So no one read the book?!

Lol.. this bothers me too.. I just can´t get it. I think Jules Verne's books have a huge potential for movie adaptions, and yet, these adaptions are almost always complete wrecks.. I really can't understand why, these are wonderful stories (with blockbuster potential), one would think lots of big studios would be really interested in making big budget films with great casts and scripts.. But no. All we got in the last decades were low budget/made for tv films, that butcher the books.. or Jackie Chan as Passepartout. What the hell?! I´m still digesting that one..

By the way, what did Asimov say about the characters in the book? Thanks

I've read the book three times; once in 1961 not long after I saw the movie, once more about twenty years ago, and more recently a year or two ago. It's a long book, rather technical, and I barely understood it at age twelve, so I most appreciated it in my most recent reading. I loved both the book and the movie, but I remember being disappointed when I first read the book that there were no giant monsters, modern nor prehistoric. Yet even then I enjoyed the book for its details of place, the adventurous and mysterious situations, and its rigorous descriptions of survival skills and the creation of devices from the basics of wild nature.
There were some things about the book I abhored, notably the needless extermination of the jaguars. Verne, like most people of his time, considered large predators malicious man-eaters and vermin to be exterminated, not knowing much about the balance of predator-prey relationships in nature. (I also hated his killing of the cachalots-sperm whales-by the Nautilus in 20,000 Leagues U.T.S--he had their behavior confused with that of killer whales). Still I enjoyed the book despite that.
I am not outraged at all by the liberties taken with the novel by the moviemakers (I only don't think it should be graced with the alternate title "Jules Verne's Mysterious Island) but I guess I can't blame them since in those days, following the huge success of Disney's 20,000 and the film version of A Journey to the Center of the Earth (also taking drastic departures from the book), Verne's name was boxoffice boffo.
You have to remember how different in intent and times cinema and film are, not to mention the differences in the tastes and sensibilities of readers and moviegoers. Furthermore, Verne wrote for different times and a far different culture. I just enjoy both the movie and book for their own merits.
There was a more recent film adaptation for tv a year or two ago, as well as one for Journey. Those were far worse than the older bigscreen movies. Now those were something to be outraged about!
I would like to see a new bigscreen adaptation of the book, one that adheres more closely to the book. I'd include Jup (an orangutan, not a monkey) if I were the scriptwriter or producer. He's a blast!

I'm so glad to see others with this view. It just irks me to no end when these Hollywood people take great classic literature and turn it into this exploited form of inaccurate entertainment! And the newer version made by Hallmark is even worse. My view of such books is this: if the book is great enough to make you want to make a movie about it, why change it? If you don't like the way the book was written, then go write your own! Don't call it "Jules Verne's" anything: he didn't write this crap! Call it ____'s Mysterious Island or whatever. These movies have nothing to do with Jules Verne, and I'm sure he'd want nothing to do with them.

I agree that the movie is utter crap compared to the book. They completely butchered the book.
I just want to ask a question: am I the only one who thinks the book has some
racist statements? I read the book a few months ago and I can't recall all of them but I recall one in particular. When the castaways begin to train Jup
to do some household tasks one of them says something like "Now now Neb, don't be jealous."
Here in this context it doesn't seem so much, as you might argue that Neb was responsible for those tasks and the orangotang was taking his place, but when I was reading it felt very racist. And during the book there are a lot more of them, all of the involving Neb.
Usually I don't give a damn if people are racist or not but at that time it really got my attention. Oh and I'm white, and I'm saying this because I don't you to think that I'm biased or something like that.

PS: Sorry my bad English.

FYI if any of you posters here come back for more, the Gutenburg Project has archived the full text for free online (as it has long expired its copyright, as a matter of fact, the copyright was probably expired before the 1961 movie, which would explain the abomination its cello has caused) and more importantly: Librivox has an UNABRIDGED audiobook available just as freely at their site.

i work long nights in a closed department store so librivox has supplied me with many things to entertain my ears and mind as i stock, and this 22 hour audio rendition is great if your on the go, and unabridged! if you arent an audiophile as myself, you might not appreciate the fact (as 22 hours is a long time to be bothered by the discoveries of plants and herbs) but when the World War Z audiobook, professionally done, (librivox is all volunteer of varying quality) but became HALF of the full text, ignoring many things i think quite nessicary to its contents... and all that to save it from being more than 6 hours... i have personally made it a point to avoid any books shorter than 8 hours save this last one, as it must get me through a shift..

on the boat, it was too small to survive a long time at sea, with the nearest inhabited island being no less than 1200 miles away, this was referenced often as the engineer was verry concerned that it wouldnt make it to tabor and back, a feet of 300 miles roundtrip, and the return trip, the waves were enough to literally wash over the ship.

on the racisim, i find that vern downplayed the part actually, despite the terminology of "negro", there is nothing to portray racisim concidering the times.
Remember: it was the 1870's, during the U.S. civil war,slavery still existed in most parts of the world. plus the inhabitants of the island were all from and for the northern, and right, side of this war.

to put it into further perspective, the sentiment that african americans were of inferior stock lasted clear into the 1960s and 70s, untill the works of Dr.King brought things around. Just keep in mind that this was 100 years prior to the final declaration that not only were these people free, they were also 100% equals to every skin color and creed.

Even now there is racism, but looking back 140 years, i think Jules Verne was remarkably forward thinking and fair.

as to jupiter, the accurate text is as follows:

"But, master," said Neb, "are you serious? Are we going to take him as a
servant?"

"Yes, Neb," replied the engineer, smiling. "But you must not be jealous."

and yes, taken this way, without thinking of it, it could be seen as racist, however, look at it from Neb's point of view: first, it was odd enough to train an orang. to be a butler in any way, but it would be taking away some of Nebs duties. Neb was a freed slave, and while he was free he had been raised to think himself inferior and thus, took pride in any responsability given to him.

i think you might think the same way were you in the position. today the world is too sensitive of anything that might be offensive and searches these things out to yell and complain and picket, but it was a much simpler time back then, no less wrong was done, but it wasnt seen as wrong then.

"If this movie had come out this year instead of 1961 people would have been enraged. They really butchered the Jules Verne book "The Mysterious Island". And in a way that you would expect from modern companies."


Riiiight... Because these days, movie adaptations are uniformly faithful to their source material every time!

They should have just called it "Ray Harryhausen's Mysterious Island". That's what it is, after all, and I guarantee you that most of the audience attending the film in the sixties was not there because they read the book. They were there to see the amazing fantasy creations of stop-motion animation's greatest wizard.

Ooo, baby, your domestic gross is SO BIG. That's how I know how GOOD you are!

I recently finished reading the book and then watched the movie. Actually I bought the dvd for two dollars several weeks ago but decided I wanted to read this first since I've read 20,000 leagues several times and am a big fan.

Before going into this movie you should have already known something was up because Harryhausen was involved. The novel doesn't exactly cry out for his talents, however immense they really are.

The story was primarily the science of survival, secondly the freedom that isolation brings. Tossing in a great, gritty extended battle along with the superb choice of Nemo as semi-omnipotent protector of this closed sample of the human race.

Not much character development (except for Ayrton who isn't even in the movie), not much cause for special effects, not much cause for sex, not much cause for anything that can get butts in the seats.

I can see the need to add the women, the creatures and writing off Ayrton as being dead when he isn't (many time savers in movie scripts). It is unrealistic to think this sort of thing won't happen, no matter how classic you want to remember the book....movies are a different form of art.

I didn't like the end of the movie and I disagreed with the different directions they went with the characters but in truth, the movie is a lot closer to the book than it COULD have been and I enjoyed it for what it was.

Alien426, sadly no one would really care today about it being true to the Verne book. I don't personally know anyone else that has even read it.

If this were made today, it could likely entirely consist of 24 year olds portraying 18 year olds being trapped on an island with a serial killer named Nemo who wears a diver's helmet everywhere he goes, thus is automatically creepy. The movie would make millions.

Be thankful for the Harryhausen flick. It helps to think of it as serving a couple different purposes. The Verne story and a chance to see the legends of Dr. Moreau, Land that Time Forgot, Nemo and the mythical civilization of Lemuria all rolled into one without it being "Friday's 13th Saw: Freddy vs. the cast of Lost."


.

I read the book, then I saw the movie. Ergo: this movie sucks.
Thank you, alien426, for your insightful criticism. This way I don´t have to write a long comment since you sum it up perfectly and I have nothing to add in this subject.
If I´d seen the movie first and not read the book at all I guess I could find the movie naïve and amusing intead of annoying.