GamerTab That was an excellent one.

Donald Seymour This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

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

janicelinton89 No one has pointed out the blatantly obvious mistakes, such as the fact that they turn up with GLOW STICKS, in a raft, with an adult. The book clearly states that there are no adults, so why does this "Bensen" end up dying in a cave and becoming the beast? And why are the boys made to be American 'cadets', when they're really British boys being sent away to safety during the war? The plane also crashes on the island, not in the sea. Even Piggy's death is wrong, he was meant to be sent '40 feet into the air', not just bumped on the head by a tiny rock. Before he dies Piggy even wears a watch, yet still wants to 'make a clock'. The entire film is too Americanised and wrongly modernised, and is a very bad influence on those studying the story. The whole thing needs to be re-made, and this time, not by Americans. Boo.

Armand 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.

mattsimdb First of all, I never read the book. Both my older brother and sister read it in middle school, but somehow I missed it. I have been aware of the story for many years though. I am definitely going to go pick up the book now. Furthermore, can anything be more cliché than to pan a movie because it didn't live up to the book. Anyways, I had the luck of going into this movie without that bias.I have read many other books that involve political analysis, such as George Orwell's 1984 and Animal Farm. I find these kind of topics fascinating.First of all, I disagree with the people that saw this movie and see it only as "boys go savage". It shows that reviewers simply don't understand the deeper level this movie goes to, which is why do people behaved "civilized" at all. How does a democracy survive? How do dictatorships happen? What is civilized? How do you make people cooperate?I personally have been in situations, such as adult recreational sports, where I volunteered as a team captain. It's a perfect analogy to Lord Of the Flies, because a team captain has no real authority. I'm not paying people, and I can't kick people off the team, and there are real limits to anything I can do. Every time I have done that there is always some punk that decides he wants to take over, or doesn't have to do what he is told. This happens regardless of how minimally I am trying to dictate anything.So, how do you prevent anarchy? How do you keep from being overthrown? Every society starts out like this. Sure, once someone gets in power there are many people that can't compete with them, but at the top of any hierarchy is competition and relationships. How is order created?So, after I watched this movie I thought, what did Ralph do wrong?Here is my answer. First of all, Ralph should have not created a complete democracy. Instead he should have created a council subgroup of kids that would be elected into their positions. He should have also been elected, and would have easily won in the beginning.By tying the council members positions to his position, they would have supported him in case of any rebellion. True authority is cemented in affiliation. Also, if someone else wanted to take over they would have had a civilized means to do so, next election, and wouldn't have to resort to rebellion.Also, anyone not doing their fair of work on the island would have to be judged before the council. This way his authority would have been enforced through a form of group discipline.Many tribal societies function like this, despite the fact that some might judge them to be "uncivilized". In fact, this is also how modern democracy/representative governments work.Jack on the other hand did just about everything right in building his brutal dictatorship. He built his own council out of boys that decided to rebel with him from the beginning. So, he already had his power base. He used fear of the monster to create a constant state of emergency to keep people from questioning his authority. He used violence to keep everyone in line, and he eventually attempted to kill off all his opposition.Stories and movies like this are very important to keep us aware of the way we are manipulated by those who want power. By simplifying the situation they serve as a window to show us how our larger societies function.If you learn anything from this movie at least learn to be suspicious of any political group that cultivates fear in you of outside forces. By making you afraid and convincing you that "we" are the ones that can protect you, they are using the oldest trick in the book.

sanookdee a fan of the book, I also enjoyed the 1963 movie. But, watching this, it's seems very dumbed down. Much of they symbolism of the book is explained to the audience of this version of the movie and done poorly. The acting is sub par, the direction mediocre and the screenplay is just terrible.I would think that, with today's audience being more sophisticated and not was easily shocked as in 1963, they could stay truer to the book. But, the writers and director did what Hollywood usually does, ads symbolism of their own (military school) and removes the authors original intent.If you never read the book or saw the 1963 movie, you might enjoy it. But, if not, please stay away. It's just bad.