MamaGravity good back-story, and good acting

Freaktana A Major Disappointment

Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

Mehdi Hoffman There's a more than satisfactory amount of boom-boom in the movie's trim running time.

grantss A reasonably interesting adaptation of the classic novel. Has the same basic plot as the novel but changes some of the characters' personalities, to varying degrees. Also grittier than the novel.Nice scenery, good action scenes, a decent degree of intrigue.On the negative side, there is a ho-humness to the proceedings. It is not overly engaging, and it sometimes does feel like it is going through the motions. The movie/series never really grabs you and drags you along with it.Performances are so-so. Eddie Izzard is fairly good as Long John Silver. Nobody else really stands out. Donald Sutherland has very little screen time.

goreilly40 OK my main gripe with this adaptation of the book is it takes too many liberties with the original story and the characters as well, Dr Livesey goes from the main hero to a sniveling coward, Squire Trelawney goes from a trustworthy leader to a two faced greedy tyrannical land owner and the protagonists don't turn on each other and Jim DOESN'T throw the loot overboard when its time to return home and he doesn't free Silver as in the original story its clear he doesn't trust him. Some of the back story of Blind Pew, Black Dog and their relationship with Long John Silver was explored however this removed the shock of the apple barrel scene when Jim overhears the pirates planning the mutiny which is one of the most iconic parts of the story, and in fact renders the whole scene pointless. That said in spite of those negatives there were a few positives with this adaptation, we finally got to see the infamous Captain Flint in person, played superbly by Donald Sutherland if only for a short time, the portrayal of Captain Smollett was one of the few character's the movie got right. Casting Caribbean actors in some of the roles was a clever touch as pirate crews at the time of the did tend to have people from that part of the world, although some of the choices were rather odd, mainly because the actors were generally too young to poetry their characters in a realistic fashion, Elijah Wood as Ben Gunn was such an example, in regard to Eddie Izzard as Long John Silver, again like most other apsects, not bad. So to sum up it was worth watching once but I won't bother watching it again.

wazvan I have read some other reviews of the film just to get a sense of how other viewers felt about this movie and beyond that, what they make out of the differences between the book and this movie. Some viewers were disappointed. I take it, they are truest to the book. I understand a movie cannot be made only to satisfy the fans of this great creation of R.L. Stevenson. There are many people who have not yet read the book nor will they ever read it. The changing of the personalities of some characters in the movie might they find very enjoyable.I for one, although all the time during the movie surprised by the appearance and conduct of Squire Trelawney, I accepted it towards the end of the movie and found it rather enjoyable, as a twist of tale. The same I felt about the character of Doctor Livesey.Apart from that, I liked the movie very much for the atmosphere, I thought it was just about the same as in the book. I have read the book several times, but I'd never re-read it for the sake of the adventure ( if I want that i re-read The Count of Monte-Cristo ) but for the sake of that wonderful described atmosphere of high-seas and the long gone era of the pirates. Back to this production, last but not list: I loved the scene in which the ship leaves port in Bristol and the whole crew starts to sing. I compare it to the first singing scene in " Oh Brother, Where Art Thou" as the convicts are smashing rocks and singing or to the first scene in " The Blues Brothers 2000" as they present the jail before the character of Dan Aykroyd leaves it. I thought it gives a lovely flavor to the whole atmosphere.I will watch this movie a second time! Even if only for this already mentioned singing scene if not for the dialog between Jim and Israel Hands, I quote: "You gotta be strong, in a religious way...or have no thought for God at all"Loved it!

vonshavingcream This is a very well done pirate movie. They did an excellent job getting most things accurate for the time period. From a sailing side, I didn't like some of the things on screen. (i.e. a shot with a loose flying Jib Boom Sail. This would have NEVER happen on a real ship with a knowledgeable crew.)My main disappointment was the complete miss on the relationships between the character's from the book. One of the main reasons the original book was so appealing and became so famous was because of the trust, and faith the adults in the movie had for the child, Jim Hawkins. In the book, just about every adult had the utmost faith and trust in the information Jim provided. I found it very frustrating that no one but John Silver put trust in Jim in the movie.Another issue I had with this was the relationship between the Squire, The Doctor and Jim. I think this triangle was something that was so vital to ability to believe the original story. It was changed so much in the movie, that it was hard to accept.Again .. I really thought the movie was great. But perhaps it would have been better to change the title and claim it as a adaptation of treasure island rather than saying it IS treasure island ... because it's not.Kudos though to all involved, I commend you for taking on such a large scale production. I know ship movies in general are expensive and difficult. It was a really great movie on a whole.