Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children

Critics Consensus

Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children proves a suitable match for Tim Burton's distinctive style, even if it's on stronger footing as a visual experience than a narrative one.



Total Count: 242


Audience Score

User Ratings: 38,740
User image

Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children Videos

Watch it now

Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children Photos

Movie Info

From visionary director Tim Burton, and based upon the best-selling novel, comes an unforgettable motion picture experience. When Jake discovers clues to a mystery that spans different worlds and times, he finds a magical place known as Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children. But the mystery and danger deepen as he gets to know the residents and learns about their special powers...and their powerful enemies. Ultimately, Jake discovers that only his own special "peculiarity" can save his new friends.


Eva Green
as Miss Peregrine
Allison Janney
as Dr. Golan
Rupert Everett
as Ornithologist
Judi Dench
as Miss Avocet
Pixie Davies
as Bronwyn
Cameron King
as Millard
Kim Dickens
as Jake's mom
O-Lan Jones
as Lan Jones-Shelley
Aiden Flowers
as 10 Year Old Jake
Nicholas Oteri
as 6 Year Old Jake
Helen Day
as Miss Edwards
Philip Philmar
as Mr. Archer
Jack Brady
as Mr, Clark
Scott Handy
as Mr. Gleeson
George Vricos
as Uncle Bobby
Cameron Greco
as Prettiest Teen Boy
Ella Linnea Wahlestedt
as Prettiest Teen Girl
Jack Fibkins
as Cousin Twin #2
Nick McGaughey
as 40's Bartender
Lynne Hunter
as 40's First Woman
Ben Roberts
as 40's First Old Man
Dafydd Hywel
as Isle-Farmer
Sophia Tailor
as Little Girl
Harry Taylor
as Ride Operator
Dan Mersh
as 2016 Policeman #1
James Kermack
as 2016 Policeman #2
Steve Money
as Burley Bloke
Christine Dalby
as Uneasy Woman
Badria Timimi
as Police Woman
View All

News & Interviews for Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children

Critic Reviews for Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children

All Critics (242) | Top Critics (44) | Fresh (155) | Rotten (87)

  • The young peculiars have names, but they don't get much by way of backstory or personality. Despite the movie's insistence that they are special, Miss Peregrine ultimately reduces them to the very thing the world rejected them for: their peculiarities.

    Oct 4, 2016 | Full Review…
  • Some movies are great. Some movies become great over time. And some movies contain moments of such greatness that you forget the rubbish bits. Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children is one such movie.

    Oct 3, 2016 | Rating: 4/5 | Full Review…

    Kevin Maher

    Times (UK)
    Top Critic
  • The film feels overstuffed, with Tim Burton repeating tricks from his greatest hits (think Beetlejuice and Edward Scissorhands). But stick with it just for those times when Burton flies high on his own peculiar genius.

    Sep 30, 2016 | Rating: 2.5/4 | Full Review…
  • Tim Burton is on macabre message in his latest offering - "Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children" - an adaptation of Ransom Riggs' popular trilogy.

    Sep 30, 2016 | Rating: 3.5/5 | Full Review…
  • The result feels less like a thoughtfully-conceived franchise-starter than a picture that was rushed out of the editing suite prematurely.

    Sep 30, 2016 | Full Review…

    Chris Klimek

    Top Critic
  • To me, Burton's movies always seem a full grade too grotesque for the whimsical stories he is trying to tell... At least in Miss Peregrine, his ghastliness fits the fable, although, even at its best, it's fairly generic Burton.

    Sep 30, 2016 | Rating: B- | Full Review…

Audience Reviews for Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children

  • Sep 11, 2018
    Some parts of the film, especially the look, are typical Tim Burton. What's rather unusual for him is the slow pacing in the first act. The logic behind the time loops is not particularly clear either. It probably helps not to think about all this too much and, more importantly, not have kids watch this, because it's pretty damn creepy many times. The finale is pretty wacky but highly entertaining raising the film from a mediocre to a decent experience.
    Jens S Super Reviewer
  • May 20, 2017
    K so this movie is of course yet another adaptation of a young adult/teen book that I've never heard of. I guess there's no reason why I should have heard of it though seeing as I am neither a young adult or teen, I digress. The title of the movie (and book) is admittedly pretty cool, indeed the whole vibe I got from this movie did kinda remind me of the 2004 movie 'Lemony Snicket's A Serious of Unfortunate Events'. At the same time it also got me thinking along the lines of [i]The Melancholy Death of Oyster Boy & Other Stories[/i]. Funnily enough a quirky little book about weird monstrous children by the one and only Tim Burton. So it was of no surprise to me at all that Tim Burton ended up directing this movie (which is almost a rip-off of his 'Oyster Boy' book in part). So, very briefly, the film is set in Wales of all places and sees young boy Jake (Asa Butterfield) learning about the mysterious school for peculiar children from his grandfather. After his grandfather dies in a very disturbing way Jake travels to Wales to look for the school, following instructions from his grandfather. Jake discovers that the old school was destroyed during WWII, but through a set of mysterious (this word will pop up a lot) circumstances which include a time portal, Jake goes back to 1943. A time when the school was in its prime. Turns out the school and its students all live within an infinite time loop (the same day in 1943), created by Miss Peregrine, where they never age, solely to avoid persecution from the outside world. Jake also learns of monsters called Hollowgasts (disfigured peculiars) led by the evil shapeshifter Mr. Barron (Samuel L. Jackson). These monsters led by Barron hunt down 'peculiars' (or 'Ymbrynes') for their eyes. They consume the eyes which enable them to retain their powers and human form (which apparently makes them 'Wights'). Did you get all that?? So lets take a quick look at the peculiar children (children with paranormal abilities). Now even though society has discriminated against these kids, rejected them out of fear, their powers are clearly of benefit to them. Its the classic narrative, the kids have special powers which are seen as negative in the film, but to you the viewer they come across as actually being really cool. Wouldn't we all like a special power. And if any of this sounds familiar...yes it is indeed exactly the same notion as Marvels X-Men. So anyway who's who. Notably there are characters that clearly play an important role in the movie with their powers, and others that do not. Emma Bloom is aerokinetic, meaning she can manipulate air, breathe under water and she floats because she's lighter than air oddly. These powers seem pretty useful. Enoch O'Connor can resurrect the dead and make inanimate objects come to life, very useful. Olive Abroholos Elephanta (say what?) is pyrokinetic meaning she's basically Pyro from the X-Men. Very useful power. Millard Nullings is the invisible boy, say no more, highly useful power. Bronwyn Bruntley is a little girl with superhuman strength, highly useful power. Fiona Frauenfeld can control plant life, so she's basically Poison Ivy. Reasonably useful power. The you have Hugh Apiston is a little boy with...umm...bees in his stomach...what now? Pretty bizarre and useless power here methinks. Claire Densmore has a mouth full of razor sharp teeth...on the back of her head. K...errr, whatever. And finally the two very young twins (no names apparently) who are both in fact gorgons. You know, a creature that can turn living things into stone, Medusa. Yeah well these two little terrors can do just that and have to wear masks all the time. Chilling power right there folks. So whilst most of this X-Kids team have some pretty sweet special powers that would obviously come in handy in times of peril. Four of them seem utterly useless to me frankly, in fact I wouldn't even call them paranormal powers but more circus freaks. I get that's all part of the story but it just comes across as odd that the author would give half the kids solid powers and the other half useless powers, so useless to the point that those characters needn't even be in the book. Why would shooting bees out of your mouth be of any use unless you lived in a Nintendo platform game. As for the bad guys, they were all peculiars originally I think (including Mr. Barron who's power is shapeshifting), but the failed experiment disfigured them. Now they hunt down peculiars for their eyes (yes eyes) because some how that enables them to retain human form. I'm not sure why they are called Hollowgasts though, considering they are merely disfigured peculiars. Not sure why they all look the same or why they look like large demonic Jack Skellington's? Probably because Tim Burton directed the movie (or maybe they look like that in the book). I'm also not sure why they are referred to as Wights when in human form when again, essentially...they are still peculiars. I dunno, I'm probably getting it wrong. Lets not forget that peculiars are actually called Ymbrynes just to make things even more confusing. So aside from the myriad of characters and funny names what is the movie actually like? Well quite frankly its your typical Harry Potter-esque adventure really. I really do hate referring back to Harry Potter but unfortunately that franchise pretty much set the ball rolling for children/young teen book adaptations so its hard not to. But yes in general the fantasy element of the movie along with the children does all seem very familiar these days. Don't get me wrong its not the exact same kind of fantasy with unicorns and goblins or whatever (in this one movie anyway, unsure about the book), but there are many similar elements involving magic, sorcery, shapeshifting, monsters etc... Clearly Burton revels in the kids with quirky paranormal powers and of course the visuals. As you would expect the whole movie has that dark twisted fairytale vibe about it, helped by the WWII setting of course. Some of the kids are gaunt looking, slender, dare I say a bit goth with period attire in typical Burton colours. Its not blatant Burton but you can still detect it. The baddies look more Burton-esque as they are generally dressed in black and look more like vampires. Overall not a lot actually happens in the movie action wise, there are obviously some action sequences but nothing much of note. Obligatory sequences where the Hollowgasts attack the kids whilst they try to escape, the predictable showdown at the finale where Barron and co are defeated. The whole sequence where they discover a huge sunken ship (ocean liner) and then proceed to raise it seemed a bit ludicrous even for this universe. Sure these kids have weird powers and I mock by mentioning the X-Men but at this point the movie does actually go full X-Men. Then in the finale there is a long battle against some animated skeletons which all seem rather stupid really. How strong were these skeletons geez! There is of course lots of time jumping between 1943 and the present, the setting being the UK does actually give the whole movie a cheaper look which I'm sure wasn't the idea. Indeed the whole idea that these kids and Miss Peregrine have to live in an infinite time loop just to avoid the general public's negative opinion of them seemed a bit daft to me. I mean surely you could just live somewhere secluded? Also this specific point in time is just before the school gets destroyed by German planes (WWII remember), so everyday they have to prevent this by winding back time. I mean, couldn't you just chooses a earlier point in time? The problem here is I haven't read the book and like many of these fantasy books there is probably a lot more to it, more books and things that have been cut out. These types of movies always seem to raise so many questions also, questions and confusion. Like, when the Wights have successfully killed all the peculiars and run out of eyes, then what? I mean...I dunno, its not a bad movie, its perfectly entertaining to a degree, but everything is so by the numbers, so mediocre. The visuals are nice but predictable, the acting is fine, the effects are pretty bog standard CGI stuff apart from a nice small sequence of stop motion. The bad guys are spooky looking and generically bad, the Hollowgast monsters are unoriginal looking, a mix of Jack Skellington and [i]Resident Evil[/i] creatures, oh and Tim Burton makes a cameo. There was a time when a Tim Burton movie meant something, it was almost like an event. Nowadays its more like yet another corny gothic escapade drenched in gaudy CGI. Admittedly this movie isn't quite as bad as that, its definitely more grounded looking. But with a plot that becomes more convoluted as it goes (all these stupid names), weak humour and very generic villains, its just not really good enough to stand out within a packed genre. Its also clearly unsure in which direction it wants to go, dark fantasy or light-hearted fantasy. I dunno, I still can't escape my feeling that Burton only made this movie because he liked just one aspect of it, the kids with peculiar powers. That aspect comes across nicely here, I wanted more of that, the rest of it not so much.
    Phil H Super Reviewer
  • Feb 11, 2017
    From Tim Burton comes the magical adventure Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children. Seeking closure over his grandfather's death Jacob goes in search of a reclusive children's home that his grandfather told him stories about, and upon finding it he discovers a world of supernatural wonders. Starring Eva Green, Asa Butterfield, Ella Purnell, Terence Stamp, and Samuel L. Jackson, the film has a fairly decent cast. And Burton's directing style is perfect for the material. Also, the special effects and score are especially well-done. However, the plot's a bit hard to follow; with the jumping in and out of various time-loops and creation of alternative time-lines. The character development is a little weak too, with most of them being defined by their peculiarity. Yet despite its weaknesses, Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children is a fantastically imaginative film that all audiences will enjoy.
    Dann M Super Reviewer
  • Jan 11, 2017
    You know, you'd think a movie about child superheroes, known as peculiars in this universe, with Tim Burton and his crew behind the camera, would be more interesting than what we actually got. I can't even begin to put into words how much of a letdown this movie actually is. This is one of those movies where I felt compelled to write the review immediately after watching it. As I've mentioned before, that only happens when a movie is really fucking great or, on the other extreme, is really fucking terrible. This isn't one of those, because, realistically speaking, it's not actually a bad movie in the conventional sense, it's just one that completely botches a story that has a lot of potential. So, because of that, I just wanted to pretty much rant about everything that it did wrong, which is what I'm gonna do now anyway. So here we go. First things first, Asa Butterfield was one of the lamest leading men in recent memory. Perhaps lame isn't even the right term to describe it, but outside of showing some flashes of quality early in the film, after Jake's grandfather passes away, the guy just settles into complete bland territory. While a lot of the film has a lot to do with Jake feeling like he's too ordinary to be a peculiar, I think Asa's performance took things even farther than that. I just found him to be an utter bore as the main protagonist of this universe. And that's really the worst mistake you can make. If you want to create a film franchise out of these characters and the world they inhabit, you have to cast someone with a little more personality, charisma and presence. Yes, Asa is super skinny, but you're either born with charisma or you're not. And he doesn't have any charisma whatsoever. Say what you will about Daniel Radcliffe's first performances as Harry Potter, he wasn't the most skilled of actors of course, but there was something about him that just made you believe that he really was this character. He completely inhabited that role and made it his, despite his lack of experience. And Asa, at this point in time, has had far more experience than Radcliffe had at the time the first Potter movie came out. Asa's performance made it difficult to care for him or any of the movie's characters as a result, which is something we'll get to later. Secondly, the film has way too much goddamn exposition and very little in the way of actual movie. I realize that when you're creating a franchise off a universe that hasn't been seen before, you have to take time to establish who the characters, what their motivations might be and what their story is gonna be about. But the movie takes an approach that does the exact opposite of making you invested in the characters and the universe they inhabit. There's about 75 minutes of exposition for a movie that lasts 120 minutes. And that's not even counting the credits. If you were to look at a percentage of how much time the exposition takes up, it adds up to something like 63% of the movie. That's way too fucking much. And it would be enjoyable if I found the characters or the universe interesting, but I just don't. If this was their best effort then I have no interest in keeping up with this franchise, if it does become one. All the kids in the home are fairly intriguing and have abilities that they could have used in ways to add something that actually resembles entertainment, but you don't actually get to see a lot of their powers until considerably later in the movie. What the movie DOES do is force in a stupid romance subplot between Jake and Emma. Which is terrible because Asa Butterfield and Ella Purnell, Jake and Emma respectively, have absolutely no chemistry whatsoever. Ella Purnell really is one of the few highlights in the film, but, again, Asa is so bland as a lead that you don't care one bit whatsoever for their budding romance. It's inconsequential and unimportant to what's actually going on. Now let's get on to the rest of the narrative. Honestly, I found the entire story to be a complete convoluted mess. And I know what the fans of the book are gonna say 'well the book is better'. And to that I say, no fucking shit. But we're not talking about the book, are we? We're talking about how the movie takes the book and adapts it in a completely different medium for a completely different market, most of which haven't even heard of this movie. So if you want the movie to be a success, so it gets non-fans to invest in the film franchise and the books, you have to make the story be as easy to follow. And this movie is not particularly inviting to non-fans of the book. And that's perfectly fine, but that's severely gonna limit the success you have with non-fans and it's gonna end up being a deal where, if another movie is made, that only fans will even bother watching it. And I don't think you can build a truly memorable franchise when only the fans are the ones watching the movies. It has to be something that even transcends its own fanbase. Something like Harry Potter, The Hunger Games or Twilight, and this is coming from someone who hates those movies. The story has something about a peculiar shapesifter, or something, wanting to experiment on the Ymbrynes, who protect peculiar children by placing them in a loop on a perfect day. They reset each day at the exact time they need to. Barron, the villain, has already experimented on one of the Ymbrynes, to achieve immortality, before and it resulted in him and his group of friends becoming these creatures called Hollows, imagine a Slender Man-esque figure, except more grotesque. The only way the Hollows are able to resume their human form is by consuming the eyes of the peculiars, especially the children. Got all that so far? Barron has consumed enough eyes that he doesn't turn back into a Hollow, but the rest of his cronies need help, so he's going after all the loops he can find in order to get his buddies the eyes. But then he kidnaps Peregrine, a Ymbryne, and all the other Ymbrynes in the world in order to resume his experiments to achieve immortality. This is where the kids come in and fuck things up. I think I pretty much covered everything. It's as convoluted as you can imagine. And don't even get me started on the ending when Jake goes to every loop he can find in order to get to the closest point he can to go back to Emma. Now that I've explained the entire movie to you, is that a movie that you want to see? Eh, not really. And I realize that the way I described it might be confusing, but that's really as simply as I could possibly put it. Can you imagine how it feels actually watching the goddamn thing? It's a goddamn fucking mess. And I already mentioned the fact that the movie does nothing with its characters, but it's so bad that I have to wonder what the point of it all was. I know the entire movie can't just be Miss Peregrine, Jake, Emma and Abe, but holy fuck, at least make some sort of an effort to develop some of the secondary characters. This movie doesn't even try. And the only effort they made is to have secondary characters fall in love, where Enoch took Olive for granted before finally noticing her at the end. That's all there is and it's absolute shit. Tim Burton has an eye for visual details and this is no different. But this is a movie that only works as a visual spectacle, because I found the entire narrative to be absolutely dreadful. Now that I think about it, I really didn't like this movie at all. It's not Burton's worst, Dark Shadows has that honor, but the more I think about this the more I actually dislike it. I can't even say that it's not a bad movie anymore when the only thing I like are the visuals, and they aren't even that great to begin with. Terrible and convoluted narrative that does the worst possible job at world-building and a dull lead drag this movie down to the depths of hell. Ending on a bit of hyperbole, but this movie really is bad.
    Jesse O Super Reviewer

Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children Quotes

There are no approved quotes yet for this movie.

News & Features