TaryBiggBall It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

Iseerphia All that we are seeing on the screen is happening with real people, real action sequences in the background, forcing the eye to watch as if we were there.

Bessie Smyth Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

Roxie The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

eelchuk7 As someone who read and loved the book I was extremely excited to see this movie. Unfortunately, I was extremely disappointed after I saw it. So many meaningless plot changes corrupted this version from start to finish. In fact, it barely resembles the Robert Louis Stevenson classic novel (he probably rolled over in his grave). I would like the writers to explain to me why they decided to make all the changes, as they seem to serve no purpose other than to upset those who have read the book.The filmmakers decided to make Dr Livesay a snivelling wimp, and Squire Trelawney a massive jerk. The director also chose for some reason to use some sort of speed up technique that does nothing more than send you into a seizure. Eddie Izzard does a good job with Long John Silver, but that only scratches at the surface for redeeming this steaming pile. I guess we'll have to wait another twenty years or so for another version to come out, and hopefully that one might do the book justice.

David Calcara I enjoy Izzard's comedy quite a bit, but I was surprised at the casting of him in this role. In a more traditional adaptation, he might not have fit, but this is a film that takes several liberties with the classic story, one of the biggest being the expansion of Silver's back story. Part of the continuing appeal of Silver is his shifting status between villain and anti hero. Between murderer and mentor. The film further blurs the lines by presenting much of it from his perspective. This, combined with a somewhat less savory interpretation of several of the protagonists creates an even stronger moral dilemma as Jim is forced to choose sides between what he has been brought up to believe is right, and what his present experiences have impressed upon him.The film takes fairly significant liberties to be sure, but welcome ones in my opinion. If this were the only film adaptation of the book, I'd hope for something more true to form. But the fact is that this book has been remade dozens of times, so it loses nothing by changing things up a bit in this particular adaptation. If you prefer the classic interpretation, there are any number of other films that will satisfy you. Personally, when a story is as well known as this, I'd rather the filmmakers try something different instead of retelling the exact same version for the hundredth time.I'm a little annoyed that several of the other reviews here apparently didn't bother to finish watching the entire thing. I can appreciate if you didn't care for this particular version, but reviewing a movie you've only watched half of seems ridiculous to me. Moreover, many of them were greatly misleading as a result. Livesy's supposed cowardice for example is merely a facet to a larger character arc that I found greatly fleshed what is often portrayed as a rather boring background character. If you want the classics, stick with Robert Newton. If you want a comedy, try the Muppet version. If you want a slightly darker, morally grey twist on a well known story, give this a shot.

sudhir98 The acting was very decent and the cinematography was quite good for a made for TV movie. The biggest problem was how the movie is very dark and how it completely changes a few critical characters from the book. Livesey comes of as a bumbling,incompetent person and trelawney is just a hateful character. Ben gunn was very annoying and probably the only character that looks like you would imagine from the book. The captain's character was very well played as well. I wish I could undo watching this movie- it just spoiled the classic for me. For the life of me I cannot understand why the changes were made. It would have been an excellent movie if they stuck to the book. Save your money and avoid this movie.

vonshavingcream This is a very well done pirate movie. They did an excellent job getting most things accurate for the time period. From a sailing side, I didn't like some of the things on screen. (i.e. a shot with a loose flying Jib Boom Sail. This would have NEVER happen on a real ship with a knowledgeable crew.)My main disappointment was the complete miss on the relationships between the character's from the book. One of the main reasons the original book was so appealing and became so famous was because of the trust, and faith the adults in the movie had for the child, Jim Hawkins. In the book, just about every adult had the utmost faith and trust in the information Jim provided. I found it very frustrating that no one but John Silver put trust in Jim in the movie.Another issue I had with this was the relationship between the Squire, The Doctor and Jim. I think this triangle was something that was so vital to ability to believe the original story. It was changed so much in the movie, that it was hard to accept.Again .. I really thought the movie was great. But perhaps it would have been better to change the title and claim it as a adaptation of treasure island rather than saying it IS treasure island ... because it's not.Kudos though to all involved, I commend you for taking on such a large scale production. I know ship movies in general are expensive and difficult. It was a really great movie on a whole.