Protraph Lack of good storyline.

Tedfoldol everything you have heard about this movie is true.

ChanFamous I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

Brendon Jones It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

adonis98-743-186503 Lemuel Gulliver has been working in the mail room of a New York daily newspaper for the past ten years. Afraid to put himself out there, he considers himself a loser, as do all his peers. Darcy Silverman, the newspaper's travel editor and one of Gulliver's only friends sends him on an assignment to the Bermuda Triangle. There, Gulliver becomes shipwrecked and ends up on the island of Liliput, where he is twelve taller than the tallest man. Gulliver's Travels is not a film that needs to be taken completely serious but for what is worth and with such a talented cast it's way better than it gets credit for and alot of fun as well Jack Black fans will not be disappointed in my opinion. (10/10)

Blueghost So looking at the votes one sees that nearly everyone below the age of fifty rated this as a five or less. And females under 18, the most forgiving, only gave it a five-point-nine.And that made me scratch my head. Why? Because I actually enjoyed the film, but then again I'm a glutton for (mostly) clean humor (urination and proctological scenes not with standing). I think the major issue with this film is that it was made twenty to thirty years too late for things like Star Wars' references to really resonate with the audience.You have a kind of clash of cultures here which is more age dependent than anything else. In essence it's a film made for 80s and 90s teens and pre-teens, and not really a general purpose cross generational comedy. And, as a kid at heart, I liked the film for what it is, and could appreciate the humor, cultural references and homage to Swift's original tale.The special effects are right for the film, it's exceptionally well shot in spite of the limitations of dealing with a character who has Godzilla like screen presence in comparison to the supporting characters, and even the humor, as dated as it is, is good. It's a silly film, but it's supposed to be, and that's kind of the point that I think a lot of people missed. For just as Swift was satirist, so is this film commenting on other scifi-fantasy films of the last twenty years, and using those film making styles to reinvent Swift's original tale.The other problem is that a lot of Swift's original intent in commenting on political structures and human nature is lost in translation in the film's desire to be appealing to teens who have since grown up and had kids of their own. In this sense it's following the "Juvenification of America" by treating the audience like adult teenagers.A more interesting film would have been on the order of the two part mini series that aired some twenty years earlier, starring Ted Danson. A film that commented on politics, society, and human nature in general, as opposed to a film about adults being too stuff shirted to enjoy The Empire Strikes Back. And that's probably the core of why this film doesn't appeal to more people, because where Jack Black's Gulliver is a youth at heart, his child like qualities don't bring any real reform to the world that gave rise to the dilemmas that he and his size are forced to address. In other words, the more things change the more they stay the same.All in all I really enjoyed the film, and just on a basic "turn your brain off" level, I fail to see why more people didn't like the thing. But, that's just me.Even though I've dissected it and given it some praise and explained why it might fail to appeal, even though it's a fairly decent movie, you might want to check out a copy at the library.See it once, and if it doesn't meet your expectations, well, at least now you'll know why.Either way, try to enjoy it.

Irishchatter Chris O'Dowd and Jason Segal had the worst English accents I've ever heard. You honestly don't have to be Irish or Amercian to get the English accent right like why did they have to make a balls of the casting?! Whoever had the idea of creating a remake of "Gullivers Travels", needed their heads checked! It was just ridiculous in casting them in the first place, they should've got better actors besides them. I like Chris O'Dowd and Jason Segal but at the same time, they weren't just suited for their roles! Emily Blunt's character sounded like such a whiny spoiled b**** that needed a reality check. Emily Blunt is a good actress but she just didn't suit the role well or did a good job. She would've been better off if she wasn't involved! Omg we go onto Jack Black, he was poor enough as Gulliver. The scene where he peed on the burning castle was the lazy way to get the movie entertaining. That was just wrong and weak.Everything involved in the movie was awful!

Massimo Marcello I can't even call this movie mildly entertaining. As a child, "Gulliver's Travels" was one of my favorite novels and comic books. This movie took a classic and completely slaughtered it. It's a shame to think that kids that have not seen or read the original version will think this crap to be the true storyline. Shame. This movie is not supposed to be a comedy. Fine if one attempts to throw a "twist" to the original version, but this was no twist. It was a complete destruction and insult to a historic classic. What an unnecessary account of this story. Adding further insult to injury, is featuring Black to star in the movie. I thought Ted Danson was bad. Black manages to bring this classic story down to new levels of low.