Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Good start, but then it gets ruined

I didn’t really have many expectations going into the movie (good or bad), but I actually really enjoyed it. I really liked the characters and the banter between them.

This is a gorgeous movie made by a gorgeous spirit.

The secret garden is an amazing story at itself. So the idea of making a sequel is not a bad one.This sequel has one big problem however; They first should have sad down an watch the original movie and than make a story line for this sequel."the secret garden" is a great story that leaves enough leads to follow and make a great sequel. So why the vanishing door and the key which is thrown in the lake but suddenly sticks in the door? Is it a sequel on the secret garden or is it a sequel on Harry Potter? This really ruined it for me Conclusion: the story line is not bad an the filming and atmosphere of the movie is excellent and if they would have followed the original movie it would have received much better critics from me. As it is: 6 out of 10.

I adore The Secret Garden, it is one of my favourite movies ever. Back to the Secret Garden is not as good, but much better than I thought it would be, considering I was expecting an atrocity in all honesty. True, some of the dialogue is trite, some of the characters are underused(Colin for instance) and while Joan Plowright plays older Martha very well with a sweet sincerity I wasn't entirely convinced by how Martha was written some of it was on the contradictory side. That said, it is beautifully filmed, the soundtrack is soothing and the story is interesting with cute scenarios. The cast are excellent, particularly Florence Hoath and Camilla Belle, but the performances of David Warner, George Baker and Cherie Lunghi aren't to be disputed either. All in all, not as good as the original but worth watching. 7/10 Bethany Cox

This is the third time over a few years that I have seen this film, it is always hard to follow an excellent film such as the original. Back to the Secret Garden does an excellent 'job' in my opinion. The storyline flows well.I have the original DVD of the original film, but for the moment have the sequel above as a TV recording. It is my intention, as with the Railway Children, and other films in our collection to have the original DVD 'set' to add to our growing collection of classic films.If you have not seen this sequel for fear of it not being as good as the original, then rest assured, if you liked the original, you'll like this version too.

This is a sequel though not one most dreadful. It was better than I expected, but I expected garbage, so that's not saying too much. The story is basically this: It's 1946 and Lady Mary goes to America to find a little girl to send back to Misselthwaite which has become a home for orphans, inexplicably. The little girl Lizzie conveniently loves working in gardens and sets about finding out why the garden is inexplicably dying. Mary doesn't return to America with Lizzie, inexplicably. We never find out where Archie Craven is or if he'd dead. And is Will Weatherstaff Ben's son or what? I'm an avid fan of The Secret Garden and I own 4 movie versions of it and have seen the Brodway show, not to mention I own a couple of copies of the novel (and the abysmal "sequel" by Susan Moody). That said, there are a few good things about this film: the lead actress Camilla Belle plays her part with sincerity and Florence Hoath (from Fairy Tale) does a great job as her friend at the "school". I quite enjoyed all of the (too few) scenes with a grown Mary Lennox (now Mary Craven, having married her first cousin, Colin. I doubt this would have happened in the early 1900's -- it was already 1911 when the children met. They must have been at least 16 or 17 before marrying which puts them at 1917 or so and during WW1. I'm just not buying it!) The main problem is with Martha Sowerby. She has utterly, completely and mind bogglingly inexplicably lost her Yorkshire accent! I despise how Joan Plowright plays the character (so much like she plays ALL of her characters). Martha could not have grown into that woman! It's like Mary Lennox only backwards. The film is set in 1946, Mary should be about 45. Martha looks at least 60. That means when Mary was 10, Martha was 25. Not buying that, either. The writer killed off Dickon in the war (isn't that convenient?). We see Colin only fleetingly. The show focuses much too much on Martha, who is so unlike the Martha we know from the books that we wonder if this impostor chopped her up and buried her in the garden and that's why it's dying! There's also the just-add-venom antagonist in the form of a Harry Potter clone with a superiority complex. And what's with the magical doors -- one minute it's there and the next it's not and there a new inexplicable "rule" that one needs the key to find the door or something. I might also mention the anachronisms. At one point Lizzie yells to a taunting meanie, "Fine! Be that way!" Did they say that in 1946? It's not a bad film for those who don't know and love The Secret Garden, but for really big fans, I think it's just another disappointment. I'm still waiting for a proper sequel in which Mary marries Dickon. Everyone knows she loves Dickon, not Colin!