I just got back from seeing Wrinkle In Time. I don't know if you have read the book or any of the other books in the story series, but the movie tells the story differently than the book does. The general story is the same....but the details are different . I would have to say that while I felt it was a good movie I don't know that I will go out to buy the DVD (other than to make sure I have it for my Disney Collection-kinda why I have the Live Action Pete's Dragon). The biggest change I felt was in the family dynamics...the characters are limited to Meg and her now adopted brother Charles Wallace; thier father and mother and Meg's friend Calvin. There is very little plot exposition to establish why Mr. Murray is missing or how, but it gets filled in as the story unfolds. What I loved about the books was the feeling of family and comfort in the home, and that is lacking in the movie version-at least until they get Mr. Murray back and make the family whole again. The other thing is that Meg and Charles Wallace are the only children in the Murray household: in the book they have twin brothers that are older than Charles and younger than Meg, and while they are not crucial to this story they play a major part in one of the other books in the series. It was a well done movie and you dont need to have read the book to get the story, but I think if you have read the book you will get more of the meaning.