guillenpascal
As Stevenson once said "to travel is a better thing than to arrive". Unfortunately, this TV movie doesn't offer neither travel nor destination worthwhile. The travel through the Earth is dull and rushed: expect no thrill and no wonderment. And when they arrive in the center of the Earth, all looks exactly the same than the surface, with a sepia tone. The last part adds to the Verne's novel a very forgettable story about Indians and a lost husband that will make us want to run away from this place as soon as possible... and to condemn the entrance of the cave to prevent from returning by mistake.
TheLittleSongbird
The story is a timeless classic, and while I was dubious of seeing this version of Journey to the Center of the Earth I watched it because I love the story, and I loved the 1959 film, liked the 2008 Brendan Fraser film(though it is nothing amazing) and was marginally entertained by the 1989 version. But I found myself bored and frustrated by this version. The only real redeeming quality was the atmospheric soundtrack. Other than that, I didn't enjoy this one bit. The production values didn't really impress me, the costume and set design are okay-looking but I felt they lacked authenticity, however the photography was often too bright for my tastes. But they are nothing compared to the script, story and acting which range from bad to diabolical. The script was weak in delivery and very stilted, while the story is dull in pace, soulless in spirit and has no thrills really. The action is uninspired, either hurriedly shot, uninteresting in choreography or far too brief in length, and for anyone wondering about fidelity to the book( not always a problem with me as long as the adaptation in question maintains the spirit), forget it, only the title seems to be unscathed. The acting ranges from over-eager, Ricky Schroder tries hard but the under-par material severely eludes him, to disengaged, Peter Fonda is so dull here that a lot of the performance actually begged for a steroid shot. It doesn't help that the characters are unlikeable and in some cases underwritten and mostly made to do foolish things. Overall, awful and uninteresting, and by far the worst version to bear the name of the classic story, and the only one of the four versions I've seen so far to completely miss the point of the story. 1/10 Bethany Cox
TheUnknown837-1
Here we have yet another film adaptation of the popular Jules Verne's novel "Journey to the Center of the Earth". Here, the cast is led by Rick Schroeder as it again tells of explorers finding a passage into the core of the planet where dinosaurs, primitive people, and a whole lost world still exist. I am not that familiar with the novel or many of the movies based upon it, but this 2008 version is a poor adaptation. There were many things I had to complain about it and few to compliment about it. Performances were good, but just about everything else fell short of expectations.The best part of the movie, believe it or not, was not while the characters were in the center of the Earth. Rather, it was while they were on the surface and even then, it wasn't that entertaining. I strongly felt the cinematography was too bright and gave the movie a feeling of schlock and no authenticity. The screenplay was rather poor, unorganized, and many scenes had little or no point. Such as this part where a bear allegedly attacks the characters and scares away the horses. We see the characters shooting, hear a bear growling, and that's all. Special effects weren't that great either. For dinosaurs, we see giant birds (not pterodactyls) and a plesiosaurus. Both were achieved with rather shoddy computer graphics. The creatures took up very little of the film and created no sense of marvel or majesty about themselves, which is what one wants to see in a movie like this. A lost world should be treated with majesty and magnificence.Bottom line, the 2008 film adaptation of "Journey to the Center of the Earth" was a very bland uninteresting film that took its time at developing itself and made very little sense. I suppose it is worth looking at once, but I'm in no itching hurry to view it a second time.
bbernyjb
It's always difficult for me to watch a movie after having read the book it's allegedly based upon. Anyways, I decided to try this one, and I have to say I can't find any part of it that'd be based on the Jules Verne novel (except the title, of course). It's amazing to see how professor Otto Lidenbrock from Hamburg became Jonathan Brock, his nephew Axel became Abel, how his Danish guide Hans Bjelke morphed into Sergei Petrov, and how the expedition that originally started in ICELAND at the end of June, suddenly changed to Alaska in September. But most important is the complete lack of respect for the original plot and its characters, to the point that the movie shares nothing with the book they say it follows. I do understand that most books can not be adapted faithfully to the screen, but there's a difference between taking a few creative licences and making a completely different story. So, I'd like to ask Mr. William Gray to, PLEASE, read the book before saying his script is based upon it, or otherwise take the credits (and responsibilities) of signing his own stories.
AD
