Bad Acting and worse Bad Screenplay

A Disappointing Continuation

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

There is definitely an excellent idea hidden in the background of the film. Unfortunately, it's difficult to find it.

The book, Lord of the Flies is a very complex novel, and to completely grasp it the complexity of the novel, you have to have a higher understanding of English lore. The movie is the same way, to understand it you have to understand the book and the symbolism. The movie is alright just on its own, but the book is just on another level that the movie never seems to reach.

it is not the perfect adaptation. and that is its virtue. because, out of acid remarks about it, this Lord of the Flies remains a honest film. the acting of boys, the tension, realistic atmosphere, crumbs of facts, savage nature as mirror of feelings, all is precise, delicate and fresh. the film keeps all virtues of novel. but it remembers that is work of a director, with his vision and way of affective translation of lines. it is , like novel, a cruel cold parable. but , for the performance of its young actors, a challenge. so, in this case, good intentions are really admirable. and final result not disappointed. a travel in heart of society. and an unforgettable verdict.

You may notice that the above line is from the black-and-white 1963 adaptation of William Golding's classic book Lord of the Flies, rather than the 1990 update which I am reviewing. I regret to say that I have not read the book (don't worry, I intend to), but having seen both films, I safely have something to base my opinions on. The 1963 film is described, both by IMDb reviewers and the film's description, as a faithful and brilliant adaptation of the book. Certainly, it was powerful, bold, disturbing and contemplative, offering a range of great acting and filmmaking. If it is any reflection of the book -- and my upcoming opinion applies anyway in terms of film -- then the 1990 film I am (finally) reviewing is utter tacky garbage.I am not going to complain about the contorting of the plot into all sorts of odd shapes, for that is perfectly acceptable if the end result is mildly worthwhile, but in the case of this Lord of the Flies (LotF) it turns out a mess which puts a sour taste in your mouth. Completely it is destroyed, so that even the crucial underlying themes in the film and, for sure, the book are replaced with brash, overspoken, meaningless messages. Nor am I going to be deliberately obtuse and moan about the inappropriate use of profanity in the film. Rather, I will (rightly) point out the quaint Britishness of the original's characters, which gave the film a timely, sophisticated film and underlined the transformation into savages, and then ask you to look at the new LotF's bratty American tweens, who from the outset behave like the kids even kids want to shout at.Instead of the above "We're not savages!" and other well-written dialogue, we get a half dozen f-words thrown at each of the cast, dated teen gobbledygook that comes out as annoying and the failing attempts of the writers/directors to give the kids that never-get-it-right "badass" look, instead heartlessly Americanising poignant characters with such crude lines as "Shove his d**k in the conch!" and "Shut up, s**thead!", which culminate in two things. One, the "savage" state of the kids not being too different from their normal demeanour, except for violence too over-the-top for kids in a movie which was ignored by adults for starring nothing but kids. Two, mere minutes after the film begins you silently pray to yourselves that these idiots will starve to death as soon as possible.The child actors in this film, unlike those of the 1963 version who acted well and were nicely sympathetic, are plain unlikable and untalented. Although the people who played Jack and Ralph can more or less pass on this front, Piggy in particular has been portrayed as a snivelling, annoying, useless fool who, really, has come out as a crude and over-the-top caricature of the, well, real Piggy. The majority of the rest of the cast are typical plucked-from-in-front-of-the-TV brats (sorry for repeated use of this word). They sit around and their main function in the film is to serve as friction between the leads -- the actors pull this off well, but with a vicious arrogance, playing the role almost as if they are sneering at the people who do fall into this situation, and acting as if they are bullies in a schoolyard (refer to "Shove his d**k in the conch!" for an example of this).In the end, it is clear that the badly put out themes are only second to the all-powerful studio machine, which has blatantly tried to run an aged, classic novel through Hollywood and spit out a streetwise, teen-friendly money grabber (again, see "Shove his d**k in the conch!") However, the dark themes are constantly at odds with this crude method, dragging it down until the two juxtapose violently upon watching. The violence, again, is far more graphic than the original, depicting with stark nihilism the... you find out for yourself. The end result, a badly acted, cash-grabbing, shameful, overly American, crude, visceral, badly "hip" bomb balanced on wobbly, half-hearted gravitas, would be funny if it wasn't so ridiculously shameful.R.I.P. William Goldberg. 2/10

You know, the book this film was inspired and it's subject are really interesting. It's a sociology/anthropology class. Instead of cherishing this well made book, the filmmakers seemed to be a little lazy and made the movie without commitment. The actors are okay, but the plot and the development of this story were too superficial.The film basically shows how a society without a punitive power would interact. They didn't approach it very deeply, but they (fortunately) approached the "Only the power breaks power" thinking that Monstesquieu said when suggested the separation of powers.About what the kids did to themselves, I personally don't know if that's what would happened if some young boys got lost in an island. I'm not sure if they'd act like they did here, I kept myself thinking about it for hours but got no where. I may ask some professors of mine.