Having read Golding's novel, and being a fan of the original film version I approached this remake with some apprehension. It is flawed, but I wasn't disgusted with the result. It is OK. Doesn't hold a candle to the original, though, which kind of defeats the purpose. Much of the story is the same, and follows the same pattern, of the original, in which scenes, and plot turns are directly from the novel, and which are left out. The strengths of this version lie mostly in the photography, and use of colour. The tropical island, and physical changes are captured well. The opening shots, underwater, are particularly well done. The characterizations are not bad, overall. The chase at the end, is well depicted. The problems with this rendering, however, do tend to outweigh the good points. Most notably- The concept of "The Beast", and the more simplified relationships, and characters. In the novel, and 1963 film, there is no Adult survivor. This alters the story altogether, and casts doubt on the motives and actions. It does not work within the framework of the novel. The "beast" is meant to be a mystery, to the reader and the viewer. The presence of the wandering "captain" establishes from the get-go, that the "beast" is human, and in fact the "captain". It is doubtful that all the older boys would not make the connection. This in turn ruins the mystery for the viewer. In the novel, and the 1963 film, the "beast" (or "monster" in this version), is at first a puzzle, subject to conjecture. But initial encounters are presented as quite hair-raising, in no small part due to the knowledge that the boys are alone, on the island. Final confirmation of the nature of the "beast", is both gruesome, and terrifying. Despite the obvious fact that it is not supernatural, or actually "monstrous". The "Beast" is, as discovered by Simon, a downed pilot, possibly from an air battle. Many pilots were MIA during WW2, and the "Beast" is one of them, having come down on the island, and entered the cave/grotto through an opening in the canopy. Still strapped to his parachute harness, and clad in a leather flying helmet, goggles, boots and suit, the dead and decomposed airman continues to be animated by the wind, the chute and rigging emitting ominous flapping and groaning noises. The scene of Simon's discovery is both vivid and memorable. In the 1990 version, this is completely abandoned, for the notion of the delirious "captain". Some of the symbolism regarding society, and power is left out of this version. Most notably in the treatment of the relationship between Jack and Roger. In the novel, and to a somewhat lesser extent, the 1963 version, the roles of Ralph and Piggy are mirrored by those of Jack and Roger. As Ralph and Piggy rely on each other to maintain civilization, and "democracy", Jack and Roger likewise collaborate to bring about totalitarianism. In this version Roger is a relatively minor character, doing little but following the "chief". In the novel/original, Jack leads, but relies almost completely upon Roger, the physically strongest boy, to enforce his rule. Roger is quite sociopathic, and as the story progresses, Jack, rather than gaining power, actually loses it. Jack becomes little more than a figurehead, allowing more and more displays of autonomy by Roger. Finally, when Roger kills Piggy, Jack fears not just usurpation, but assassination. Jack is the Dictator, installed by Roger, the military, which becomes increasingly arrogant and violent. It is Roger that encourages Jack to hunt down Ralph, and kill him, although Jack would be content to banish him. Jack can no longer reign in his muscle. All of this is missing from the 1990 version, and replaced with the more streamlined narrative, and reduced characters. Overall, not bad adaptation, and would serve well to inspire to read the novel. However the 1963 version is far superior, and would be more satisfying for those who are familiar with Golding's book.
Review of Lord of the Flies
