Movie Mom

Movie Mom

Gulliver’s Travels

posted by Nell Minow
B+
Lowest Recommended Age:All Ages
MPAA Rating:G
Profanity:None
Nudity/Sex:None
Alcohol/Drugs:None
Violence/Scariness:Storm at sea, fistfights, war stopped by Gulliver
Diversity Issues:A theme of the movie
Movie Release Date:1939
DVD Release Date:March 10, 2009

A cringe-inducing catastrophe with all of the appeal of fingernails on blackboard, this movie’s first early warning sign should have been the omission of Jonathan Swift from the opening credits.

I thought at first it was an arrogant oversight. Now I think it is more likely his ghost showed up and threatened to haunt the film-makers and their descendants forever if they did not remove any mention of his name. Swift is the man who wrote the book, with satire so biting and fantasy so thrilling that it has endured for almost 300 years. It will survive this, too, but just barely.

The story has been updated so that Gulliver, like every other aspect of the story, is downgraded (and degraded). In Swift’s book, he is a surgeon. Here, played by a doughy and lusterless Jack Black, he is a guy who works in a newspaper mail room, too insecure to try to get a promotion or ask out the beautiful editor he adores (Amanda Peet, who does her best to pretend she is in a better movie).

In order to impress her, Gulliver plagiarizes some travel pieces.  She gives him an assignment to investigate the Bermuda triangle. I know this is a fantasy, but since when can newspapers afford a mail room staff and what appears to be a bountiful budget for investigative travel pieces?

Gulliver gets trapped in a vortex that lands him in a kingdom called Lilliput, populated by people who are just six inches tall. As in the book, at first he is captured, tied down while he is asleep on the beach. He stands up, ripping the ropes open. But there was noting in the book about his pants falling down, and then having him fall backwards with a poor Lilliputian apparently smothered by his, uh, tush separation.

And then it really gets disgusting. Gulliver has to rescue the king from a fire and, finding no water within reach, pees on everything to douse the flames. As dispiriting as that is, it is not as bad as the flaccid torpor of the script, which shows utter contempt for its audience in every line. Every reference, joke, and plot development is tired and predictable. Gulliver collects — guess! Yep, “Star Wars” action figures. At work, he slacks off by — guess! Playing “Guitar Hero.” When he persuades the Lilliputians that he is known as President Awesome back home where he comes from, we see posters all over the city with Gulliver appearing as the hero of every movie or play from “West Side Story” to “Wicked.” Those are hardly recognizable, much less knee-slapping references for anyone under 40.

Even worse, Gulliver is a thoroughly unpleasant character. He reflexively lies to everyone. He is selfish, incurious, and thoughtless. There is a dull storyline about a Lilliputian commoner named Horatio (a sweet Jason Segal) who dares to love the princess (a regal Emily Blunt), but it is ineptly handled. When the princess challenges the bad guy (Chris O’Dowd, the movie’s sole highlight) to come up with a reason for loving her, predictably, he can’t. But then, shouldn’t Horatio demonstrate some understanding or appreciation of the princess to show his fitness? The script and director Rob Letterman cannot be bothered to follow through. It just keeps desperately throwing stuff at the audience, finally including a killer robot.

Letterman, who showed he knows better in “Monsters vs. Aliens,” blows all the possibilities of the book’s shrewd (and still very relevant) commentary for silly sight gags like Gulliver’s using the Lilliputians to re-enact video games and DVDs. A “Titanic” joke! Stop!

A lump of coal in the stockings of everyone behind this mess.



You Might Also Like...
Previous Posts

New From SpiritClips: Hallmark Hall of Fame and More For Families
New from SpiritClips: unlimited access to Hallmark Hall of Fame movies, thoughtfully selected Hollywood classics and original short films via the web and stream-to-TV devices.  This is a great source for inspiring, heartwarming stories that you won't find anywhere else.  Take a look!

posted 10:33:23pm Jun. 18, 2013 | read full post »

Linda Holmes: Where Are the Women in Movies?
Linda Holmes of NPR's Monkey See blog has written a piece that is more than the usual "Why aren't there more women in/making movies?" There are 617 movie showings today — that's just today, Friday — within 10 miles of my house. Of those 617 showings, 561 of them — 90 percent — are storie

posted 3:59:07pm Jun. 18, 2013 | read full post »

Claire LaZebnik Remembers A Visit from Patricia Neal
Claire LaZebnik wrote a beautiful piece in the Wall Street Journal about a visit from the late Oscar-winning actress Patricia Neal.  The first movie I ever reviewed -- for my high school paper -- was Neal's comeback film, "The Subject Was Roses" (with a very young Martin Sheen as her son).  Neal

posted 8:00:26am Jun. 18, 2013 | read full post »

Opening This Week: World War Z and Monsters University
It's one of the biggest weeks of the year at the movies with two huge openings.  It's the zombie apocalypse vs. monsters, Brad Pitt vs. Mike and Sully. Pitt stars in a movie based on World War Z, a book by Max Brooks (son of Oscar-winners Anne Bancroft and Mel Brooks).  It is directed by Marc F

posted 3:59:28pm Jun. 17, 2013 | read full post »

Contest: Jack the Giant Slayer -- and An Exclusive Look at the New "Jack the Giant Slayer" Game for Kids
I really enjoyed Jack the Giant Slayer, next week's DVD/Blu-Ray Pick of the Week, and I am very excited to have five copies to give away.  Send me an email at moviemom@moviemom.com with "Jack" in the subject line, and tell me your favorite fairy tale.  Don't forget your address!  (US addresses on

posted 7:00:23am Jun. 17, 2013 | read full post »

Advertisement
Comments read comments(1)
post a comment
jestrfyl

posted March 12, 2009 at 9:46 am


Like the old rotoscope, CGI has yet to match the artisitic feel of these great old animated masterworks. What separated the Fleishers and others from Disney was that Disney writers were better (sort of like comparing today’s PIXAR with other studios, including Disney’s own). The art work and most of the caracterizations were just as good for the most part. It will be interesting to see this new and improved versions of these many classic works.



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.





Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.