Customer Reviews


140 Reviews
5 star:
 (75)
4 star:
 (37)
3 star:
 (11)
2 star:
 (10)
1 star:
 (7)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
Share your thoughts with other customers
Create your own review
 
 

The most helpful favorable review
The most helpful critical review


166 of 168 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent, durable version of the Novel. Better than remake.
`Lord of the Flies' has been made into a movie at least twice since the William Golding novel of the same name became a cult classic / must read volume for high school and college students in the late 1950s. The first version, which follows the novel very closely, was done in black and white by the noted director, Peter Brook in 1963. The second version was done in color...
Published on August 28, 2005 by B. Marold

versus
20 of 24 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars Hmmm.....
First things first: William Golding's _Lord of the Flies_ is one of the best novels I've ever read. It is suspenseful, terrifying, disturbing, brilliantly symbolistic, and deeply moving--all at the same time. The book gets 5/5 stars, no question about it.
Now for the 1963 movie: Well, for the most part the acting is decent (Ralph and Simon are especially good) and...
Published on July 18, 2002 by Mark Lee


‹ Previous | 1 214 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

166 of 168 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent, durable version of the Novel. Better than remake., August 28, 2005
This review is from: Lord of Flies [VHS] (VHS Tape)
`Lord of the Flies' has been made into a movie at least twice since the William Golding novel of the same name became a cult classic / must read volume for high school and college students in the late 1950s. The first version, which follows the novel very closely, was done in black and white by the noted director, Peter Brook in 1963. The second version was done in color by Harry Hook and released in 1990.

Like many remakes in the same language, one immediately wonders why bother, as the original Brook version is more than gripping enough to convey the message of the novel.

To highlight the differences between the two versions, let me outline the story shared by the two versions.

The scene is set when an airplane carrying school children crashes in the South Pacific, of the coast of a remote tropical island. Approximately 30 of the children, ages 6 to 13 make it to shore and gather on the beach to work out how they are to survive and assume that since they are far removed from their original destination and the island is small and uninhabited, there is a good chance it will take a long time, if ever, for grown-ups to find and rescue them. The first two principle characters are Ralph, one of the two or three oldest boys who we meet first, in the company of an intelligent, bespectacled, slightly overweight boy of the same age known as `Piggy'. The third main character is Jack, about as old and as fit as Ralph. Three minor named characters are Simon, who is prone to fainting and `seeing things' and Sam and Eric, a pair of twins.

An early vote sets up Ralph as the leader, with a few rules establishing a conch shell found by Ralph and Piggy in the first reel as the symbol of the right to speak to the gathering of boys. Jack immediately assumes the responsibility as leader of a `gang' (later to become a `tribe') of hunters who will also take responsibility for maintaining a signal fire which Ralph succeeds in lighting by using Piggy's eyeglass lens as a means of concentrating sunlight on a clump of tinder.

Jack's gang gets involved too much in hunting and allows the signal fire to go out just as an aircraft flies near the island. Soon, a story evolves about the presence of a monster on the island. This creates the pretext for Jack to split off from the group with his tribe and create a camp at a more defensible location. As this larger group becomes more and more primitive, they raid Ralph's camp and steal Piggy's specs since it is the only means they have for starting fires. To placate the monster, the head of a killed wild pig is cut from its carcass and stood on the top of a pole near the suspected monster's lair as an offering to the monster.

After a few days, Simon observes this pig's head and its very large collection of flies feasting on the festering flesh and imagines he hears the pigs head speak to him, hence, the source of the title. Simon is then killed when the hunters mistake him in the night for the monster.

When Ralph and Piggy walk to Jack's camp to recover Piggy's specs, Piggy is killed by another `accident' when Jack's tribe members pry a large boulder loose that falls on Piggy. Ralph and Jack fight, Ralph is driven off, and the whole tribe sets fire to the jungle to flush out Ralph and, presumably, kill him. Both stories end as Ralph runs to the beach to find himself at the feet of a very professionally uniformed member of his country's elite armed services.

Hook spices up the dialogue by making the boys much more hip with lots of swear words and references to contemporary popular shows such as Alf and Miss Piggy of the Muppets. Unfortunately, Hook loses the two most important elements of the whole story. In the beginning of the novel and, subtly, in the beginning of Brook's film, we see that the world is once more at war and the boys from several different schools are on a plane to Australia to find relative safety from the coming (nuclear?) conflict. Hook shows nothing of this, giving us simply a group of boys from the same military academy on a trip to goodness knows where. This totally looses the whole allegorical sense of the story where the conflict between the boys mirrors the war in the world at large, especially the sense of the last scene where the world (island) is destroyed by the conflict (fire).

The second major oversight in Hook's rendition is that there is never enough attention given to the significance of the pig's head, Simon's vision, and the sense of `The Lord of the Flies'. A less important point is that the origin of the monster myth is different in the two movies. Brook's film follows the book and has it be a misinterpretation of a billowing parachute from a fallen, dead pilot. Hook creates the myth out of the spasms of the downed plane's delirious pilot as he finds refuge in a cave and is rediscovered by Simon who believes he is a monster.

Both movies do a credible job of depicting the fall of nominally civilized boys into savagery and myth. The combat between Ralph and Jack near the end is straight out of Frazier's `The Golden Bough' on the myth of killing the king. Unfortunately, Hook's version seems as eviscerated as the pig carcass, as all the great allegorical of the original story are totally lost. And, as minimal as they were, I even think the boys' performances in Brook's version are better done, as their initial innocence in the face of this loss of civilization makes their transformation all the more interesting.

Brook's version is highly recommended.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


67 of 68 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars A Great Experience, December 13, 1999
This review is from: Lord of Flies [VHS] (VHS Tape)
It was a pleasure to see the original version of "Lord of the Flies" again. I'll be interested in seeing the DVD version as well, to see what additional material comes in that format. Having been one of the boys in the movie, I also appreciated seeing the reviews posted by other Amazon customers! I wonder if any of the other cast members have checked out this site...
I confess to liking the original version far more than the remake, but that's not surprising, I guess. I TRIED to keep an open mind when I saw the new version, but, alas, I failed. My recollections of running from the burning jungle, coughing, onto the beach at the end makes a black-and-white rendition seem more real to me.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


48 of 48 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Fantastic dvd of a superb film, March 3, 2002
By 
A. L. Spieckerman (Los Angeles, CA United States) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Lord of the Flies (The Criterion Collection) (DVD)
I was terribly excited to discover that one of my favorite classic films, the 1963 Peter Brooks "Lord of the Flies" was on dvd. I was even more excited when I saw it had been given a deluxe treatment by some studio called Criterion.
"Lord of the Flies" was the first dvd I bought and it introduced me to the phenomenal Criterion Collection. Every extra on this dvd is fantastic and interesting, there is no filler or meaningless praise. The commentary alone is worth the price of this dvd, it gives a magnificent insight into how this film was made: for instance, the film was one of the first independent productions ever produced. This is one of those rare commentaries that adds to your appreciation and understanding of the film, I rank it alongside "Seven Samurai" and "Grand Illusion" (also both Criterion dvds) commentaries as among the best I have heard.
The film itself looks abolutely fantastic, worlds better than any vhs or laserdisc edition I had previously seen; criterion's produced an amazing, clean image that will be striking on any video set up.
_Lord of the Flies_ is one of my favorite novels; Golding masterfully touched on many themes and concepts about society and managed to capture the essence of humanity in the boyish caricatures he created. For the most part those themes and ideas come across very faithfully in the film. As it is pointed out in the dvd's commentary; there is no screenwriting credit, because there was no script, the production team worked straight from the novel, using it as their sole source of the story. The result is a remarkably clear and coherent adapation of the original novel, brought to life with great faith and startling prowess for a first time filmmaker. Some technical limitations can still be seen in the final product, but they do little to detract from your enjoyment of the film.
In short: a fantastic, dark, and compelling story is brilliantly brought to life in such a stark manner that it feels to viewer at times like an unfolding documentary. Finally, to top it off, the film was given a royal treatment on dvd that perfectly complements and enhances the film itself; in all, very much worth the price of admission.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


22 of 22 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars A great movie, a fantastic DVD., August 30, 2000
By 
This review is from: Lord of the Flies (The Criterion Collection) (DVD)
This is a thinker's film. If you like movies to sweep you away in a safe adventurous fantasy, get something else. Enjoying this film is contingent upon thinking about it. Like the book, it provokes, and you, being the subject matter, may not like being addressed in such a way.
Whether ir not it lives up to the book is a whole other question. I think it is wonderful in its own right, and that it does a great job of bringing Golding's story to the screen. Whatever.
As a DVD, this Criterion Collection edition is practically unsurpassed. I buy very few DVDs because they are expensive and I see this new medium as an opportunity to build a truly great movie collection. One afternoon I was discussing with some friends what movies we would buy on DVD. I immediately suggested "The original 'Lord of the Flies'. But they won't release it. And if they do it will be a crappy transfer. And there won't be any extras." Oh, how wrong I was! The sound and picture transfers are incredible - the film is better than I've ever seen it. And the extras are amazing! The commentary is completely satisfying from a filmmaker's point of view, and likewise a philosopher's interest. The story of the making of the film is worth the purchase in itself.
There's tons of stuff to watch and listen to. It's great. It's totally worth the price. I thought that "The Matrix" was a great value as a DVD (in terms of extras), but this matches it and means a lot more. "Buy it!", I say!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


16 of 16 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Are we humans really THAT bad???, September 2, 2001
This review is from: Lord of Flies [VHS] (VHS Tape)
This movie is a very skillful presentation of William Golding's eponymous, timeless sociological horror story. A group of boys ranging from around 6 to, I would guesstimate, 14 or 15, are stranded on a desert island. Unfortunately for the boys, the general spirit of their story parts ways with the spirit of "Gilligan's Island" immediately, and they end up deteriorating into tribal, superstitious savages, rent with internecine strife, in a matter of (evidently) weeks.
Any viewer out there who plans to see this movie should absolutely make an effort to read the book. You could possibly see the movie first, if you digest storylines more easily through movies than books. But whatever order you carry out the two activities in, you must see the movie AND read the book, if you want a full understanding of what the director was doing here.
Here are a few good things to notice. First of all, you should be aware that this film was shot mostly on the islet of Vieques, off the coast of Puerto Rico. It's hard to believe that this is true, because it's just so perfect -- Vieques is the island where the U.S. Navy practices bombing these days, and protesters against war have been getting into all kinds of clashes with the authorities the past few months (spring and summer of 2001). Maybe "Lord of the Flies" was more prophetic than the director, actors and writers ever even realized.
A second thing to notice is the song that is constantly playing, throughout most of the movie. The song is "Kyrie Eleison." At first Jack's choir sings it, and then it sort of becomes general background music. If you happen not to be particularly into going to church, let me just clue you in that "kyrie eleison" is Greek for "Lord have mercy," which I think you'll agree is a chillingly apt refrain for this relentlessly dark movie.
A third good thing to notice is the little boy, who progressively loses his memory of his own identity, over the course of the film. At first, he automatically recites his full name, address and phone number to any stranger he meets, as he was apparently taught to do by his parents. Midway through the film, he can remember only his name, and part of his address. By the end, not to spoil the ending by giving too much away, he cannot even recollect his name. "How quickly," one envisions William Golding bemoaning, "we forget!"
But I'm just pointing out a few minor things to notice. The basic theme is obviously the clash between savagery and civilization, and the tendency for things to fall apart, for the center not to hold... George Washington himself used to say that the job of government has to do with Fear -- instilling it in possible malefactors, in enemies of the state, even in respected members of the community, just to keep everyone in line. This movie makes you think about what might happen if that force were removed from society as a whole. If the function of art is to raise awareness of painful truths, as this movie does, then the individual must be sure to bring things other than art into their lives, in order to raise awareness of kinder truths which are no less valid, no less serious, and no less important for being kind. That's what I think anyway.
This is an interesting movie, and it will really make you think. Two thumbs up.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


15 of 15 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars The Survivors Are Due on Maple Street, September 25, 2004
By 
JON STRICKLAND "Jon Strickland" (Smithfield, NC United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
This review is from: Lord of the Flies (The Criterion Collection) (DVD)
The 1963 version of Lord of the Flies is a very interesting adaptation that depicts the savagery that lies within each of us. It is so profound that it makes one wonder about not what we are like but what we are REALLY like.

In the story, young, English schoolboys are castaways stranded on an island with little hope of being rescued or even detected. They form their own microcosm of a government so as to establish an organized, daily routine that will enable them to hunt, gather, and shelter themselves in order to withstand the harshest elements of Mother Nature.

At the start, they are, again, English schoolboys who are well-mannered and civilized. However, as the days pass, they lose their capacity to maintain any stable, social order as the "warrior within" that helps them to hunt down and kill wild animals for food, thus survival, becomes the haunting, albeit primal, emotion of savage paranoia that causes them to hunt down their own kind.

Two programs come to mind. One is Survivor, because of the island setting (The movie was shot in Puerto Rico), and the other is the Twilight Zone classic The Monsters Are Due on Maple Street, because there was a perception that in the island was a beast out there that the boys would have to either appease or kill.

Quite frightening is that what might be described as a Dr. Jekyll to Mr. Hyde metamorphosis as one sees the breakdowns in Lord of the Flies is a character devolution that would be so gradual and so subtle that it would be difficult for many to see the perils that would lie ahead.

A great classic is this movie, a forthcoming of a psychological case study that has often been shunned and ignored by many industrialized societies that choose to deny that youngsters are not necessarily the so-called sweet, little angels that they have been stereotyped. Truly, this was a bold step to possibly suggest that, no matter our background or social status, there is that beast within us that must be both acknowledged and contained and that to not be so frank can lead to destruction, both individually and societally.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


32 of 36 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Fantastic DVD transfer, March 18, 2000
By A Customer
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Lord of the Flies (The Criterion Collection) (DVD)
I've been waiting for this one to become available for awhile. The Criterion DVD has so many valuable extras. The amount and quality of commentary is exceptional. Crystal clear images! You even get Golding reading is own excerpts! As for the movie itself... It is compelling and disturbing. I wrote a review back in about December. The images grow on you and are very memorable. Outstanding filmmaking. Yes, the dialogue of the scene from the book where Simon talks to the pig is left out. I would have put it in, but the facial expression by the child is very interesting as he examines "The Lord." I've taught the novel and find this version very powerful and true to the intent of the author. The later movie version is horrendous and completely perverts the message. This is the version. The child actors are very real, the story of the filmmaking on the DVD will only further your enjoyment! A Criterion Collection Winner! My other Criterion Collection DVD, the Third Man, is also a winner. Golding Rules! Very Powerful!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


18 of 19 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars Fans, rejoice - a wicked good version!, April 5, 2003
By 
Kellyannl (Bronx, NY USA) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Lord of the Flies (The Criterion Collection) (DVD)
This disturbing, scary movie version of the classic novel about English boys stranded on an island after a war - and their descent into moral darkness - is just about as good as one could hope for.
To start with, the casting is great. From the first time you see each of the principals and hear them speak, you want to nod. When the choir first arrives, singing a Kyrie that slowly fades in and ends in a trumpet fanfare as they reach the other boys, it gives you chills. Lord have Mercy, indeed, those who know what's coming will think. We're on the right track.
The film is remarkably faithful to the story, including many of the little moments that subtly define the characters. The buildup is just right, including Ralph's increasing desperation as he tries to hold the boys together and the gradual change in Jack. When the most horrendous moment of the story arrives - I don't want to give it away but those who read the book will know what I mean - it's almost unbearable to watch. There's no merciful tact here to let viewers off the hook. You're forced to deal with exactly what's happening and the irony of who, out of all the boys, it's happening to.
I will note, though, that Simon's notorious interview with the title character (a scene that admittedly must give directors everywhere nightmares at the mere thought of trying to film it) is not heard, which might leave you a little puzzled and missing an important part of the story if you haven't read it. This version suffers much, much less than it's remake from the omission, however, and can pretty much get away with it.
All in all, highly recommended.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


11 of 11 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars The best film version of the Golding masterpiece., August 6, 1999
By A Customer
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Lord of the Flies (The Criterion Collection) (DVD)
Initially, this film looks very low budget, but it's cinematic style tells the story very powerfully. I found myself engrossed with the film. The amateur cast of children rings very true to form, especially the actor who plays Ralph. The characters are very strongly realized. The sound appears off in a few places so I want to see if the DVD version coming out works over this problem. This version will get to you. The black and white film presents an atmosphere very faithful to the book. The later 90's version perverts the main idea by adding females and a living adult on the island. This alters the nature of the "beast," and leads the story down a different moral path. See this black and white version. It'll stay with you. Simon's death and the final sequence are very disturbing and profound. I'm buying the dvd Criterion version when it becomes available in December!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


12 of 13 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars Peter Brook's 1963 version of William Golding's novel, January 15, 2004
By 
Amazon Customer (The Zenith City, Duluth, Minnesota) - See all my reviews
(HALL OF FAME REVIEWER)    (VINE VOICE)    (COMMUNITY FORUM 04)   
This review is from: Lord of the Flies (The Criterion Collection) (DVD)
The 1963 version of "Lord of the Flies" was made on an island off of Puerto Rico by director Peter Brook with a cast made up on the sons of English parents that could be found on the island and in the United States. Only one of the children playing a major character, James Aubrey, who played Ralph, ever made another movie (although Nicholas Hammond, who played Robert, would have a real career in films and television). This becomes a key factor in the film because we are not dealing with child actors, which usually works for the film, but not always. But the more telling factor is that this film is only 92 minutes long, which meant some key elements from William Golding's celebrated novel are omitted. Ultimately, your feelings for this film are going to depend on your familiarity with the novel.
Brooks creates an effective prologue consisting of a series of stills that set up the key elements of the situation: a boys school, a war, an evacuation, and a plane going down near enough to an island for a group of boys to survive. They find themselves on the island without any adults. Ralph (James Aubrey) argues that there have to be rules, while Jack (Tom Chapin), the leader of the choir (he can hit high C) thinks he should be in charge. If Ralph represents civilization while Jack is hearing the call of the wild, then it is Piggy (Hugh Edwards) who represents human intelligence. But in the inevitable shift in power that goes from Ralph to Jack as the children devolve into savages, it is Piggy who becomes the pivotal victim.
What is sacrificed in the film are the two characters who occupy the next level of significance in the novel, Roger (Roger Elwin) and Simon (Tom Gaman), and while that choice is understandable it is what keeps this from being a great adaptation. Still, you cannot fault Brook for reducing the novel to the pivotal triad and the essence of Golding's novel is here if not the depth and rich symbolism. But even as we marvel at the performances that Brook coaxes from his young actors, and the cinematography by Tom Hollyman (who had been a still photographer before this film), we really do have to remember that it is 1963 and the idea of depicting the horrors of this novel on the screen was a risky endeavor. The fact that the novel is allegorical (i.e., Brooks is probably right in claiming on the basis of his filming experience that in the real world the boys would not have lasted a week) would not be enough to temper the reactions of audiences to little boys killing one another in the wild.
This Criterion Collection edition has the usually goodies, although instead of a scholarly commentary track this time it consists of reminiscences by Brook, producer Lewis Allen, director of photography Tom Hollyman and cameraman/editor Gerald Feil. As such tracks go it is certainly above average, but I have to admit that I enjoy the academic approach usually found on Criterion's DVDs. There are also excerpts from the novel read by Golding that are interesting, although obviously not insightful (the excerpts are keyed to the same scenes in the movie). There is also a clip from Gerald Feil's documentary "The Empty Space" showing Brook's method of creating theater, a production scrapbook, outtakes, home movies, a deleted scene, and the original theatrical trailer
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


‹ Previous | 1 214 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

Details

Lord of the Flies (The Criterion Collection)
$39.95 $36.14
In Stock
Add to cart Add to wishlist
Search these reviews only
Send us feedback How can we make Amazon Customer Reviews better for you? Let us know here.