I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

I've seen the version of the story starring Ted Danson, which was quite good. This is nothing like that.Jack Black's Gulliver starts out in the real world of the present day, with a smart phone. That's all you really need to know about when this took place. He's not happy with his life in the mail room, and he wants more. A relationship with travel writer Darcy, and more opportunities to do the real work of the New York Tribune.The Internet makes things easy. When I was in high school and college, there was plagiarism, but it was more challenging because what we know today as the Internet didn't exist. Gulliver has an easy time impressing Darcy and gets sent to the Bermuda Triangle. Oh, so this is how it will work. And it's actually a pretty exciting scene as Gulliver gets sent into another dimension. Then he has the experience that Danson had, only funnier. This version of the story, pretty much limited to Lilliput, will go for laughs.And Lilliput is quite a complete nation, but with very small people compared to Gulliver. The castle where the royal family lives is huge. There is a city with lots of people, with varying ethnic backgrounds, and a countryside outside that city. And the Lilliputians have wars against other very small people from other nations.Only after Gulliver shows his value in fighting a war is he treated with respect. He is a hero. And then things get quite silly. Every movie Gulliver has ever seen becomes a detail of his life, and pop culture references show up in abundance. We later see a giant R2D2 from "Star Wars", combined with "Transformers", used in battle, for example. All because Gulliver's plans for a video game become a fighting robot.Meanwhile, the prisoner Horatio vies with the nasty Edward for the heart of Princess Mary. Horatio is released only because Gulliver is his friend. There is one scene where Mary is kidnapped, and I'm not sure whether it is atrocious writing or atrocious acting. No, it's actually brilliant writing and good acting, because most of the acting in this movie is quite good. I mean for the material. It takes real effort to make the acting look really bad. I am curious about one thing. Of course Gulliver loses cell phone service when he gets close to the Bermuda Triangle. How then is it possible he can receive the voice mails he missed--AFTER he crosses over? And these voice mails are quite important--if you think about it, there's an interesting plot twist coming. The battle scenes are pretty impressive. I watch several CW super hero shows, and it's a lot like that. Even Horatio gets involved. There is one cute scene in the world where everyone is big. It only has a little girl, who is quite big compared to Gulliver. Imagine what she would look like to Lilliputians. And the movie has a big musical number which is quite well done. Again, it seems silly to have the entire cast performing a song Gulliver likes. Also, the music here is quite old compared to, say, a romantic comedy starring teenagers. It comes closer to what I like. Let's say that.No, it doesn't rank as the most impressive of the productions based on the literary work. No, it is not literary work on its own. But it is enjoyable and somewhat well done. If you're the type of person who can enjoy Jack Black, you will probably like this.

Gulliver's Travels is not the best film you would ever see. I know that, but if you have low expectations its great i mean........ I didn't read the book, so i just watched the film. The acting is not the best one, but still.... A fun family film to relax. Don't be so serious mates, just watch the film like you didn't read the book. I gave it a 7, because i like the film. I enjoyed watching it, but it's acting is not every time that great. A feel-good film. Don't be tricked by the overall review (4,9), and just give it a try. I laughed and i had fun. Maybe you won't like it, and maybe you will. (I never write reviews, but i had to do it because of the bad rating.)

I loved the succession of that script. I loved most of the cast, especially (Emily Blunt) and (Jason Segel). And I loved the transformer's design and moments. The problem though is that all the rest has problems !The script is the movie's biggest sin. There isn't anything further the main events. OK. They hired someone to remake Gulliver's Travels, where he did good job, then forgot to hire someone to write the comedy. It's sad that the movie has gags famine. You have to hate comedy when it lacks comedy !(Jack Black) doesn't do much; he merely phones in his lines indifferently. The material he has doesn't differ from Harvey the rabbit. I don't know how he approved to do it as dry as this, rather how he didn't add anything of his own ? Otherwise he added what didn't eventually work ! Anyhow, he seemed working without passion in something he doesn't want, or that's what he really looks like in the so-called family comedies ! I felt that the character played by (Amanda Peet) was supposed to be funny, but nothing was funny about it, from the way it was written to – for sure – the way it was acted (I'm still trying to erase Peet's goofy dance from my memory !). The CGI suffered being obvious in many spots, I was badly shocked when knew that the budget was 112 million dollars (most probably the movie's CGI experts drank beer with it !). And there wasn't spontaneity in anything; just the "War" song, and that's it. This is not a bad movie. It's a so-so one. The thing is it didn't utilize its talents to the max, being poor and executive at best. And they can't get away with it even by pretending that it's a kids movie. Believe me, with a movie like this, sooner or later kids will hate you !P.S : Ideas like extinguishing a fire by Gulliver's urine, or getting a soldier stuck in Gulliver's butt WERE DAMN WRONG !

This movie consists of dull performances, an average score and an average modern rendition of 'Gulliver's Travels', riddled with clichés and topped off with below par special effects and directing.You'd think, with a story focusing on extremities, that the creators would've at least tried to make it something more than a bland cash cow.Amanda Peet was, well... a lesser version of the regular Amanda Peet. The same applies to Jack Black. Nothing feels natural, even the things you would normally ascribe to Mr. Black. And the chemistry between the two was totally absent. Luckily, their interactions were limited. The performances of Jason Segel and Emily Blunt were slightly better, but I wouldn't call it acting either. Something more along the lines of amateur role-playing.All in all, I think people are really hungry for 3D, which would explain the box office success. I can't see how anyone would go and watch this excuse for a movie otherwise.My advice: If you need a movie to bring your kids to, this is the one. No kids to bring? Avoid at all cost!