Salon Beauty Best Books of the Year So Far Introducing Prime Wardrobe nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Weekly One Starting at $39.99 Grocery Handmade Personalized Jewelry Home and Garden Book a house cleaner for 2 or more hours on Amazon TheGrandTour TheGrandTour TheGrandTour  Echo Fire tablets: Designed for entertainment Kindle Paperwhite GNO Shop now Start your Baby Registry

Customer Reviews

2.8 out of 5 stars
4

on November 2, 2016
This film has production values that similar to television shows from the 70's, so there's some bad lighting for the interior shots. The acting is not that great, even from the magnificent Orson Welles, whom you can barely hear at all throughout the film. I bought it to use in class to compare to some other versions of the film. There is really no single great version of the classic, but most of the novel is not the kind of story that would translate to a medium like film anyway. Traditional, mainstream film is no place for this story. It belongs in the hands of a filmmaker that can translate the rich imagery and characterizations of the text into the visual storytelling medium of film. Think Carroll Ballard or Terence Malick, or even Stanley Kubrick. This Welles film plays only on the stereotypes, and uses some sub-par actors to do it. Unfortunately, and tragically, Welles was considered a sub-par actor at this point in his career. I would love to have seen him in this role in the fifties.
|0Comment|Report abuse
on December 7, 2014
Fair. Overall the cast was good, especially the boy who played Jim Hawkins. However the presentation was choppy and Orson Welled lacked the heart and enthusiasm expected for such a role. Most of the time his mutterings were unintelligible and so a lot of who his character is was lost. He was greatly miscast in this role. Should have been much better.
2 people found this helpful
|0Comment|Report abuse
on January 20, 2015
Orson Welles and Lionel Stander ... what a combo. Unfortunately Welles mumbles his way through this production and pretty much shanghais the fun out of existence. Need subtitles to understand what on earth he's saying. Skip this and watch the version with Robert Newton, who is far better in the Long John Silver role.
One person found this helpful
|0Comment|Report abuse
on May 4, 2002
That classic of children's literature is made into a masterpiece by the use of a very good actor for Jim, the kid, and another very good actor for Lonjohn Silver. Orson Welles in this second part cuts a brilliant performance that gives the film its momentum and its depth. This film, this story is still very attractive for young children, or not so young children, with the question of how young children can invest themselves in adult adventures and enterprises. Children must not be cut off from adult society. They learn more by being involved in this adult society than by simply going to school. How can this be achieved ? We can dream of various means after the film.
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU
7 people found this helpful
|0Comment|Report abuse


Need customer service? Click here