4/10
Royal Nonesuch
18 November 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Although the movie was mildly entertaining, it is a very poor representation of Mark Twain’s book on which this movie is “based.” Crucial character elements are either weakly represented or altogether missing from the movie. In the book, Huck Finn, a young boy, and Jim, a runaway slave, travel far down the Mississippi River from their starting point in Missouri. In this movie, they only get a mile or two past Illinois. The book portrays Jim as a kind-hearted, loving person who wants freedom for himself and his family. In this movie, he is seen as a simpleton and gives the impression that the entire story is racist. Although the movie may not show it, Twain was an abolitionist. In the book, Huck overcomes the prejudices of his upbringing and helps Jim to become free, even if Huck must go to hell for doing so.

Eddie Hodges and Archie Moore performed decently in this movie from a pure entertainment point of view, but neither of their characters showed the elements which Train created in them. Michael Curtiz and James Lee allowed elements of Twain’s book to be reorganized or left out altogether. They even created two scenes which never existed even in part in the book. If you don not mind mediocre acting, by all means go ahead and watch this movie, but do not think for one second that it reflects accurately the image or message which Twain created in his book.
12 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed