Your blood may run cold, but you now find yourself pinioned to the story.

Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

This movie stinks. There's no getting around that. I can think of nothing positive to say about it. I've watched a lot of terrible movies made for the SyFy channel, and this one ranks among the very worst. It's right up there with that awful version of KING SOLOMON'S MINES that looked like it was filmed in a city park.I don't object to films adapting works of classic literature in ways their original authors never imagined, but I do object strongly to attaching the original authors' names to the often unrecognizable results. Such is the case with this virtually unwatchable atrocity. It has little to do with Jules Verne's original story, which is set in the time of the U.S. Civil War, when five Yankee prisoners escape from Confederate captivity in a balloon craft and are blown by an immense storm all the way to an uncharted South Pacific island. That's the essential premise of this film, though the geography is vague. Beyond that premise, however, the film has little to do with the novel. In fact, I'm willing to bet it was based not on Verne's novel but on the 1961 film of the same title that was itself a major departure from the novel. Like that film, this SyFy stinker adds several similar characters not in the novel–namely a Confederate soldier and two women. This version differs mainly in having the female characters arrive on the island in a airplane after–apparently–being blown through the Bermuda Triangle. Is the ensuring story now set in the mid-19th century or in the early 21st century? It's impossible to say, but I doubt the creators of this film themselves knew–or cared.Like the 1961 film, this one moves the action along far more swiftly than the novel does. It has the characters leave the island within days of their arrival there. By contrast, in the novel the castaways are on the island nearly four years, during which time they raise extensive crops, breed animals, mine minerals, make tools and machines, and build houses, bridges, and boats. One of the chief points of interest in the novel is how they meet the many challenges they face, while dangers posed by harsh weather, fierce animals, pirates, and a volcano make for frequent thrills. The novel is a robust, fascinating book that might be thought of as like THE SWISS FAMILY ROBINSON on steroids. In this SyFy movie, nothing interesting happens. The chief questions one has while trying to watch it is this: Did someone actually write a screenplay for this mess? Or, were they making it up as they went along? What does this terrible SyFy movie have to do with Verne's novel? Not much, aside from its undeserved title. If the SyFy channel wants to produce lousy movies, that's fine. They'll always find an undiscriminating audience that will enjoy them. I have no problem with that. However, if they must do that, it would be far better if they would come up with totally original stories and not pretend they are producing adaptations of classic works that can only serve to give real science fiction a bad name.

Not a great movie by any standard but not too bad either - by far - I'm saying this in the context of the modern movie industry where most of the product is just too painful to watch. So against such backdrop this was a nice piece of family-safe entertainment - yes entertainment indeed. Kids loved it, I sat through it with occasional interest. Acting wasn't that bad despite what has been said on this site.Yes it's not faithful to the book by Jules Verne but in a creative way. There is a even a reference to Barack Obama. Not necessary but not out of the way given the time travel angle that this movie has introduced into the story.Not the best, silly at times, but if you take it for what it was meant to be (a TV movie) it's a solid piece of work.

If you are expecting to see a great adaptation that is faithful to the book by Jules Verne (as the title implies), do not watch this film.If you want to see the book by Jules Verne mashed up with time-travel elements from "Lost," but done on a shoestring budget and without any character development, do watch this film.I might have given it 4/10 except that is it that disrespectful to the classic novel and is almost unable to capture anything worthwhile from the book. Had they stuck to the original story instead of treating it as a stepping off point, the film would have been greatly improved. As it is, it's a b-movie with hokey SFX that is left this viewer greatly unsatisfied.

i truly enjoyed this film. i think what you have to keep in mind before you turn it on is, this is a made-for-TV-Syfy movie. you can't over analyze it - i just took it for what it was : an entertaining TV movie on a Saturday night.i'm also not a Verne Purist- i like seeing creative adaptations, so the fact that the movie veered from the original novel didn't bother me a bit. actually i kinda like it, because it meant that i didn't know what was going to happen. i did like that they gave homage to other verne works by including other favorite characters and names - i thought that was an interesting tie in and a great way to work up to a sequel or prequel if that happens.i also was familiar with the fact that this film had a VERY small budget, and honestly, i think they did a heck of a lot with the amount of money they spent. there were a couple cheesy effects, but for the most part they were pretty dang good - i've seen a lot worse from films that had a lot more money.i also like the fact that they added 2 women characters, as i woman, i appreciated that. i think it would be very interesting to update other classic novels, and give people characteristics that weren't initially part of the story - what if captain memo was in a wheelchair? or hebert was gay? or they were all hispanic? i think adding new pieces to the story gives it more layers. i particularly liked the conversations between the girls from modern times and the civil war soldiers, when they were trying to figure out which time period they were from - it really makes you think about how different things are now compared to over 100 years ago. and it provided some comic relief, which is always welcome.overall i really liked this movie, i thought Mark Sheppard did a fantastic job on directing his first film. i wish the Syfy channel had more quality movies like this on their channel. i DVR'd it and will watch it again.