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.
4 out of 4 found this helpful