the amorphousmachine I remember reading William Golding's book back in my youth as well as watching both versions of 'Lord of the Flies', and I actually remember thinking the American version was pretty good. Re-watched it again and my feelings remain the same, but I did forget that the "monster" in the movie was actually called the "beast" in film, and I was questioning my decision to revisit this film at the beginning of the movie. Checking out IMDB, it's disappointing to see most of the child actors didn't have great careers, except Getty who was prominent in the 90s, and the kid who played Simon resurfaced in 2002 to have career in TV and movies. The film was adequately directed and location felt genuine. For the most part, the acting was pretty good, particularly from Danuel Pipoly who played Piggy. The problem with the updated version is some of the script -particularly at the beginning of the film where I felt wasn't realistic enough to set the premise. Realistically, more kids would be terrified and crying, particularly the younger ones. I also didn't understand the relationship between Ralph and Jack, or the inclusion of the pilot which didn't really gel for me as it established days had passed. I think Jack should have been more antagonistic in the beginning before his metamorphosis into a power-hungry hunter. The script got better as the story developed and I'm glad the film potentially introduced a new audience curiosity for the book. Some great imagery, such as the beach bonfire scene, or smoking out the "prey" scene, but the film did have a television movie feel rather than a cinematic one. I personally would recommend both the 1963 version and this one for fans of the book. I give it extra points for a young cast enduring the elements and holding this film together. If you haven't read the book, you should read it, as I plan to hopefully read it again soon.***½ out of *****!

grantss A plane carrying schoolboys from a military school crashes into the ocean. A group of them make it to an island. After taking stock of their surroundings they settle into a regimen and order, with Ralph as their leader. However, after a while a splinter group emerges, lead by Jack. Jack is hardly a benevolent leader and fascism and barbarism follow... A reasonably interesting adaptation of William Golding's classic novel. I haven't read the book or seen any other adaptations of the novel, though am familiar with the basic plot. So the story is quite original and thought-provoking to me. I did think it would be a more powerful metaphor for society though, so, even without having that background knowledge I sense that this is not a great adaptation of the book.This said, it is quite entertaining and you can see how it mirrors human behaviour.

Richard Dominguez First, I Have Seen All The Remakes, Retelling And Versions Of The Classic English 1963 "Lord Of The Flies" (I Have Always Loved The Implication Of That Title) ... There Is Something Horrific In The Idea That In The 1960's Children On This Large A Scale Could "Lose It" And Then Filmed In Black And White Sends The Imagery Over The Edge ... While It May Also Be True That Kids (At This Present Time) In This Large A Number "Losing It" Might (Sadly) Be Common Place, This Is Not A Bad Remake ... It Doesn't Have The Edgy Black And White Feel To It ... The Story Does Manage To Convey A Tingle Up Our Spine About How Fragile Society Is ... If You Hear My Words And Say To Yourself "Well They Were Kids", Pick Up A Newspaper Or Turn On The News Or Go Online ... Human Beings As A Species Is Bent On Destroying Itself And This Version Conveys That Message Well Enough ... I Once Read That The Only Thing Needed To Revert Present People Back To Savages Would Be To Take Away Electricity (Some How That Thought Seems Real Enough And Frightens Me) ... All In All I Found The Acting To Be Sufficient, The Scenery Well Selected And Direction On Key

italianredneckgirl This adaptation of William Golding's chilling novel, that bears the same name, is decidedly American. Although brilliantly acted, this American adaptation of the classic lacks the essence of the novel. The changes are obvious. There was no plane crash, no choir of boys, no symbolism that was the rich undercurrent of the novel.Upon arrival, in a raft that mysteriously disappears after the opening sequence, the boys; seemingly from an American military school, are stranded on an uninhabited island, presumably somewhere in the Pacific. The film moves quickly without allowing the viewer to develop any attachment to any of the boys. The vulgarity used by the boys was superfluous and unnecessary. Further detaching the viewer from the experience by setting them on edge by the verbosity of these boys. The vestige of the Captain? on the island with the boys veers us further from the novel. Although some thought was used to turn this "last adult" into Simon 's monster, the delicacy of the situation is manhandled until warped into obscurity. There is no symbolism, no hidden fear of the unknown. The viewer is lead to the conclusion rather than discovering it, as it occurs in the novel. The deaths of Simon and Piggy were almost as an afterthought, rather than chiefly main points. There is no frailty of Piggy, with his restrictive asthma. No idyllic beauty in Simon. The very features that endeared the reader were lost on the viewer who had no connection to the boys. And without doing so, their deaths were just relegated to gratuitous violence. The underdeveloped character of Roger made Piggy's death nonsensical. There was no shattering of the conch. No forethought that Roger was the true evil of the island. The reason the boys followed Jack. The threat of psychotic violence wrapped up in a tween wrapper. Jack and Ralph, albeit most developed characters, were shallow. The child actors portrayed their roles brilliantly. But we're underestimated by screenplay and director. An underlying fault within the entire project. Giving this film such a high ranking was out of love for the story. The enigmatic island, the poor tortured Ralph, and for the loss of innocence. Overall, if you have the means, seek the original 1963 version and skip The Lord Of The Flies, Gilligan's Island edition.