A scrappy, funny modern dude played by Jack Black, on a travel-writing assignment in the Bermuda Triangle, stumbles upon a society full of tiny people played by the likes of Jason Segel and Emily Blunt. He pretends to be a supreme ruler back where he came from, when he’s really just a struggling mail clerk with a dream. Jokes about the Millennium Falcon and Yoda ensue. (Wouldn’t it be great if just once, a hero tried that gambit only to find that the miniature people in medieval garb with British accents turned out to have satellite cable and have seen Star Wars?) In any case, have a look here:
So what do you think, PopWatchers? Fun update of a literary classic or lame destruction of a literary classic?
Read more:
Gulliver’s Travels poster
Emily Blunt: Iron Man 2 or Gulliver’s Travels?
lame. very lame.
it’s not going to be remotely satirical.
I think Jack Black is going to ruin a classic story.
This is the reason that instead of a cool, talented actress to play the Black Widow we got Scarlett Johansson? Really, Emily Blunt?
Hey, not her fault. She *wanted* to play Black Widow, but the studio wouldn’t allow her to adjust her schedule, and used her existing contract to keep her out of Iron Man 2. Shame, really.
It’s not like that would have saved Iron Man 2 anyway
Jason Segal’s accent is pretty bad.
Talk about ruining a classic…
Every character Jack Black plays should be named Jack Black. he does it so well.
Oh lighten up people! It’s Jack Black!
I’m boycotting this film because I can only assume we’re going to get at least ONE scene where he needs to “go to the bathroom,” in this tiny town. I just can’t sit through the inevitable potty humor. I really hope I’m wrong!
Anyone who has read this (or anything else by Jonathan Swift) knows that the author wasn’t above a little bawdy humor himself.
I’m with those who would like to see someone take a real stab at updating Gulliver for our time with new satirical references, but fat chance of that ever happening.
Oh, please, Donna. You ARE wrong about the significance of this scene.
It’s satire. Read your early 18th Century political history and get over it.
@ns… the idea of updating Gulliver’s Travels with new political references is a great idea… and there are so many targets…
Look, we all know that for a successful adaptation in this day and age, Gulliver’s Travels has to be updated since, like, all the humor is topical references to politicians of the era. So you’re left with the big fish-out-of-water concept, which is ripe, and the idea of satirizing society, which requires a more deft (defter?) hand, and possibly even MORE venom from Swiftophiles (having had to listen to more than one Gilbert and Sullivan fan whine about updating KoKo’s “little list”, which is basically the same thing). So it’s kind of a no-brainer which route a screenwriter would go.
I agree with most of what you’re saying—the text definitely needs to be updated to work. The screenwriter clearly chose the easier of two paths, but it’s still unlikely to be successful, so now it’s just going to be a public destruction of a classic. I’m one of those people who wishes that good things would just be left alone.
That said, I wouldn’t have minded (too much) seeing an adaptation tackled by a screenwriter who’s talented enough to satirize modern-day society.
Well, this looks pretty bad, but I’m excited to see Donna Noble (Catherine Tate) from Doctor Who as the queen! Although, is she supposed to be Emily Blunt’s mom? She’s not that old!
I was so psyched to see Donna!
I like Jack Black and all, but Ted Danson is still my only Gulliver!!! No exceptions!!
Wow, what a great movie! And now that the trailer has given away the entire movie I don’t have to pay to see it! Yay!
Wow… this looks craptacular even though Catherine Tate and Emily Blunt are in it.
“I was President the … Awesome.”
haHahahHAHAHAHhahahahhahaha (pauses catches breath) Ahaha AHah aha aha ahhh…
holy crap that joke was clever. Jack Black is hilarious!
@ Monica: “…it’s just going to be a public destruction of a classic.” Thank you.
I’ve been reading Swift’s work for almost 20 years. This latest effort to retell “Gulliver’s Travels” (after the failed Ted Danson 1984 mini-series) is another indication that Hollywood writers are pandering to the lowest common denominator.
“In their common perusal of books, singling out the errors and defects, the nauseous, the fulsome, the dull, and the impertinent…plundering the branches of the Stymphalian fruit.”