IMDb > Gulliver's Travels (2010) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Gulliver's Travels
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Gulliver's Travels More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 7 of 12: [Prev][2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]
Index 120 reviews in total 

Jack Black's slacker act: $112 million and all they got was the star mugging in front of a green screen

2/10
Author: moonspinner55 from las vegas, nv
22 May 2016

The reason why most modern movies are so dim-witted is obvious after watching Rob Letterman's version of Jonathan Swift's "Gulliver's Travels": the film has been made by restless kids for restless kids...and if you're not a restless kid, the inane dialogue ("Dude, that is harsh!"), the hammy star performance and the elaborate but familiar special effects are not enough to hold interest. We know so much about how effects-oriented movies are made these days that to have Jack Black constantly interacting with the Lilliputians in the same way (hunched over in front of a green screen and nodding maniacally) offers us no magic, no mystery and no fun. A mailroom worker with a New York City newspaper invents a talent for writing and is immediately given an assignment: to explore the Bermuda Triangle! (there's a current topic burning on everyone's mind). His boat is sucked into a waterspout and he washes up on the city of Lilliput, inhabited by tiny people--and a princess in danger. Screenwriters Joe Stillman and Nicholas Stoller specialize in a sort of frat boy/post-druggie sense of humor meant to tickle 10-year-olds. In this case, Black was the actor for them, as the star is still doing the same sloppy, cool-nerd shtick he specialized in over a decade ago. The whole picture feels like an awful rerun, with cheap, prodding jokes; at one point, Black goads lovestruck Horatio into dancing to the Prince song "Kiss", but instead of laughing we're wondering why the producers used a sound-alike version of the tune in place of the original (too expensive on a budget of $112 million?). Had Black suddenly started dancing too, it would be about as logical as anything else happening in "Gulliver's Travels". With nothing fresh added to the story and nothing interesting happening from a visual standpoint, this unfunny fiasco aimed at the collective hip-factor will only appeal to restless kids--undiscriminating ones. * from ****

Was the above review useful to you?

Gulliver's Horrible Travels.

2/10
Author: Python Hyena from Canada
20 April 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Gulliver's Travels (2010): Dir: Rob Letterman / Cast: Jack Black, Amanda Peet, Jason Segel, Emily Blunt, Chris O'Dowd: Here is the umpteenth time Gulliver ventured to the land of little people where discipline is strict. It is a film about imagination starring Jack Black as Gulliver who works in the mail room yet desires the hottie female up several floors. He is soon boating off on an assignment regarding the Bermuda Triangle where he is whisked away in a storm and awakens pinned down ashore as a prisoner to a society of little people. He eventually gains their approval when he saves the Princess from an invasion, as well as save the King from a fire when he urinates the fire out. Director Rob Letterman had greater success with Monsters Vs Aliens but here the editing is terrible and there is sequences that appear broken such as the unexplained escape from "the land where thou man shall not go" as well as Gulliver's discovery there. Black fares okay as the destined hero who goes from mail room to giant hero although special effects are so horrid that it is too evident of Black's placement on the screen. The idea of Amanda Peet showing interest in this guy is perhaps the stuff of adolescent fantasy, and her boating after him is a joke. Jason Segel first appears as a prisoner due to his interest in the Princess and despite predictable elements he steals moments when Gulliver gives him advice. Emily Blunt as the Princess is straight forward and dull pulled in two directions. Chris O'Dowd is amusing playing the commander of the miniature army at hand. This film should travel into a trash compactor. Score: 2 ½ / 10

Was the above review useful to you?

What the hell were they thinking?

1/10
Author: Irishmoviereviewer from Ireland
10 April 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Chris O'Dowd and Jason Segal had the worst English accents I've ever heard. You honestly don't have to be Irish or Amercian to get the English accent right like why did they have to make a balls of the casting?! Whoever had the idea of creating a remake of "Gullivers Travels", needed their heads checked! It was just ridiculous in casting them in the first place, they should've got better actors besides them. I like Chris O'Dowd and Jason Segal but at the same time, they weren't just suited for their roles!

Emily Blunt's character sounded like such a whiny spoiled b**** that needed a reality check. Emily Blunt is a good actress but she just didn't suit the role well or did a good job. She would've been better off if she wasn't involved!

Omg we go onto Jack Black, he was poor enough as Gulliver. The scene where he peed on the burning castle was the lazy way to get the movie entertaining. That was just wrong and weak.

Everything involved in the movie was awful!

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Colossus of Manhattan

5/10
Author: exe_malaga93 from Argentina
22 January 2015

I watched it knowing what to expect: an absurd comedy for the whole family, starring Jack Black (who by the way, doesn't bother me, although I'd say I'm not a big fan of his either), and based very slightly in the ultra-famous satirical book by Jonathan Swift. Even with all that, I dared to take a look, waiting to find something entertaining and with a certain charm, but ... are at least those goals achieved? Let's say "so- so".

It's not a completely bad and unwatchable film, but I would be unfair to myself if I say it's completely good.

There are some jokes that work, especially those related to popular culture (Glee, Kiss, Prince, Calvin Klein, and Guns N' Roses) and the most successful movies in history (Star Wars, Avatar, Titanic, X-Men: Wolverine), but they are few, and the rest of the humor consists in not so memorable and overused jokes: Slapsticks, exaggerated gestures (mostly courtesy of Black), silly dances, etc.

The pace is uneven: during the second half it seems so endless, repetitive and monotonous. It's a 85-minute flick, but sometimes 5 minutes felt like one hour; and then, in the last 20 minutes, everything happens so quickly, until concluding in a very accelerated ending, like if the fast-forward button on the DVD was automatically pressed and before you realise it, the movie is over and the end credits roll on screen.

The acting isn't good either: Jack Black plays himself... again, Amanda Peet has got not so much to do, Jason Segel embarrasses himself, Emily Blunt is wasted. Only Chris O'Dowd seems to enjoy his character, easily the best thing about this.

The special effects aren't anything special, and sometimes they're even mediocre (the use of green screen looks fake, specially in the scene where the enemy army attacks Lilliput).

Maybe some kids will like it, or at least will have a good time, but also, it is possible they'll rapidly forget about it afterwards. While on the other hand, moms and dads, may get easily bored.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Not a terrible trip, just not one you'd want to repeat

5/10
Author: Adam Peters from Birkenhead United Kingdom
28 December 2014

(43%) This is a prime example of a movie that isn't really very good, yet is hard to hate or even dislike. Jack Black's character (largely playing himself), for me at least, is likable; his heart is always in the right place and he's only somewhat annoying in places. The plot is thin and runs out of steam really quickly, but at least it can be easily followed, and there is some fun to be had along the way. Beside the decent effects lie pantomime style performances from a star studded line-up of little people that could have worked better if the writing was a little tighter and a little funnier. This isn't terrible, far from it, but I can see why so few have anything good to say about it.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Don't expect too much from Swift's original

6/10
Author: david-sarkies from Australia
12 August 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I don't want to knock this movie too much simply because of the nature of the book upon which this movie is based upon. There are a lot of differences, and the reason is that the original collection of stories (it is composed of four sections in which Gulliver travels to a different fantasy land) are satire and are intended to create a fantasy world where Swift could then criticise both the British government at the time, and also British society as a whole. By sticking too closely to Swift's books can leave most readers, who are not well versed in the political situation of England at the time, a little baffled. While the story about a man traveling to a world where everybody is a tenth the size of him (and then traveling to a land in which the people are ten times the size of him) does create a great fantasy adventure, the substance of the story needs to be brought into the modern world to have the best impact.

Thus we have this film where Gulliver is a no-hoper working in the mail room in a large media company. He then gets up the courage to speak to the journalist whom he has had a crush on for the last five years and convinces her that he is a great writer and an extensive traveler. Believing him, she sends him on a trip to the Caribbean where he is caught up in a whirlpool and sent to the realm of Lulliput. In Lulliput he is thrust into the politics of this world, and after saving the castle and the king (played by Billy Connelly), he is turned into a hero, and begins to meld Lulliput into his own idea of what a kingdom should be like (creating a version of Titanic and Star Wars where he is a hero) and turning Lulliput into a replica of New York.

Of course we have General Edward (who is not strictly a villain, though in a Shakespearian sense, more of a comic villain like Don John, rather than Iago) who sees through Gulliver's deceit and attempts to convince the Lulliputians that he is not the wonderful hero that he claims to be. Of course Edward is ignored, and after one embarrassment too many, he defects to their enemy and declares war against Lulliput (in the original book, Lulliput is allegorically England whereas their enemies are the French).

This version of Gulliver's Travels does not attempt to bring Swift's satire into the modern world, though I feel it would have shown much more skill upon the creator's part to do so, but it appears that the creators were more interested in creating a light hearted fantasy comedy than to create political satire. Unfortunately though it seems that there is not much in the way of Swiftian satire anymore. Though we must say that we are much more fortunate than Swift was that if we wish to criticise our government, we can do it openly (take Oliver Stone's W, which is satire, but in a much more direct sense) than Swift could, in that he had to hide his criticism behind allegory. One might suggest that our world is not smart enough to understand allegory, but then again, neither was Swift's, particularly since there was still a high rate of illiteracy (which is similar to our world), but then they did have the theatre in the same sense that we have cinema.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Not hilariously funny or memorable,but still average family entertainment,

6/10
Author: Dillon Harris from Ireland
10 May 2012

Gullivers Travel is a decent family movie,it isn't hillarios,and it isn't very memorable,but it still fairly average family entertainment.I think it wouldn't have been a good as it was without Jack Black and Jason Segel,two actors I really like who made the movie for me.I thought the funniest parts was when Gulliver was pretending movies where stuff that happened to him.

A man named Gulliver crosses the Bermuda Triangle while on a boat and is stuck in a world filled with little people.They treat him as a king because of him being the tallest man they have ever seen.

-DILLON HARRIS

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

updated version of an old tale

5/10
Author: MLDinTN from TN
29 December 2011

This movie was OK mainly because of Jack Black. He plays Gulliver, a mail room guy, whom steals some material from another source to wright a review of some destination. One of the bosses there, Darcy, whom happens to be the girl he likes, thinks he should be a writer and gives him his first assignment, the bermuda triangle. So he takes a boat and gets caught up in a storm and winds up in Liliput, a land of little people. They call him the beast but he soon becomes respected. He teaches them about Star Wars and Titanic. Has them rebuild Times Square and incorporates modern music. He befriends Horatio and gives him love advice. Horatio likes the Princess and soon Gulliver is having him sing Prince songs to her. Gulliver defends their land by destroying the enemies boats. General Edward, whom is courting the Princess, doesn't like him and joins the enemy. And later Darcy shows up and Gulliver is rescued from a land of giants. And there's a happy ending.

FINAL VERDICT: Black was funny in this. It had some cute moments and the short running time made the movie entertaining enough to recommend if you don't mind a story that's been told before.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

disappointing

4/10
Author: sharrison12 from United Kingdom
29 January 2011

A slightly disappointing film, what I thought would have been a hit with Jack Black but turned out not as good as I thought. Jack Black plays rather a silly part which slightly spoils the fun of the film with someone making unfunny jokes. In particular, the song at the end of the film about war, was very cheesy and brought the film to a bit of an anticlimax at the end. It's a sort of cliché type of film with a classic, competitive villain, princess, hero, king, queen etc. None the less, it was a good story who's title everyone recognises. A fun family film but overall, I was disappointed on the whole, perhaps having too high expectations. Another final small point, watching it in 3d did not have any effect on the way I saw the film, only for the sea near the beginning which was quite exciting

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

A "travel writer" named Gulliver takes an assignment in Bermuda, but ends up on the island of Liliput where he soon discovers adventure beyond his imagination.

7/10
Author: AnyaThai from Denmark
17 March 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I actually thought this movie was quite good and entertaining throughout the whole movie. Yes it is a typical Jack Black movie but I thought this was a good one.

The cast was great, everyone played their role well.

And I love how they sometimes tend to involve modern times with the 18th century. Especially the scene with Gulliver's "homemade" theater.

I liked it and I know for sure that children will as well.

It was an entertaining and a light-hearted movie where the imagination comes alive. I can't really understand why this movie is so underrated when it certainly deserves more.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 7 of 12: [Prev][2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history