MovieChat Forums > Mysterious Island (1961) Discussion > How is this better than the 2005 version...

How is this better than the 2005 version?

posted 11 years ago by vulcanhades
5 replies | jump to latest

I watched both movies and I enjoyed them almost equally. I'm not sure I understand why this movie has such a high score while the 2005 version has only 4/10.

Honestly, the 2005 version has more action, better characters, better acting and more story to it. The only thing this one had was sexy goatskin panties. But that's certainly not enough to make it stand out as "the better movie".

2005 version had cheesy special effects yeah and is more humorous/silly while this one is more serious. But that's part of its charm lol.

[–] StuOz 11 years ago

Three words: composer BERNARD HERRMANN.

The 1961 original has a score that many films would kill to have!
The early sections of the film in the balloon: note how perfectly the music is matched to what is happening on the screen. It is movie magic!

But then, I have a thing for movie music.

The original also had a great cast!

[–] vulcanhades 11 years ago

Yeah I figured music was one of the reasons people liked this movie. :) It certainly is more fitting I guess.

The other movie had really cheesy music but it was kinda catchy lol.

[–] Blueghost 11 years ago

Just looking at the previews, it looks like a real dog with poor CGI.

To answer your question, I think largely because a lot of people have fond memories of the original. And to me it has more heart than a lot of over the top acting in a lot of contemporary films. The 2005 version, just based on the previews, falls into that category.

The 1961 film was an adventure film. It wasn't about deep angst or pathos. The actors did their part, and the story told the tale for the audience. The only thing you can really fault about this movie are the heavy reliance on master shots and stop-motion animation which, for the time, was cutting edge SFX.

I'll have to view the 2005 version to make a fair assessment.

[–] Big G-2 11 years ago

I recall some idiot on the IMDB boards stating that even the worst CGI was better than the best stop-motion. From the trailer I've seen of this, I really don't that's the case. I may or may not check out this 2005 version (which I did not even know existed, until I saw a copy of it recently at my local Barnes & Noble).

[–] Wuchakk 7 years ago

Honestly, the 2005 version has more action, better characters, better acting and more story to it. The only thing this one had was sexy goatskin panties. But that's certainly not enough to make it stand out as "the better movie".

2005 version had cheesy special effects yeah and is more humorous/silly while this one is more serious. But that's part of its charm

While the '61 movie is superior I agree that the absolute lambasting of the 2005 version is undeserved. Yes, the exploding volcano and lava at the end were cheesy looking, but the '05 movie does have excellent island locations, shot in Thailand, which are superior to the '61 version, not to mention it doesn't have those thoroughly lame backdrops of the '61 flick with the fake-looking mountains & volcano. It also has more story and therefore more character development. The only silly part of the '05 version (beyond the exploding volcano and lava) is the depiction of the pirates some of the time; I say "some" of the time because most of the time they're displayed in a generally believable manner; and I think they came off quite well.

And, generally speaking, the creatures in the '05 movie looked fair to good. The mantis, for example, looked really good, particularly considering this was a TV production. Yes, it was cartoony, but the whole story is decidedly comic booky. Moreover, the sets for Nemo's lair were excellent.

I don't understand how these viewers were expecting Jurassic Park F/X quality in a freakin' TV production. Personally, I think the story & characters of the '05 movie are superior to any of the Jurassic Park films.

My 175 (or so) Favorite Movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/