One of my all time favorites.

Excellent adaptation.

As Good As It Gets

Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

That the story is such a classic and that it had Jack Palance in it were two reasons enough to give this much-maligned adaptation a try. Unfortunately, this adaptation of Treasure Island just doesn't work at all and by far the worst version, to me the only really bad one as well. It's a disaster as an adaptation, and judging it on its own terms(which this reviewer considers a fairer approach and always tries to use it) there's little to praise it either. The locations are beautiful indeed if not always tropical enough, the Hispagnola is fantastically rendered and the adaptation is well shot, the start is quite strong and there are a few good performances with Kevin Zegers' appealing Jim Hawkins, Walter Sparrow's humorous Ben Gunn and Patrick Bergin's gusty Billy Bones. Jack Palance is the big name here, he certainly tries his best as Silver and looks the part in a role that on paper he was perfect for but he deserved much better scripting and direction than what he got. Because what we got was a waste of a great actor's talents, there are numerous points where Palance is very charismatic and engaging but when the scripting is particularly poor there is the sense that Palance knew it was poor and gives up. The rest of the acting shows little enthusiasm either, in fact most of the cast go through the motions. Characterisation is incredibly weak here and not really in the bland sort of way but in the grossly distorted sort of way, where we have the least frightening Blind Pew imaginable and interesting characters like Squire Trelawney now one-sided caricatures, and the less said about the good guys now bad thing the better. What was really disappointing was the lack of development in Silver and Jim's relationship, crucial to the story and very interesting and potentially poignant but hardly seen. And you know something's wrong when you can't really tell whether Silver is good or bad, no other adaptation of Treasure Island has had that problem. But other than the bizarre treatment of the story and characters the main problem with this Treasure Island adaptation was how lazy it felt. The script is one corny muddle with some parts only feeling like padding which only succeeds in slowing down the pacing, and the story is plodding and completely lacking in adventurous spark, intensity and mystery that would have been there if just a little if the stockade assault had not been left out. When it comes to the changes, changes to a story is not a problem but it can be if the changes are basically useless and drag the adaptation down and that was exactly the case with this Treasure Island. It also depends on the nature of the changes and here it just felt bizarre in a way that you don't want to witness again. The adaptation is hurt even further by too much focus on Black Dog, a secondary character originally and it feels like it, an incredibly rushed and anti-climatic final battle and a very tacked-on and toe-curlingly cheesy ending that leaves a sour taste in the mouth. All in all, lazy and uncomfortably weird, a very bad version(even on its own terms) and not worth bothering with unless you are a fan of Palance or one dead-set on seeing every Treasure Island adaptation available. 3/10 Bethany Cox

Don't watch this version if you loved the classic. Has virtually nothing to do with the original story. The heroes are turned into villains and killed off, along with most if not all of the original dialog. If only they had done this same with this film in pre-production. Having read the book recently, I've gone back and watched the original film and the Disney remake. I thought this might be fun for comparison. Fun is not quite the word. Jack Palance is about as good a substitute for Long John Silver as the Isle Of Mann is for a tropical island with a few hot house plants stuck in the background. What is going on in Canada? I'd say there were some strange films coming from there lately, but this is ten years old and strange doesn't begin to describe it. More like bizarre! And here is the Spoiler of Spoilers in a pre-spoiled mess. Instead of Jim Hawkins sailing back to England with the good guys and the treasure, they kill the bad guys and good guys, and he runs off to Panama with it with Long John and Ben Gunn. Wait? What? That's right. And Long John doesn't even know the names of the sails even though he's supposed to be a sailor. Huh? What? The bad guys are bad. The good guys are bad. Everyone dies. And the last two members of Flint's crew don't know anything about sailing.

I bought this VHS tape years ago and watched it once, knowing then I wasted money on it. But recently, I have read the novel again in my old (middle) age, and still like it as much as when I first read it at 13. But I had forgotten the conversion this film takes until I watched it again, and I'd sure give the tape away for nothing.While there are moral ambiguities in the story, personified in Long John Silver, this follows after Shakespeare's witches in MACBETH: "Fair is foul, and foul is fair" say they. The 2 characters in the novel who prevent blanket torture and murder of all loyal to the ship's command are Captain Smollett and Jim Hawkins. Smollett because he sensed that trouble was in the works when he was engaged on a cruise of secret 'treasure' with the secret out of the bag, a crew he did not pick himself, and the arms already stored under the bows (within easy grasp of the crew he distrusted). If his points of precaution had not been met, he would demand to be discharged; so to prevent delays his precautions were applied, and if it had not been so, it would have been easy mutiny, the pirates (if true to what pirates really were) would have cut off their lips and ears and roasted them, then made them eat them before their slow bleeding finally killed them. So it's rather angering to shift the story to where the pirates were the "good guys" and Smollett and those loyal were villains. The Japanese were more 'heroic' at Pearl Harbor! And as for Jim Hawkins actually turning traitor... this simply is not Stevenson's story. While we can sympathize, some, with his natural curiosities and desire for adventure in his 2 escapades in the novel, it was never in his consideration to join those he knew to be human trash who recklessly waste short provisions and maim and kill for the pleasure of it. That's a completely different personality than Stevenson's story-telling character.Squire Trelawney is the one character of the "faithfuls" whom I wouldn't mind being given a more critical portrayal than most cinemas of this story. After all, it was only through coincidence (overused in the novel) that he happened to be right there at the discovery of the treasure map and was probably the only one who had the means to organize an expedition to find it. So he is a greedy opportunist. But he totally ignored his wiser friend's imperative to keep quiet about what they had found, and thus the crew he hired via Silver had the perfect opportunity to get 'their' treasure. But this movie does not develop that, and instead it goes after the one man of authority with foresight, the Captain, and makes him into a manipulative crook willing to let innocent blood be shed to make himself rich. That's low. It compares with making Joe Friday into a bribe-hustling cop.

In "Treasure Island" 1999, Jack Palance follows such notables as Robert Newton, Orson Wells, and Charelton Heston as Long John Silver with this second-rate knock-off of the R.L. Stevenson classic novel. An unfortunate attempt at film making, this version plods along dutifully telling the story without the passion, mystery, and intrigue penned into the pages of the novel. Pretty much a waste of time unable to live up to the precedent set by Disney.