MovieChat Forums > Robinson Crusoe (1997) Discussion > How is this 'based upon' the book?

How is this 'based upon' the book?

posted 18 years ago by Phidippides
5 replies | jump to latest

I recently saw this movie after having read the book a few months back. First, the book - excellent, one of the best I have read. The movie - mediocre in its own right, and horrible in its adaptation of the novel.

Spoilers herein

The book's story and main elements include Robinson's failure to take heed of his father's words and his resulting calamities - first getting caught by pirates, and later on gettin shipwrecked on his island in the Carribean. The story is one of conversion; at first he doesn't care much for religion, yet after he considereds the sorry state he is in he comes to realize his fortune, particularly in that he has most everything provided for in his "kingdom". I think there are probably contemporary philosophical elements in the novel, such as his "entering the state of nature" on his island, and his attempts to bring "civilization" to a deserted island.

The movie, then, doesn't attempt to reproduce Robinson's initial predicament; rather, there's a love story involved, and Robinson gets shipwrecked in the South Pacific while circling the globe. While there are of course similarities to the book, the movie Robinson departs significantly in his relationship with Friday. In the book, Friday becomes indebted to Robinson for saving his life; in the movie, Friday is much less subversive and more challenging. He is less humble than the book Friday, which makes him less interesting. Particularly "stupid" is where Robinson says to himself that he doesn't really know whose deity is the real one - his or Friday's pagan god.

While the movie could have reproduced the story in the novel in regards to Robinson's and Friday's relationship, it instead uses modern-day values that it projects onto the story. Not only is this a twisting of the story of Robinson Crusoe, but it is a sappy technique not seldomly used in movies nowadays (e.g. see the white people and the slaves partying together at the wedding feast in The Patriot). This kind of thing makes movies "incredible" in the sense that they become less believable and less enjoyable.

History forum at http://www.westerncivforum.com

[–] sappy987 17 years ago

Excellent post. The incorporated politically correct modern-day values are so blatantly incongruent with the story and the reality of the time the movie is supposed to portray that it becomes a disturbance substantial enough to seriously damage and cloud the overall depection of the story.

Still, II think it managed to be quite an entertaining movie. Although any deeper appreciation of the movie than for the mere adventure/action is lost due to the politically correct Hollywood-version of the 18th century.

[–] Ganoes_Paran 16 years ago

It's a movie, not a bloody documentary. Personally I believe the relationship between Rob and Friday was depicted very well and was really interesting. If they would've made it more Master - Slave as you seem to imply it should've, it would never have been so interesting.
Besides, he starts of as calling him his slave and viewing him as his inferior anyway. But every sane man would built up a friendship even with someone they should consider inferior if they're both alone on an island for more than 4 years.

[–] TheWoolyMammoth 16 years ago

I agree with the Novel being amazing. I loved it. The movie was similar in it's own ways. They could have made it more alike the book with still making it exiting. I wanted to see Robinson hang the birds to scare the other ones. That was a good part.

[–] ergomane 16 years ago

This is really actually more based on Alexander Selkirk's life on a island (Robinson Crusoe Island), which Defoe based his book on...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Selkirk

[–] KartofflMuter 14 years ago

I hated the book. I read it as a teen and again about 5 years ago. He came off condescending at best. .......but then,, i thought stuart Little was a smug little mouse compared to the one on film. I'll read it again but the film at least held my interest and Friday's costuming wasn't as hokey as it usually is in these kinds of films. But then,I collect headhunter artifacts so I'm fairly cynical about these things. i'djust like to know why there was a year delay in releasing it. Beavis aand Butthead-yes.Glitter,certainly. But this really wasn't that bad.