BoardChiri Bad Acting and worse Bad Screenplay

Gurlyndrobb While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Hadrina The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Dana An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

Alyssa Black (Aly200) One needs to have a serious sense of humor to watch this epic disaster of a movie which I luckily have about this film.This reboot of H.G. Wells's classic mad scientist tale maintains its roots in the original material. The story is straightforward in staying relatively faithful to the novel on which it is based. As with every book to screen adaptation there is of course Hollywood changes such as adding in a love interest for the hero. Sadly that lowers the quality of the story a bit, but does not derail the plot.What does hurt the film is its horrendous miscasting of the lead roles. The story of switching cast members around on this project is highly infamous. In particular is the switch of star Val Kilmer from the film's hero to the film's secondary antagonist; this was at the actor's request due to his on- set rampage over personal issues that he took out on his fellow actors and the crew. Kilmer is not convincingly villainous as Montgomery, rather a crude caricature of a wannabe baddie. Taking Kilmer's spot as the hero, Douglas, is a terribly miscast David Thewlis after actor Rob Morrow bowed out due to the chaotic nightmare of the film's delaying production. Thewlis is visibly uncomfortable in the lead role that it shows during the entire film. And finally in a disastrous turn as the mad Dr. Moreau was the infamously uncooperative Marlon Brando (he won the Razzie for Worst Supporting Actor over co-star Val Kilmer for the film). Brando clearly demonstrates his lack of preparation for the role as he recites dialogue just as someone reading it to him; one of Brando's infamous tactics in all his later work. Chemistry between all members of the cast is absent and is completely evident from the start.I do recommend seeing this film more for the notoriety of the production process. It's one bad "B movie" though like a "D movie"

amesmonde A misunderstood DNA tinkering scientist performs human-animal vivisections, but things go wrong when his creations begin to regress.The Island of Dr. Moreau is the third major film adaptation of H. G. Wells and plagued with production issues (later extensively covered in Lost Souls: The Doomed Journey of Richard Stanley's Island of Dr Moreau) and unfairly (debatably) panned by critics. Director John Frankenheimer offers plenty of visual treats and along with the writers injects enough double crosses, surprise deaths and story twists to hold interest. The themes of nature, law, religion and society simmer behind the strained wacky nature of the characters. Edward Douglas (David Thewlis) survives a plane crash in the Java Sea and is eventually rescued by a passing boat which arrives on an Island, soon he finds that the inhabitants are human-animal hybrids. Writers Richard Stanley (the intended original director) and Ron Hutchinson offer a disciplined enough script. Referred to as "The Father" by the mutants, Marlon Brando gives an outlandish performance as the mad scientist. Val Kilmer, particularly makes the most of it as Montgomery - at one point mimicking Brando's Dr. Moreau with his best impression.Thewlis looks confused throughout, either due to the production or because of the character, either way his performance is fitting as perplexed Douglas, a U.N. agent who is in the middle of the warring mutant animals who are being controlled through fear using implants to exert pain. There's some entertaining moments between Brando and the world's smallest man, Nelson de la Rosa. Rosa's silent role as Majai, a miniature version of Moreau would inspire Austin Powers' Mini-me. Notable is Fairuza Balk as Aissa, Douglas' love interest. Sadly, Ron Perlman's extended cameo of sorts is wasted as the Sayer of the Law, a blind goat-like hybrid. The makeup and costumes are very good, but the CGI elements are '96 primitive and unnecessary as the cat-like creatures unconvincingly bound about. The action scenes, quieter tension filled moments are well executed and are at times menacing. The island's buildings, lush greens and sea blues of the on location shoot coupled with Gary Chang's music creates plenty of atmosphere, especially during the night-time scenes where the hybrid faction revolt, rampaging through the compounds huts shooting guns and blowing things up. Even though Richard Stanley never got to realise his darker version his DNA (no pun intended) is all over this. And while this film may have been made for the masses and less art house the late Frankenheimer's 1996 offering is arguably the most entertaining version of Wells' classic to date.

Carlos Stein Screw them negative reviews. This is one mind boggling tour de force with the likes of fat Marlon Brando channeling Colonel Kurtz and the Godfather all rolled up in a giant freezer of ice cream complete with hairy half human animals. The creatures costumes are a scream and a half. Val Kilmer plays his role with such serious intentions it makes a hilarious foil to Marlon Brando's over the top performance. Marlon creates an evil deranged Dr. better than the other 2 versions. Anything with Marlon is worth watching. Based on the HG Wells novel, this version would make old HG turn flips of hilarity in his grave. You will find this film astonishing, frightening and hilarious. I'm still giggling over the creatures outfits/hairdos/makeup. Imbibe while watching this and I promise a good time for all.

redalert51 Essentially the " Directors Cut " or should say is the unrated cut ,scenes , such as the beginning of the beast peoples take over which is more blood thirty , the killing , of Dr Moreau , teeth biting into his flesh , also there is one " Hyena Swine " chews the doctors ( father, the) arm off with inter-cuts of various animal people's blood soaked teeth. I personally believe , how a few minutes of graphic shoots shown, in sequence , can make the difference . The reason for my mid rating is , the blu ray release , did not not have the any bonus features , no commentary track , extended documentaries or a retrospect of people who work on the film , I do not know if the DVD release , has the features I mentioned , I perused , one release online and there were no indication of any features . Though the picture are excellent on the Blu ray and likewise with the audio , I hope this will be of help , to interested parties of this much maligned film ....Thank you , for the opportunity ..