Sadly Over-hyped

Fresh and Exciting

Excellent, Without a doubt!!

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

First of all I must point out that the storyline on IMDb bears no relationship to this film, it is actually from Back to the Secret Garden. A little American girl travels to Britain to stay with her aristocratic uncle Lord Craven and his Grand Daughter Margaret.Along with Margaret and a boy named Timothy she rediscovers the secret garden. The film is technically awful but a nice story . First of all the British kids are obviously American although they make a brave attempt at a British accent. Secondly they appear to all come from different periods of time looking at their clothing, Katherine is a modern day girl, Margaret seems to be from the 40's and Timothy appears to be from the 20's. When Katherine is taken ill an American ambulance comes to attend to her and the staff appear to be early 20th century. Despite all the faults it was a nice story, I thoroughly enjoyed it and would recommend it particularly for kids.

This was decent and not nearly as horrible as the other two reviewers would have you believe. Just remember this is made for young school age children who have not reached their preteens. Any child 11 or 12 years old, and certainly older, would find this too childish as it is targeted to a younger audience.I would think most would realize this, as the original Secret Garden was also for made young children. Yes, it is American made, and it looks to have been filmed at the Biltmore House and grounds which is near Asheville, North Carolina USA. My guess is this was a budget film and since the Biltmore House was modeled after an European château, that this was the nearest building that could be used in the United States to simulate a manor in Yorkshire, England. However,the young previous reviewer is right, I have no seen any English castles that look like this. The château's look is more Continental than British.To the young teen reviewer I must also clarify, those were bad supposed British accents, not Australian. If he thinks those were bad, he should hear some bad accents of the supposed southern United States done by actors from other areas of the United States in many a top box office movie. I am from Georgia, USA, so I know this even if others from other areas of the world do not. As far as the accents, I am guessing though, this being a children's movie, it was assumed most young children would not notice.As far as the Biltmore House being an American hotel, this reviewer's American friends stirred him wrong. It was built in the late 1800's as a home for the wealthy Vanderbilt's, who had many homes all over the United States and elsewhere. It seems they spent a lot of time in Europe and wanted a home that looked like an European château.It is now a museum, not a hotel, and it is really something to see, between the house, the attached winery and green houses, and the basement boiling alley. I enjoyed the movie just for seeing the house and it's secret passages!I must say though that "Back to the Secret Garden" is a better sequel. Although it is more a sequel to the 80's Hallmark adaptation than the novel. Highclere Castle does make a better Yorkshire manor than Biltmore House. I believe that was also produced by an American company, the difference is they used a real castle in England instead of "America's castle", Biltmore House. Even though both stories are overall only mediocre entertainment for anyone over the age of twelve, being targeted to a very young audience; the better location did make a better movie for atmosphere alone.

As a somewhat pedantic Briton, I found this film incredibly horrible. Some people may not be able to tell, but the "English" children were in fact American and having difficulty sustaining their Australian accents. This is just one example of the lack of effort that went into this confusing and patronising film which stereotyped many of its characters. Other things that annoyed me included the riddle and diary, which most certainly did not go with Mary Lennox's reserved character, the setting, which was clearly an American hotel (with no Yorkshire weather), and the patronising nature of the scenes showing their "growing friendship". I watched this with three other English children and two Americans and none of us could restrain ourselves from making snide comments about the poor acting and other elements that I have already mentioned. This film would be funny to watch again- but only because it was so bad.

I would give this a 0 if the voter let me. This film is a pathetic attempt to capture the magic of the 93 version with Kate Maberly. I've been a big fan of Secret Garden my whole life, and think I was tricked into watching this because I thought it was a Maberly sequel. Aside from the fact that it is not, there are many things wrong with this movie and nothing right. The story is dull, the characters lifeless, and the acting half-hearted. No one seems to even care that they are there, there's absolutely none of the heart from the Kate Maberly film. It's quite pathetic, and the reason you've never heard of this film is because it is quite that bad. It only serves to remind you how wonderful the Maberly version was, and how much they should have left it alone. I thought it had Kate when I first rented it,because the picture on the front looks much like the other version, and was so disappointed and disgusted with it I was quite upset I was stupid enough to rent it.Serves to show, never mess with a perfect picture, by giving it a sequel or prequel or whatever it is they do these days. I know Maberly's film wasn't the original, but I think her version was by far the best Garden, and as far as I'm concerned, this film doesn't even deserve to have the name Secret Garden anywhere in the title.