I have to give the producers of Gulliver’s Travels credit. They certainly used the perfect formula to success. Take a well-known story, or at least the well-known part of a well-known story. Cast someone famous like Jack Black. let Jack Black be Jack Black. Throw in recognizable actors like Amanda Peet, Jason Segal and Billy Connolly. Angle things toward kids. Then put the thing in 3-D to get a few extra bucks out of parents.
Sadly, the movie may not have lived up to what they had hoped. Many reviews came out on the negative side. The film has grossed more than $130 million from my last check, but it cost around $112 million so I don’t know how that fits into their plans. Maybe they used too perfect of a formula.
I went to see the flick with my daughter a week or so ago. I didn’t have a bad time. Actually, I enjoyed the movie just fine. But that doesn’t seem to be enough anymore, especially when you throw the whole 3-D thing into the equation. That raises the stakes.
For my money, they could have saved the entire 3-D scam. You don’t need 3-D to see that Gulliver is much bigger that the Lilliputians. The amateur effects in some parts of it made me wonder why they even went with 3-D in the first place. They could have probably saved a lot of money and achieved similar effects the old-fashioned way.
So I’m of two minds about this flick. I was entertained, but I think they could have done so much better. More than anything, it makes me wonder when someone will get this whole runaway 3-D train under control. Then maybe they can put some more money into making good movies instead of making mediocre ones with some goofy effects to prove that they used money to make goofy effects.
Special effects replacing good story-telling is not a new phenomenon. Just look at ‘Avatar’ for the most recent example.
Wouldn’t surprise me a bit to see that a lot of the first talkies were forgettable. Gulliver’s Travels will probably wind up in that category as well.