Well then, you’d be a fool.

The childrens have grown up but it wouldn’t work with other kids, Emily Browning and Liam Aiken were perfect so I think they’ll have to change the Baudelaire ages, that’s what they probably meant with “a widly different form” because Silbling has already said that he didn’t want to re-cast the kids.

I would argue the same of Olaf in the books (except maybe in the Bad Beginning).

The ironical humour from the dark tone of the books was absent from the film. Instead, it was replaced by hamfisted exaggeration. This effectively removed any sense of sublety, especially with Carrey’s over the top antics which lacked any understated depth. Yes, Olaf does have comical elements to him, but he himself is not comedic. Throughout the books he is established as a menacing figure and his presence is dreaded. Basically, you’d have to be an extreme pussy if Carrey’s film version of Olaf unsettled you in any way.

Well the books were only depressing in an ironic way, at least after the first couple. It annoys me when people make your complaint, as though they’re disappointed that this character who dressed up as women, made up ridiculous laughs and had an absurd relationship with his girlfriend was portrayed in a comical manner? How else? I think the film could certainly be more literate though, although it would be difficult to translate the ‘word-centricness’ to film.

I love the casting and look of the film but my only problem was the story. They introduced things too early and put in things that were never in the book. That was my only problem with the movie.