Pierce Brosnan stars in a new movie version of the classic adventure tale Robinson Crusoe. After killing a friend in a duel, Crusoe flees his native Scotland and takes to the high seas. A storm casts him ashore on an island in the Indian Ocean, where he builds himself a home out of bamboo and goes a little crazy from solitude--until he finds a footprint in the sand that isn't his. The relationship between Crusoe and Friday, a native from a neighboring island, gets a more contemporary (less colonial) interpretation than in the original story; the result is quite enjoyable. Brosnan is particularly good at depicting Crusoe's borderline madness from isolation, and William Takaku gives Friday both dignity and intelligence. The cinematography of the island is gorgeous. --Bret Fetzer --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
Top Customer Reviews
As a person who is fond of all whole and decent tales, I can say truly, after watching this movie, (dubbed inaccurately "Robinson Crusoe") I felt ill. Not that the story was completely re-written, for, as we all know, a re-written story can be excellent at times. But, that through this lame attempt to make the racial issues in "Robinson Crusoe" (the book) palatable to the modern mindset; instead of focusing on the gracious example of Friday, or the moral of the story, this movie seems to wish to overlook any true illustration of decency.... offering, instead, the crippled climax of man's incompetence.
Not wishing the reader to assume this review was written in a furious attempt to squash any chances the movie might have for some mischievous reason of my own, I would like to assure all who may look upon these words, this is as unprejudiced and accurate a report as possible.
The best that may be said for this film is that the actor, (Pierce Brosnan) did show some talent in portraying George Miller and Rod Hardy's mediocre account of Robinson.
Though other of Pierce Brosnan's rolls are a deal more enjoyable, no one can quite dislike him, no matter the ruffian he plays. Though it comes close, I admit.
For the storyline itself, I leave you to rely on previous reviews, which, I'm sure will do a thorough job depicting and dissecting this fable.
The ONLY similarities between the Defoe classic and this film are as follows: the lead character's name is Robinson Crusoe, the savage's name is Friday, and Crusoe is shipwrecked on an island. The Tom Hanks film Cast Away is closer to Defoe's plot line than this film (and has much better acting and dialogue).
Granted, this script has far more action than the original work (Crusoe's ship apparently had an unlimited supply of salvageable gunpowder) as Crusoe becomes an almost comical booby-trap-setting military strategist defending against a savage onslaught (if you liked Disney's Swiss Family Robinson, you may actually enjoy the exploding tree houses and rope-traps that predictably befall the ignorant savages). But the film's action, can't keep an otherwise unriveting plot and medicore acting afloat.
In sum, read the classic, watch Cast Away and the Swiss Family Robinson, and pray for the careers of the script writers and director of this poor film.
Although it bears little resemblance to DeFoe's original, there is little room in our world now for Colonialism, and though I regret that Friday kept his religion, I am grateful for the dignity by which he was treated. I especially appreciated how they showed him to be physically an equal and in some ways a superior to Robinson. Having grown up in PNG, and living in both cultures, I actually thought they gave Crusoe much more physical strength and endurance than I would have, in comparison to the strength of the locals. (o: I appreciated so much that Friday did not speak gibberish, and that, despite his early desire to eat the heart of his enemy to gain his enemy's strength, he acted with dignity throughout the rest of the movie.
I did think the DOG was the weak point of the movie. No dog that pampered could have survived catching his own food, and even if he had found food, he would never have looked so glossy and healthy in a tropical climate. (o: I also found that the dog didn't play enough of an important role to warrant Crusoe's grief over his death, or over the desecration of his grave. (o:
Most recent customer reviews
THIS HAS NO CLOSE CAPTIONING which is a must for me due to loss of hearing???Published 2 months ago by Sarah Anderson
great movie - fun exciting and brilliantly acted - One of his best yet preformancesPublished 8 months ago by Pamela Grandmaison
I'm still trying to figure out how they got away with calling this movie "robinson crusoe". It has few similarities to the book. Read morePublished on July 13 2004
This film, although sporting many elaborate Hollywood props full of explosions and tribal wars, has taken a potentially exciting and meaningful screenplay and altered many key... Read morePublished on July 12 2003 by Dan
Don't waste your time or money on this one. They took a great story and ruined it with political correctness.Published on April 30 2003
The movie, "Robinson Crusoe" seems to be centered wholly on the notion that human race is not fit to be alive at all. It throws prejudices in ones face, without dealing with them. Read morePublished on Oct. 23 2002
An overall poor performance that is easily outshadowed by Aidan Quinn's performance in the same role of the same title which was released in 1988. Read morePublished on June 9 2002 by Travis J. Mack
First of all, for all the movie critics out there, this had barely any real correlation to the book it was based on. Read morePublished on May 16 2002 by atlgurl
I watched the first five minutes of it and cried. Iam telling you now if your a Damian Lewis fan Do Not watch this film. He has like 6 short lines then dies. Read morePublished on April 3 2002 by Nicole Benish