, and no one knows what to make of him, other than they want to help. This is the "serious" side of the story, and it's balanced with often silly-type sequences. As an example, the new kids are out of their element with farm life, and of course, we get the pratfall of slipping in the mud, followed by the giggles.

Tom Courtenay appears as the mysterious Uncle Walter, while John Bradley is the station master. Homages to the original include Lily dreaming of seeing her military dad through the steam of the locomotive, and we see the local kids banning together to create signs and noise to stop a passing train. The aspects of racism are a bit heavy-handed, but not to the extreme of the overly dramatic, and at times, overbearing music (meant to generate viewer reaction). It's easy to dismiss the film as fluff due to it's "after school programming" feel, but again, that is purposeful, and through young eyes, it should work.

The first review on IMDB for "The Railway Children Return"

[Metal_Robots · 7/10 · 15 July 2022]

"The Railway Children Return" is a new film. It features a Railway, a train, various children, and a few adults.

I first became aware of The Railway Children when I was a child myself, but I was not involved with railways in any way at the time. It was often shown on TV at the time and I also used to watch something called Black Beauty, which was tonally similar but set at an earlier time, as far as I recall. Thanks for reading my contribution to IMDB.

The "usual" tripe.

[michaeljameshughes · 1/10 · 28 July 2022]

The original, released in 1970, is still remembered, over 50 years later, with affection. A great little story about childhood innocence. This latest effort will be remembered for 50 minutes!!!. An absolute travesty that they linked it to the original in an effort to get " bums on seats". Why, oh why, do these film-makers think it is fine to turn a well-loved classic into a "woke-infested" pile of doo-doo?. Well at least it will lose money, let's hope the money men take notice, but they never seem to learn.

Is this the first occasion on which the second episode of a franchise has appeared fifty-two years after the first?

[JamesHitchcock · 6/10 · 14 April 2023]

During my childhood, I loved Edith Nesbit's novel "The Railway Children" and was equally fond of the film which originally came out at around the same time (1970) as I was reading the book. I am not the only one to have enjoyed the film; it enjoys classic status in Britain and is sometimes even included in lists of the "greatest films ever made".

"The Railway Children Return" is a very belated sequel to the 1970 film. Is this the first occasion on which the second episode of a franchise has appeared fifty-two years after the first? Despite the title, the film is not about the further exploits of Bobbie, Phyllis and Peter, the children featured in the novel. The story is not set in the Edwardian period but forty years later in 1944. Bobbie, now an old lady, has a role in the story, but we learn that Peter was killed in the First World War and that Phyllis is also dead, although her husband Walter appears.

The children in this film are siblings Lily, Pattie and Ted, who are evacuated from Manchester to the Yorkshire village of Oakworth, the village also featured in the original film. They are befriended by Bobbie's grandson Thomas, whose mother Annie is the headmistress of the local school. The American Army has a base nearby, and most of the story revolves around what happens after the children meet an African-American soldier named Abe McCarthy. It turns out that Abe is only 14 years old- he joined the army by lying about his age- and that he has deserted because of racist bullying by white officers and the military police. The film follows the adventures of the children as they attempt to help Abe to escape; he has plans to get to Liverpool to find a ship that will take him back to America. As in the earlier film, railways play an important part in the drama.

The film has generated a considerable amount of controversy, particularly on the political Right. There have been grumblings that the sequel has "ruined" the original film and that the racial theme is just another example of "woke" political correctness. I myself, however, would not accept these criticisms for the following reasons. Firstly, the original film still exists and is the same as it always was. Secondly, the US Army of the 1940s, like many American institutions of the period, was indeed deeply racist, and the racism which existed within its ranks is therefore a legitimate subject for a film. Thirdly, Nesbit herself was politically on the Left, a Fabian socialist and sympathetic to the "little man" taking on authority. (Remember that Russian political refugee, on the run from the Tsarist authorities, in the original?) I therefore suspect that she would not have disapproved of a sequel to her novel being used to highlight the theme of racism. Fourthly, if there seem to be a disproportionate number of films today dealing with racial themes, this is probably a backlash to those long decades during which the cinema, in both Britain and America, either ignored such themes altogether or at best only dealt with them occasionally.

Despite this, however, I still did not enjoy this film as much as I did the original. Part of the reason is that there are no acting performances that stand out in the way that those by Jenny Agutter and Bernard Cribbins did; Agutter appears again here as the older Bobbie, but does not make the same impression that she did all those years ago. Another part of the reason is that the ending is rather disappointing, with Abe being saved from a possible death sentence for desertion by the intervention of a deus ex machina in the form of a sympathetic American General, who just happens to be black. And finally, while "The Railway Children Return" is by no means a bad film- it's heart is in the right place- for me it lacks the indefinable charm of its predecessor. But then, that predecessor is largely protected from criticism by a thick layer of childhood nostalgia. 6/10

Some goofs. We learn that the children have been evacuated from Manchester by renewed German bombing of British cities. While the Luftwaffe did indeed conduct a fresh bombing campaign ("Operation Steinbock") in early 1944, it was targeted at London, not at Northern cities. In 1944 the US Army only had one black General, Benjamin Davis, who never served in Britain. The presence of a black General also seemed to undermine the film's argument that the US Army in the forties was institutionally racist.

Truly awful film

[Sky4021 · 1/10 · 29 August 2022]

Ruined a classic film bringing racism into it why was that needed!!??why change a film which had a feel good family feel to it!! No need what's so ever.miserable fail in my eyes and others reviews I can see,stop trying to rewrite classic films leave them alone,not sure what they were thinking another one ruined by wokeism and drivel, a charming family feel good film ruined......appalled to be honest how on earth did they think this would work!!

Stop trying to rewrite classic films for rubbish like this,some terrible acting too may I add,the original railway child actress Jenny Agutter must have been crazy to join this film.

Enjoyable family film

[mich9999 · 7/10 · 4 March 2023]

I'm surprised at some of the low scoring reviews, and can only assume some people object to certain aspects of the story line.

The film exposes the racism, even bigotry, that was prevalent at the time in the US, and also in the US Army, as well as the illegal conscription of minors. The story is based around this, and while it exploits similarities to the original, overall this was a heartwarming, if a little far fetched at times (But then so was the original!) story exposing the tragic realities of the time.

Not the most gripping film, especially having lost some of the originality to the first, it is however a little more realistic and well worth a watch.

Probably pitched at younger viewers, but as a family film, it works.

Disappointing

[glyn-jackson · 3/10 · 20 July 2022]

We were really looking forward to this film but were left very dissapointed.

Even the posters featuring Spitfires and the children running towards a steam train seem to be totally missleading as neither feature in the film.

The film is almost totally focused on a young black GI on the run because he has been a victim of racism with MP's and the charm of the original film where the kids spend their time watching the trains go by - sadly they seem to spend all their time hanging around in a railyard full of empty freight.

It was a watchable film but not one i would rush out to see again - not like the original which I can watch over and over again.

Get on Board

[talentgirl · 8/10 · 15 July 2022]

A lovely nostalgic film. A simple story but well executed. It was lovely to see Jenny Agutter in it and took me back to a simpler time of my own childhood. Well worth seeing and your kids would like it if you could persuade them to come along. Recommended.

Alright, but leaves lots to be desired.

[joehills-47835 · 6/10 · 6 September 2023]

An alright film, one I watched at the cinema when it came out, and then again streamed it while having a quiet afternoon in. The film surrounds 3 different children to its 53-year old predecessor, with only 1 cast member from the original film returning. As a avid rail enthusiast, I have to talk about the trains for a minute. To the public eye, this may not be noticeable, but there are dozens of little errors and continuity issues throughout regarding the trains and the railway. I'll list one or two examples.

In the opening scene, the engine pulling the train that the children are riding on changes 3 times, each change extremely noticeable. There is also one panning shot flying over the top of the engine, as it sounds its whistle, no steam can be seen coming from it. I'm not bothered about the inaccuracies, as all of the locomotives (bar one) are prototypical to have been seen on the tracks in Britain in 1944. Abe, the American GI who is on the run from his commanding officers, is a cool character, however it's much easier to be found in a small tin-pot village like Oakworth than it would've to be in a large city like London. I praise the film for not glossing over the harsh reality of WW2, especially with the bomb that drops on the graveyard, and the racism surrounding other races of people. All in all, a film that hard-core rail enthusiasts will tear to shreds due to the amount of errors and inaccuracies, however a decent film for families to watch, especially ones with children who are 8+, mainly because of the usage of potty humour throughout...

What have they done.

[majorebanez · 1/10 · 19 July 2022]

Another movie ruined by race again. If they can't make a good movie they decide, hey let's make a movie about race as that's all we know how to do. They ruined a classic English movie by injecting race into it. We all have had enough now of this, just stop.........