IMDb > Brave New World (1998) (TV) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb

Reviews & Ratings for
Brave New World (TV) More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 5 of 6: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [Next]
Index 53 reviews in total 

1 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

i cant believe this!

Author: ( from Sydney, Australia
8 June 2001

I just dont know what to say. I cant believe I wasted the energy of programming my video to record this. I cant believe I spent an hour and a half to watch this. I cant believe that Leonard Nimoy would associate himself with his. I cant believe that they were allowed to destroy a masterpeice like this. No further comment.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Utter trash

Author: Syd Barrett
26 September 1998

This version was completely horrible! I read the book a year or two before this came out and when I saw it it made me want to throw up. They did a HORRIBLE job on this. What was w/ breaking Bernard Marx's character into 2 different people?? They loosely followed the book. It isn't even worth the tape it's recorded on! And whoever bought advertising time wasted their money

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

really, really bad

Author: poetellect from USA
1 March 2001

don't waste your time. So awful. So, so awful. Think of every Made-for-TV-movie-CLICHE ever, and this movie has it. So bad. Too wrapped up in getting across what the book tells you in five pages, that it looses itself in its technicality...not something that translated well to screen. Just don't waste your time.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

A Modern Science Fiction Classic -- Boldly Re Interpreted For Today!

Author: Dan1863Sickles from Troy, NY
7 December 2005

I respect the integrity of the written word as much as anyone. I first read Huxley's BRAVE NEW WORLD at 13 and I enjoy the classic novel. However, there is no question in my mind that this innovative, dark, and sexy retelling of the Huxley classic is only strengthened by the major changes in plot and characterization.

Let's face it, in Huxley's version the main characters are much less interesting than the ideas he presents. Bernard Marx is a whiner. Lenina Crowne is a luscious, empty-headed plaything of her own desires. The Savage is a paranoid, humorless sex-hating pervert. None of these people are really strong enough or engaging enough to make an audience care deeply about their adventures in the "perfect" future.

What makes this TV version so amazing is that all the ugliness of the society has been captured -- the cloning, the compulsive spending,the life of pure sensation. But the characters are much, much stronger. In this version Bernard and Lenina are not weak and stupid. They are tough, honest, and sexy. Their society has twisted them in many ways, but as they learn better they make changes and try to make a difference. One exchange between them sums up the tone perfectly: LENINA: I'm beginning to understand why we eliminated love. BERNARD: I don't think we ever did.

The casting is absolutely perfect. Tough, brooding, virile Peter Gallagher is a bold, daring choice. He turns Bernard from a Woody Allen whiner to a true romantic hero in his own right. Rya Kihlstedt, who was so sexy and feline in THE BUCCANEERS, is exactly the right actress to capture all of Lenina's sex appeal -- while adding a great deal of sly intelligence. This is a bold new cast for a bold new vision of Huxley's classic.

In this version, Bernard and Lenina have the makings of a true, adult relationship, and they don't back away from danger in order to help their friend, the Savage. His tragedy remains intact, and indeed the fact that Lenina is much stronger and really in love with Bernard only makes John Savage's isolation more tragic. Watch the scene where the Savage is trying to explain Shakespeare to a classroom of bored clones. In the background, Lenina is watching, sitting on a desk with her fabulous legs crossed. In the book she's just a bimbo, but here she's more like a queenly figure of strength. She knows John can't survive, but he's under her protection all the same. The clones can't hurt John while she's in the room.

The one thing I do regret is that this version totally ignores the Savage's Native American roots. Aldous Huxley really did live among the Zunis for several months. However, it is obvious that "political correctness" forced the film makers to reimagine the Outlands as more of a trailer park full of white trash than an Indian Reservation. But even this change works, in that it shows how bland the world is without culture, religion, and Shakespeare.

In conclusion, this movie, like Michael Mann's LAST OF THE MOHICANS, is a legitimate example of what happens when a film maker truly captures the spirit of a literary classic -- without being tied to the exact letter of the text.

Would love to see a DVD release of this modern television classic!

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Brave New World

Author: Robert-Westmeier from Germany
16 March 2005

Brave New World (1998) is directed from an unknown director and he used unknown actors/actresses. The movie is based on the novel from Aldous Huxley, published in 1932. It is a sort of science-fiction movie but is not comparable with the Star Wars or Star Trek movies. The film has a length of around 90 minutes and it is about a world where everything seems to be perfect because all the people are conditioned. There are five different groups with a different intelligence a different attitude to life. Beyond the borders of the Brave New World there live the "normal" people who are not conditioned and live a life like we do. But one day two Brave New Worlders, who are against the system, fly to the reservation to make a holiday. But the helicopter has an accident and later they get to know John and his mother. Because John is actually a boy from the Brave New World, they take them with them back to find out, who John's father is. And this will bring a very big surprise with it. John is going to be the most interesting man there and this will change his life and the life of some other inhabitants of the Brave New World. In this movie you will find many changes of the characters, sadness and happiness. So it is very demanding movie which you won't really understand if you have not read the novel. The novel is more detailled and the relationship between some characters is described closer. Another point is that some scenes in the movie doesn't exist in the novel and vice versa. So would recommend this movie only to people who have read the novel or to people who doesn't care about things like that and are just interested in the subject.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 5 of 6: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Ratings External reviews Parents Guide
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history