Lemuel Gulliver has been working in the mail room of a New York daily newspaper for the past ten years. Afraid to put himself out there, he considers himself a loser, as do all his peers. Darcy Silverman, the newspaper's travel editor and one of Gulliver's only friends sends him on an assignment to the Bermuda Triangle. There, Gulliver becomes shipwrecked and ends up on the island of Liliput, where he is twelve taller than the tallest man. Gulliver's Travels is not a film that needs to be taken completely serious but for what is worth and with such a talented cast it's way better than it gets credit for and alot of fun as well Jack Black fans will not be disappointed in my opinion. (10/10)

So looking at the votes one sees that nearly everyone below the age of fifty rated this as a five or less. And females under 18, the most forgiving, only gave it a five-point-nine.And that made me scratch my head. Why? Because I actually enjoyed the film, but then again I'm a glutton for (mostly) clean humor (urination and proctological scenes not with standing). I think the major issue with this film is that it was made twenty to thirty years too late for things like Star Wars' references to really resonate with the audience.You have a kind of clash of cultures here which is more age dependent than anything else. In essence it's a film made for 80s and 90s teens and pre-teens, and not really a general purpose cross generational comedy. And, as a kid at heart, I liked the film for what it is, and could appreciate the humor, cultural references and homage to Swift's original tale.The special effects are right for the film, it's exceptionally well shot in spite of the limitations of dealing with a character who has Godzilla like screen presence in comparison to the supporting characters, and even the humor, as dated as it is, is good. It's a silly film, but it's supposed to be, and that's kind of the point that I think a lot of people missed. For just as Swift was satirist, so is this film commenting on other scifi-fantasy films of the last twenty years, and using those film making styles to reinvent Swift's original tale.The other problem is that a lot of Swift's original intent in commenting on political structures and human nature is lost in translation in the film's desire to be appealing to teens who have since grown up and had kids of their own. In this sense it's following the "Juvenification of America" by treating the audience like adult teenagers.A more interesting film would have been on the order of the two part mini series that aired some twenty years earlier, starring Ted Danson. A film that commented on politics, society, and human nature in general, as opposed to a film about adults being too stuff shirted to enjoy The Empire Strikes Back. And that's probably the core of why this film doesn't appeal to more people, because where Jack Black's Gulliver is a youth at heart, his child like qualities don't bring any real reform to the world that gave rise to the dilemmas that he and his size are forced to address. In other words, the more things change the more they stay the same.All in all I really enjoyed the film, and just on a basic "turn your brain off" level, I fail to see why more people didn't like the thing. But, that's just me.Even though I've dissected it and given it some praise and explained why it might fail to appeal, even though it's a fairly decent movie, you might want to check out a copy at the library.See it once, and if it doesn't meet your expectations, well, at least now you'll know why.Either way, try to enjoy it.

For the best re-telling of the "Gulliver" classic, the 1996 live-action TV movie with Ted Danson, produced by Jim Henson, remains the best. This one is very cute but bears little resemblance to the classic version. Only two worlds are involved, The Lilliputians (who have electricity!) and an island of giants where Gulliver briefly becomes an unwilling doll house captive of a screaming, spoiled giant brat. The other worlds are not visited. Some mild similarities here and there to the classic. The "little people" have all but forgotten what started their war across the pond. Jack puts out a roaring fire by the only means possible-urination. (Yes, that's from the book!) Some other tasteless humor as well. It ends up being a parody of several things, including Times Square, "School of Rock" and "Iron Man". Where is this Magical Place? Why the Bermuda Triangle, of course. A bit cleaned-up on cable (which is good) with the usual 1/2 hour of commercials added. Clever use of the song "War, What is it good for?" Otherwise, a lot of fun but not meant to be taken seriously at all. Especially for Jack Black fans. Also, how did he ever get cell-service way out there?

I love jack black and would happily watch him in anything but it seems the more I analyse this film, the less appeal it offers me. Firstly, I love the fact that Gulliver rips off every classic movie made and pretends he's done everything. But I just expected much more wit from black. I know it's not his script so he didn't have much to work with, but after such hits as school of rock? You know it should been better basically. I like Chris o d but felt his whole robot fight thing was boring. James cord en, Catherine Tate and Billy Conolly aren't given enough to showcase themselves. ESPECIALLY Tate who I feel could have brought some much needed British humour. That guy from how I met your mother and the five year engagement was pathetic in trying to Be noble and all coy around Emily blunt. Also someone should decide which period they are dressing for, we go fro, potentially Elizabethan to Georgian to modern day. It is all mix matched and by the time they finished that end song I was glad to run out of the cinema. Good for families, but from an analytical view point, it ain't no biggie for sure. Ta x