Released in 2010, the film has undergone major changes compared to the original. Some of the changes were too childish in my opinion, and some of the changes also made the story more interesting.
"Gulliver's Travels" is a literary work with many readers. The original intention is to satirize the British society at that time through fantastic fictional stories, and there is no lack of profound reflections in the interesting. The film of the same name directed in 2010, in order to better understand the young people, has made changes in the protagonist and storyline.
First, the protagonist was changed to a postal office clerk. He belongs to an ordinary person, very different from the original owner. He is an otaku and has no self-motivation. He can only think of his colleague Nacy, who he can't ask for. It was an accident that he arrived in Lilliput, where he pretended to be a hero and did some good deeds for the local people.
Second, the plot changes. Because of the problems of blah blah blah, Commander Edward of Lilliput turned to the Empire because of his official failure and love failure. And designed to let him go to the giant country. And the heroine, his lover Nacy, also went to Lilliput and needs his rescue. In the end, the protagonist defeated the villain, and everyone was happy.
Third, the theme changes. The irony in the original book is not reflected in the slightest. In this film, "if you have a dream, what if it comes true?" This kind of chicken soup is similar to a joke. This makes the meaning of the film monotonous, unable to leave a deep impression on people, and it is not conducive to the understanding of the book for first-time readers.
It has enough baggage for a comedy, but I think its meaning is missing. But there's no denying that, in a way, its comical, laughable purpose is served.
View more about Gulliver's Travels reviews
