Cute, but jumped audience age groups too fast
582552
Cute story. Good messages about standing up to bullies and friendship. Only gave it four stars because, while the show is geared to the younger kids (5-8 I'd say), this story line jumped straight to early teen. They're in high school, Twilight likes a boy, that kind of thing, that my 7 yr old thought was weird. It's reaching for a new audience but lost what made it unique. Overall it was good, my kid enjoyed it, and the lessons were good, just had them grow up too fast.
4435365
This Eyewitness video, like the couple others we have viewed with our preschoolers, is interesting for us adults, but not at all entertaining enough for young children.  Too much talking!  Not enough action!  <G>
The cover shows a wooly mammoth, but I don't remember seeing a mammoth in the video, unless I was distracted by one of the kids at just that moment.  I guess when I think of prehistoric times I think of cave men and sabre tooth tigers and wooly mammoths, not the beginnings of the earth.  This video covers the whole of prehistory, all 4.5 billion years of it, in 1/2 hour.  So not much time is devoted to the subjects we are familiar with or that kids are interested in.  A lot of time is spent on the "primordial soup" stage ...And the entire dinosaur age is covered in about 10 seconds, showing just 1 of the many species.  But I do recommend the video to more mature audiences who are interested in a brief overview of the developments during those 4.5 billion years.
3106786
My 5 and 6 year old have been playing with this nonstop the last several days.  With that being said, it's definitely geared for the younger age group.  It's just that my 5 year old is big Minnie fan and thought it would be perfect for her.

Cons:
*It only has an on and off button which means the music is way too loud.  You can fix this by putting tape over the speaker in front.
*If you spin Minnie remotely at normal speed, she falls off.  They should have thought about magnets in Minnie's feet and the bottom of the `runway'
*My daughter is a little too tall (possibly since she may be too old for this toy) to use it like a suitcase, which the handle repeatedly comes off of

Pros
*My kids can actually change all the accessories on Minnie without my help
*You can store everything inside!
*It's just darn cute
87920
This was an instant hit with an 8 year old and a pair of four year olds. It has "baby" proportions--short arms and big eyes. That might be the appeal.
3454237
Most Caldecott books are suitable for children in grades one through three--this one is not!! Although the cover makes it look like a cute summer romp, the language and some of the content are for a considerably older audience. It is quite an affecting story, and a nicely illustrated graphic novel. But the four letter words that abound throughout make it objectionable for young girls. On the other hand, the main characters are young and somewhat immature, and I'm not sure it would appeal to an eighth grader. This book left me unclear about its intended audience.
462983
There are 3 different stories included on this DVD. As a mom, I like the cartoon style, and the bright colors which keep my girls attention. And since each episode is less than 15 minutes long, my girls' attention won't sway from the story in front of them.

Both of my girls were interested in the stories, and my 5-year old really liked the giraffe. My 7-year old "likes that they've been silly all the time".

This is a DVD we'll take in the car with us for longer trips. It will break up the movies since they don't have to pay attention for a long time.

Personally, I didn't enjoy the stories. They just didn't capture my attention or make me understand the lessons.
502677
Age 5 and under, lots of singing but not much storyline... A watch one time movie unless you are age 2-3
4835420
This was really written for a younger audience, I think.  It starts with 18 year olds and ends at 22, and it was a amazing how little any of the characters had matured.  Well written in that you don't trip over typographical errors or anything.  It was sweet and I liked the premise, but it was just a little too slow for me.
4369303
I really liked the story, it's a different take on Tchaikovsky's original story line, with a much better core and ending. Most of the characters were well-developed and likeable, but with the exception of Barbie/Odette and Odile which I think needed a bit more depth and character.

The motion-capture performed by NYC dancers were exceptional, but the disappointment was that there was actually very little dancing.

The character models did not seem age-appropriate, it was something for more mature or teen audiences, I would definitely not recommend this as a kids movie, especially young girls who can get the wrong impression about thinness.

The computer rendering of the scenes seemed rather poor for a movie produced in 2003, there was also an major absence of shading/shadows which was very noticeable.
4462503
It's funny but in a very smart funny kind of way. It seemed like something my son would enjoy but most of the references are way over a 12 year old's head. It would work well for any adult, but just didn't work well for my purposes.
4538594
I ordered this for my 3-yr old son. The images are cute, it's a decent quality paperback, and I like the story, but the vocabulary and advanced "sentence" patterns make it just too much for my little guy. He loves books, but he couldn't sit through the first two pages. I've put it in the closet for when he's older.  For a school-age child, this would be great!

I wish there were a thanksgiving story for vegetarian toddlers!
1851929
This book tackles an interesting topic and does it with engagingly simple illustrations that little ones will find funny. The type font is easy for newer readers. too. But I disagree that this book is for kids up to age 8. It's not long enough, nor are there enough examples of "snitty" behavior, to keep second/third graders interested.
3143295
When reading this to a small group of children, some of them enjoyed this, others thought it just silly and a couple thought it to be on the lame side. So a very mixed reaction.

Those that liked it got a kick out of Mr Archimedes trying to figure out what was happening with the bath water. One child kept laughing because the man is naked (and if you do not want your children seeing a naked cartoon guy avoid this book) and sent the kids on some giggle fits. Others were bored with the repetition. The really little kids (age 3-4) seem to be most likely to enjoy but by age 5-6 they lose interest.

What I didn't like was there are a lot of accusations flying around about who is responsible for the bath water but when the answer is found no apology or anything. This could have been a great opportunity to teach kids that when the accuse or say something that isn't true and later learn they were wrong, they should be able to admit that and apologize to those they wronged. So a perfect lesson opportunity lost. And in this day and age, being sure to teach children about manners, responsibility and respect seem crucial.
2005065
Shrek 2's target audience, unfortunately, doesn't fit my family's profile:  my girls (7 and 3) are too young.  For kids to appreciate Shrek 2 (or even for them not to experience a certain revulsion towards the character Shrek), they need to be older and slightly cynical, at least towards the prototypical Disney "and they lived happily ever after" fairy tale movies.  However, even pre-teenage children will only capture a fraction of the references to popular culture and 20 year-old movies that pervade Shrek 2.  Therefore, I submit that the target audience for Shrek 2 is a pair of pop culture saturated parents, and their post-Disney kids.
Since I'm not saturated with pop culture, I didn't get anywhere near all the references in Shrek 2.  But even those that I did get, such as the Stay-Puft marshmallow man of Ghostbusters' fame, and Joan Rivers dishing out her commentary at the Academy Awards, were not exactly side-splitting funny.  Amusing, yes, and Shrek 2 had its moments.  But to me it felt like much of it was formulaic, and aimed at the true pop culture sophisticate.
Pixar, by contrast, has proven repeatedly that they know how to develop funny, warm computer animated movies that truly can be appreciated by all ages. Most all the Pixar films are classics that will still be viewed 20 years from now, whereas by then, Shrek 2 will have faded from memory.
4495250
I suppose I should have known that the book's target audience was under 12 since the main characters are 11, but I was hoping this book would be one of those that transcends age and manages to entertain parents as well. Unfortunately I was wrong.

Having picked this book up because of the fascinating sketch-like artwork on the inside cover, I found it was originally published in Italian and was translated to English. Because of this I was willing to overlook some of the awkward or bluntly short sentences. I was not, however, able to ignore the cheesiness of the plot, the number of times characters did exactly the right thing at the right time because the "felt" it would somehow turn out, etc. I was also puzzled at how Julia is introduced as only liking credit cards and expensive things but she never really acts that way at all (I think there was one thought that passed through her head).

In the end this is essentially a slightly older version of the Magic Treehouse books, and it entertained me about as much. Fortunately, though, I got it from a library and it only took a couple of hours to read. It isn't a bad book, but I certainly wouldn't encourage my kids to read it.
2253119
This story invites you to bounce in as many ways as you can think of.  Bounce like a bunny.  Bounce a ball off of your head. Bounce in a puddle.  Watch the bees bounce in the day time and bats bounce at night.

The illustrations are mixed media and digitally rendered.  They are fairly basic making it easier for the younger readers to enjoy.

I like the idea of a book about bouncing.  But this activity to me should be a joyful and contagious activity.  Unfortunately, the choppy word flow and, well, choppy illustration flow did not pull me into any sense of fun.  This would be a good book for a group read with preschool children in which you practice bouncing along with the story and making sounds together.  Recommended for ages 1-8.  I would cut that to ages 1-5.
1408750
I could not keep the kids (3-4 years old) interested in it. It would probably be great for a little older audience. It is a cute show though.