2 of 2

2. Why do you think Joe was a bully? Why do you think bullies exist? Have you ever been a bully—or just really mean to others? If yes, why did you pick on others? What were you really trying to prove or accomplish?
3. Have you ever been bullied? How did you handle the situation? What's the best way to respond to bullies
4. One by one, Joe's "team" starts to defect to Billy's side. Why do you think they do that? What lessons do we learn about being true to yourself and about true friendship?

Though this is a family flick with nothing overtly offensive for young eyes, it does contain some bullying, bathroom humor, and disrespect for adults. One boy talks about his penis. And I wouldn't take any kid—or grown-up—with a weak stomach.

Photos © Copyright New Line Cinema

© 2006 Christianity Today International. All rights reserved. Click for reprint information.

Thomas Rockwell's book How to Eat Fried Worms is a childhood favorite for me and many other book lovers.

But based on what I'm reading from religious-press critics of the film, I may steer clear of it entirely. The reviews suggest that writer-director Bob Dolman's movie adaptation, which comes to us from Walden Media, fills the story with unpleasantness, and changes the events at the conclusion, changing the meaning of the story altogether.

Steven D. Greydanus (Decent Films) is even more upset about it, giving the movie a D+.

He laments this adaptation, saying "Rockwell's beloved novella … is a cheerfully disgusting tale of boyhood bravado and rivalry among friends that winds up going too far. The new film version … transmogrifies this minor classic into an unpleasant endurance test about coping with bullying by humiliating and degrading yourself before the bullies can do it for you, with a trite, tacked-on message of solidarity that's about as realistic as a package of Gummi Worms."

Greydanus believes that Fried Worms "marks a new low for once-promising Walden Media, which still professes to be education-oriented and once espoused a commitment to faithful adaptations of quality children's literature. Their last film, Hoot, was a poor adaptation of an admittedly flawed novel. … Fried Worms is a melancholy new landmark, their first bad film from a good book."

Similarly troubled, David DiCerto (Catholic News Service) notes that Dolman "alters the story considerably." But he quickly adds, "The plot-tinkering is of less concern than the new message. Standing up to bullies is well and good, but, troublingly, the movie seems to suggest that the best way to deal with peer pressure is to give in to it."

Christian Hamaker (Crosswalk) writes, "Young actors are front and center throughout Fried Worms, and although Benward, Eisenberg and Hicks give it their all, they are surrounded by a young cast that isn't in the same league."

Hamaker notes that Dolman "further tests audiences with a cinematic presentation lacking in flair and visual grace," whereas he was impressed with earlier Walden films like Holes and Because of Winn-Dixie

Adam R. Holz (Plugged In) says that the lack of sexual innuendo and other crass content feels "refreshingly anachronistic," and concludes that it's "about as innocent as anything you're likely to find on the big screen today." Innocent, yes. But excellent? "[M]ore than a few middle school principals will be disappointed with the way it teaches kids to take matters into their own hands … when it comes to dealing with tweenage tyrants."

Mainstream critics are divided over the film, but most don't seem to notice how this adaptation arrives at different conclusions than the book.

first page |  2 of 2