Contrary to how it may appear, I'm not completely opposed to movie remakes. I'm merely against making them for no other reason than as a shameless money grab (cough, cough, Disney). Also, I'm opposed to changing an author's intended themes and replacing them with others which you prefer their work to have. Have a message you want to push? That's fine, but don't shoehorn it in to a work whose creator very obviously had other intentions. Here's an idea: write your own frickin' book or screenplay. But in a movie landscape which seems to consist mainly of pointless remakes and endless sequels this, alas, is a pipe dream.
So when do I approve of movie remakes? When the previous film was bad, not doing justice to its source material, or when it has something new to glean and portray from its source. As I said in my review of the latest Ben Hur debacle, there is content in the original book which has never been explored and could definitely justify revisiting the work, but they never bothered. The same applies in a more limited fashion to The Secret Garden... there is room for a movie that, for instance, includes the stuff about Martha & Dickon's mother which has, as far as I know, never made it onto the big screen. But, as with Ben Hur, this film doesn't return to the source to glean new material or fresh ideas; it retreads old ground, adds in things which weren't in the book and, worst of all, casually dispenses with the author's- Frances Hodgson Burnett- central thesis. Well done, all. But I am getting ahead of myself.
The movie gets off to a weird start as we realise that they've changed the time period in which the story is set, bumping it up from turn of the century to 1947, in the aftermath of W.W. II. There seems to be no particular reason for this, other than it was the time frame of India's partitioning but since this plays no discernable role in the film, it's rather pointless. Of course, it does provide an opportunity for the film to take a jab at British soldiers. In this movie, Misselthwaite Manor is a dingy, rundown hulk with its grounds torn up. Mrs. Medlock - the housekeeper- sourly tells a newly arrived Mary that this is because during the war British soldiers were barracked there and made a mess of the place. If they wanted to have the Manor in a shambles- for some impenetrable reason- the obvious thing would be to have it fall victim to a German bombing during the Blitz... I'm not sure why they felt the need to slag off British troops- the ones who had, ya know, been fighting actual Nazis- instead, but here we are. Having the Manor be a dingy mess also interferes with what is supposed to be the central theme of the story. In the novel, the Manor is perfectly preserved- almost like a museum, and not a welcoming atmosphere for children. It is the garden which, locked away and forbidden, is a sad, neglected place in need of tending... a metaphor for the problems afflicting various characters. But we'll revisit that later.
The rejuvenated garden is supposed to be a metaphor for what happens in the lives of Mary, Colin, and Mr. Craven. At the beginning of the book, Mary is an unhealthy, unpleasant child who resents her now dead father and mother because they were indifferent parents, too caught up in their own interests to pay much attention to her. Colin is neglected/isolated by his father for the opposite reason: he cares too much and is afraid that he will lose his sickly son. This has resulted in Colin being weak, fearful of everything, and prone to panic attacks and sudden rages. His father cannot get over the death of his wife and this leads him to keep himself isolated from his home and son- and to have locked up the garden. The once-loved garden has been neglected for years and fallen into disrepair. The once beautiful and plentiful roses- the favourite of Colin's mother- have ceased to bloom. When Mary and Dickon start working in the garden, they plant seeds, prune and weed, bringing the roses- and the rest of the flowers- back to life. And as Mary concentrates on something other than herself-fixing the garden and, eventually, Colin- and basks in the warmth and friendship provided by Dickon, Martha, and their family, she gradually grows and blooms into a happy, well adjusted girl. This eventually works for Colin as well: he becomes healthy and happy as he begins going outside to the garden with Mary and Dickon. And together they bring around Mr. Craven. As the garden heals, so does their family.
In the end, this movie doesn't work on any level. It's characters are either just bland and forgettable, or unpleasant and forgettable. Of course, Mary and Colin are supposed to be unpleasant to begin with, but this movie doesn't do the work of showing their gradual transformations and why they happened. And so, when their characters and personalities change on a dime, we don't care. Also, by completely disregarding the central theme of the story, this movie literally has no point. It's just a series of events which happen and the filmmakers seek to disguise its hollowness and superficiality by adding in a bunch of random, unfaithful-to-the-book occurrences, such as burning down the house. If you want to watch a decent version of The Secret Garden, check out the 1993 film, not this one. Or better yet: read the book.