richard-1787 Most movie adaptations of novels are just that: they pick and choose scenes in the novel to present in movie form, but basically tell the same story to be found in the novel.This is not that. It does present much of what is in Stevenson's novel, yes, and rather faithfully. But it also includes a LOT that is not in the novel, scenes that Stevenson had suggested but never developed. Indeed, as others have pointed out, there are significant characters here who do not exist in the novel.I found it to be a good presentation of Stevenson's novel, and I found Assante to be a lot of fun as Alan Breck Stewart, even if he is more Erol Flynn than ABS. Viewers just have to understand that this is not solely what Stevenson wrote. For that, as others have observed, the Disney treatment from the 1960s is better.Still, this is FAR better than the BBC travesty of the novel, which is far too often unfaithful to the novel, which this really is not. It just adds a lot that is not in the original.

Cristi_Ciopron This newer adaptation is charmless, unappealing, it lacks brio, energy and gusto, the desired Scottish accent sucks, Assante is no match for Finch, nothing recommended the director for the job of adapting a Scottish swashbuckler, the women, few as they are in Stevenson's chaste universe, are banal, yet the subject and the storyline are far too strong and the dynamism of the plot is delightful; my mother called it a Scottish 'Musketeers', a thorough swashbuckler. The action scenes are exciting and dynamic, the few duels are well shot. And it can be granted to dear Assante that he does a pretty good Stewart Breck. Some actors (such as the shipmen) are well—chosen, or at least the makeup did the job.Davie Balfour of Shaws steps into a world of murderers and bandits, dreadful hieroglyphs of evil. His story has been awesomely adapted for cinema some almost 50 yrs ago, as a movie with Finch.

themorningcomes Well, to start with, this version of kidnapped hasn't got much in common at all with the book.That being said, it is a masterpiece in its own right. Unlike most movies, this one is not made to gratify cravings for thrilling immature romance, gory fight scenes, or political ax-grinding.And it is not dull.What drives this movie is its content. The real running theme throughout the movie is what men give their lives for.It's odd, but it has the most peculiarly uplifting execution scene. Very strange.

sharkinthesalsa What a shame that the movie, while being excellent in its own right, has absolutely nothing to do with the original book by Stevenson. Aside from the names and places, only about 5% of the novel made it into the movie. As a fan of the book and some of the older versions of the movie, I was horrified by the amount of information in the film that was 'made up'. While I'm sure it was all accurate for the time period, very little of what occurred in the film ever happened or was even alluded to in the book. If you completely ignore the fact that the movie is based on a book this film is very enjoyable and exciting however I disagree with the re-writing of this classic just to make it into a more compelling tale.