MovieChat Forums > Gilligan's Island (1964) Discussion > The concept of this show makes no sense

The concept of this show makes no sense


I have been struggling, trying to understand what makes this show popular.

Now, not a lot of this show makes any sense, but there are just so many weird things I can't quite understand. I mean, who thought it was a good idea to even make this show?

One very puzzling thing is, Gilligan does not have the kind of charisma I thought he would.

After seeing SO many TV shows and movies basically 'mock' this show ('ALF', 'The Nanny', 'Galaxy Quest' and so many others), and yet somehow respect it at the same time, I had to find out what all the fuzz was about.

I was expecting something funny and charming, like 'The Dick Van Dyke Show' - now Mary Tyler Moore, there's a solid... I guess she's just a tiny sliver shy of a nine. So let's give her 8.7. She is very charming and extremely talented as well, but amazingly, Dick van Dyke can keep up with her with his comedy, charisma and also amazingly expressive talent.

Now I didn't know much about this show before going in, but it's almost appalling how the actor for Gilligan has no charisma or charm. I was expecting at least 'Laurel and Hardy'-type expressive quirkiness, but nope.

It's like a 'regular dude' trying to do old theater skits and perform bad jokes and gags, and it almost never works from what I have seen so far.

I thought there would be some kind of cleverness to it, or relatability, maybe a feeling of sympathy, like Charlie Chaplin or Niles of 'Frasier' fame - just something to make you feel for Gilligan. Maybe he would be an 'idiot savant' that bumbles a lot but then somehow manages to create brilliant solutions or whatnot.

The concept puzzles me a lot - so people are stranded on an island that can keep them alive, but yet no one finds that island or them? They can survive easily, but not 'escape'? How hard would it have been to just fix that boat?

What's more, the big confusion for me comes from the fact that they let Gilligan always ruin everything. Why? If they got rid of him or just tied him to a tree or whatever, they would not have so many problems. He's like a walking disaster and catastrophy combined. Why anyone would even tolerate him - other than company, perhaps, but he isn't very interesting as that - is beyond me.

In the end, this seems to be just a silly, 'wacky' comedy where nothing makes sense and Gilligan just fumbles a lot, and that's about it. The concept doesn't make any sense - how can this island not be on maps or charts, while airplanes fly nearby..? Wouldn't the pilots see the island and know it should be added to the maps?

It's not exactly a TINY island, either. A group of people roaming around, building huts and fires and whatnot should be pretty easily seen from the air, not to mention the boat and all. In any case, a mysterious island that pilots can see with lots of stuff going on, and no one wants to investigate, explore, reseach, check it out??? What kind of sense does THAT make?

What kind of 'tour' was the trip supposed to be anyway? Just going into deep sea and back?

Why would a captain ever be surprised by 'harsh weather', when this kind of information was readily available back in the day and a seasoned veteran sailor should have known before even starting the 'tour' that there is rough weather in a certain area..

Not to mention, other people whould have put two and two together - a group of people are following a pre-determined 'tour' route, clearly venture into 'rough weather' (so they should know the location just from that), then 'disappear' and the search is called off even though there is an island around that very area that pilots have already seen from planes that no one has explored yet, so it should be an exciting opportunity to all explorers and what have you..?

As I said, only seen a couple of episodes so far, but none of this makes any sense to me from any angle.

A concept like this is so weird anyway - just have a group stranded on an island and make fun out of not being able to return? WHO thought this was a good idea?

I guess it could have worked if it had been done with charm, grace and actual, funny comedy, as in 'The Dick Van Dyke Show', but I am finding this show so far worse than cartoons made for toddlers. It's hard to be hooked by a show that doesn't have anything fun/funny/charming about it, especially when almost nothing makes any sense.

Yeah, someone could have a 'field day' with this, indeed..

reply

You hit the nail on the head when you wrote "In the end, this seems to be just a silly, 'wacky' comedy."

It's not meant to make sense, or be realistic, or be humorous on an intellectual level.

It debuted when I was ten years old, and I found it hilarious. I think, for adults (men, at least), there was strong eye-candy appeal from Ginger and Mary Ann.

It worked well enough to be on for three seasons, and still to be talked about sixty years later.

It was basically a live-action "Flintstones"-style cartoon. I don't think a sitcom on that level would succeed today. It's not that we're any smarter or more sophisticated than the 1964 audience. We just have different (and not necessarily higher) expectations.

reply

Simply put it is "just a silly, 'wacky' comedy"

reply

Look at Seinfeld.
The lead in that, Jerry Seinfeld, is an ok performer.
That show is a silly, wacky show about nothing.

reply

What doesn't make sense is you thinking Gilligan's Island would make sense. ;)

reply

BEWARE! Avortac4 is a troll trying to waste everyone's time with such idiotic comments. Look at his posts. He doesn't think anything in any film makes sense. His post may seem like it makes sense in the first sentence or two. But he always quickly wanders off into a completely idiotic idea, and then writes a wall of text that makes no sense. And his sole purpose is to waste your time, thinking he's cute for doing so. Don't feed the troll. If you write a comment, you're giving this troll EXACTLY what he wants. Don't comment after my comment.

reply