You got me kidding me
omg why why why!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! this is gonna be SHI^%&
share[deleted]
MovieChat Forums > Treasure Island (2012) Discussion > You got me kidding me
Well, whatever it is, it isn't going to be "Treasure Island." We already have a great Jim with Christian Bale in the 1990 version - not to be surpassed and obviously not by this one. At the other end, we have a completely unnecessary and ancient Captain Flint in Donald Sutherland. Flint... who died blue in the face calling for rum in Savannah before the story ever opens!
shareSo its damned before its even finished ! Seriously though, it might be interesting if a version actually shows what happened when the treasure was dumped in the first place. We know Flint went ashore with six men and came back on his own. Since the plot depends on fear, it might be worth seeing who everyone is most afraid of.As has been said, the 1990 version alread exists as the definitive (although Orson Welles is a more realistic Long John) so what you got to lose by at least waiting until its made before passing judgement ?
shareNot entirely passing judgment.... There are a few good casting choices. I can completely see Eddie Izzard as Silver and I'm intrigued with Philip Glenister as Smollett - plenty of intelligence and charisma there. But honestly, a grown Jim...! What's next, a love interest on board? They might as well say "suggested by Treasure Island."
shareWell, according to this site, there are TWO other versions besides this in pre-production so it could be a busy year next year.
shareAbsolutely right. The 1990 Treasure Island cannot be bettered.
share
What about th 1950 Disney version? Robert Newton's Long John Silver in particular is pretty memorable.
If Clint Eastwood and Chuck Norris got into a fight, Clint Eastwood would probably win.
Until the 1990 version, I was all for the Disney version based mainly on memories of Robert Newton. I think it may have been Leonard Maltin who called him "a ham, but a succulent one." However, even as a child I thought Bobby Driscoll was awfully young and sniveling for Jim, and revisiting the film as an adult, I really couldn't stand the way the film played fast and loose with the book, especially giving it a sentimental ending. When you read the book, you realize Heston nailed it - and so did every other actor and every other element in the 1990 version.
Honestly, I AM looking forward to the new version - the Eddie Izzard version, that is, not the big screen ones. But the problem is in trying to out-do the book with additions that aren't needed. Flint retains his imaginative power by remaining unseen.
I really liked it as well, in fact I'd have liked to see more.
shareNewton is very memorable, if more than a little hammy and not actually as described in the book, where Silver is tall, blond and clean (until they all get grubby on the island). Heston, other than being a few years too old (Silver is specifically said to be 50, though his life with Flint could certainly have aged him). The Disney version also takes a lot of liberties with the timeline and the ending. The 1990 version pulls off the amazing feat of being utterly true to the book and a rousing, authentic-style adventure in its own right. And Jim isn't trying to be a cute little kid....
shareYeah, but the kid who played jim was irittating as hell
-- -- -- --
"Okay, son, I'll give you my authorization code. It's E-A, T-M, E."
I thought this was one of the better additions to the story. Old Don was good in his limited scenes and it was a fairly decent version of filling in the blanks. It's got some additions which aren't so good but the Flint part is pretty cool.
sharewhile i disagree with op cause iv just watched and really liked it, id still like to say thanks to this post for informing me of the 1990 version that iv never heard of. will watch it asap
shareIs there anything more ridiculous than going to IMDB and condemning a movie before it even came out? People who do that should be banned from posting.
shareYou said: You got me kidding me
Didn't you mean: You have got to be kidding me
Honestly I'm not some sort of spelling nazi but the original poster has obviously misheard this phrase
just watched part one of this & I thought it was the dogs bollocks, can't wait for part 2 .
shareWhat?!? You waited until seeing it before forming an opinion? What kind of nutbar are you? (Please note intended sarcasm)
shareI've just finished Part 1 and I liked it. It really is not bad at all. The changes from the novel (so far) aren't big enough to destroy the novel. I still prefer the 1990 version but this is pretty good.
Looking forward to Part 2.
Surely the change such that squire Trelawney screws Jim Hawkins and the Dr out of their share is a Massive change to the book?
shareAbsolutely terrible adaptation. I had to watch the 1990 TV movie with C Heston again to remind myself how good it could of been with a little effort.
shareI really liked it. Although I have never read the book or seen any of the film adaptions. So I had nothing to compare it to.
shareGah! My english-nazi (as opposed to english nazi) side has bitten me!
It's 'should /have/ been', not 'should of been'... you should've just gone for the actual contraction, my friend...
-- -- -- --
"Okay, son, I'll give you my authorization code. It's E-A, T-M, E."
I prefer treasure planet, so far it's been the most fun sorta remake/retake but all in all why talk trash if you know nothing about it or what it takes to make something interesting for people to watch.
It is good and fun to watch !!!
One Last point tho..... why is it people complain about a 20 y/o playing Jim but no one cares about 25 y/o's playin high school students... Doesn't matter much to me either way as long as the production value is great which this really has, as an American i really enjoy a lot of British stuff because I like watching things with actors I don't really know.....
[deleted]