Evengyny Thanks for the memories!

Dorathen Better Late Then Never

Neive Bellamy Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

Hattie I didn’t really have many expectations going into the movie (good or bad), but I actually really enjoyed it. I really liked the characters and the banter between them.

culmo80 Stevenson's classic is loved by generations for many reasons and this retelling of the story cuts all those reasons out.Spoilers: First, the treatment of Jim by the Doctor, Squire, and Captain is all wrong. They take advantage of him, sell him out to the pirates, cut him out of his share of the treasure and try to kill him. What? Jim was never in league with the pirates and the gentlemen (Doctor, Squire, and Captain) remain honest and help Jim in the story. Only when he slips away to get to the ship do they think he may have gone over to the pirates.The action is also a bit lackluster. The group's escape from the ship felt anti-climatic...almost like a leisurely departure with a few shots.Then there is no assault on the stockade, which was a major part of the original story.And the bargaining between the Doctor and pirates isn't quite explained...why would they give up the map for Jim, whom they already have disowned? In the book, they exchange the map for free passage out of the stockade (already knowing that the treasure was gone because Ben Gunn had joined them).And just where did they film this movie? It looks like it could be off the coast of Newfoundland or something...hardly the tropic environment of the original story.The only redeeming value of this film was Jack Palance. Too bad they couldn't have built a better film around him.

cynic2all I bought this VHS tape years ago and watched it once, knowing then I wasted money on it. But recently, I have read the novel again in my old (middle) age, and still like it as much as when I first read it at 13. But I had forgotten the conversion this film takes until I watched it again, and I'd sure give the tape away for nothing.While there are moral ambiguities in the story, personified in Long John Silver, this follows after Shakespeare's witches in MACBETH: "Fair is foul, and foul is fair" say they. The 2 characters in the novel who prevent blanket torture and murder of all loyal to the ship's command are Captain Smollett and Jim Hawkins. Smollett because he sensed that trouble was in the works when he was engaged on a cruise of secret 'treasure' with the secret out of the bag, a crew he did not pick himself, and the arms already stored under the bows (within easy grasp of the crew he distrusted). If his points of precaution had not been met, he would demand to be discharged; so to prevent delays his precautions were applied, and if it had not been so, it would have been easy mutiny, the pirates (if true to what pirates really were) would have cut off their lips and ears and roasted them, then made them eat them before their slow bleeding finally killed them. So it's rather angering to shift the story to where the pirates were the "good guys" and Smollett and those loyal were villains. The Japanese were more 'heroic' at Pearl Harbor! And as for Jim Hawkins actually turning traitor... this simply is not Stevenson's story. While we can sympathize, some, with his natural curiosities and desire for adventure in his 2 escapades in the novel, it was never in his consideration to join those he knew to be human trash who recklessly waste short provisions and maim and kill for the pleasure of it. That's a completely different personality than Stevenson's story-telling character.Squire Trelawney is the one character of the "faithfuls" whom I wouldn't mind being given a more critical portrayal than most cinemas of this story. After all, it was only through coincidence (overused in the novel) that he happened to be right there at the discovery of the treasure map and was probably the only one who had the means to organize an expedition to find it. So he is a greedy opportunist. But he totally ignored his wiser friend's imperative to keep quiet about what they had found, and thus the crew he hired via Silver had the perfect opportunity to get 'their' treasure. But this movie does not develop that, and instead it goes after the one man of authority with foresight, the Captain, and makes him into a manipulative crook willing to let innocent blood be shed to make himself rich. That's low. It compares with making Joe Friday into a bribe-hustling cop.

liberalgems This film does not stray from the original story until the boat lands on Treasure Island! It was a bit shocking at first, but Long John Silver's (Jack Palance) and Jim Hawkins' (Kevin Zegers) superb acting makes this a very enjoyable fantasy to watch! This is a story of two very elderly men and a very capable teenage boy! Jim Hawkins, while polite, is incredibly resilient and thinks very fast on his feet. And Long John Silver is not some evil minion, but a man of honor who believes in democracy, no less! My hats off to the filmmakers for having the courage to re-interpret a classic in such a dramatic fashion. It certainly makes you think about Treasure Island in a totally different way!

germancards The titles say the film is "based on" the novel by R. L. Stevenson. That seems to mean they chose the same names for the characters. As the film progresses, the plot diverges more and more from the novel. The end is completely different and gave me the impression the budget ran out and they had to kill the cast off and finish the film as quickly as possible rather than stick to the story. I watched them making the film on the Isle of Man and bought the DVD to see what they had produced. I can't think of any other reason to buy it.