Reviews (7)

SENSATIONAL!
The movie is a hilarious spoof on Hollywood, a lighthearted comedy that has you laughing all the way through it. My favorite part was when Sonny, as a gunfighter enlisted to protect the town, is requested to sing for the townsfolk. He protests, stating that he can't sing. Cher, the dancehall girl, chimes in "Don't let that stop you!" The whole movie shows how real and lighthearted Sonny and Cher were, and how deeply they loved each other. This film is worth a look! Plus it's cool to see Cher so young and fresh-faced!

"Cher" this DVD with a lover of sixties films
I wasn't quite sure what to expect from this movie when I first viewed it. I ended up being pleasantly surprised. It's certainly watchable and a fun period piece. Sixties fans will get a kick out of seeing scenes of Sonny and Cher going around town and the brief concert footage that is shown at the beginning of the film.

The plot concerns Sonny accepting an offer to make a film but Cher doesn't feel it's the right thing to do. Sonny images them in a Western, a Jungle picture (watch for Micky Dolenz from the Monkees in a quick cameo!), and a detective drama. The duo find the time to sing a couple of songs, including an accoustic version of "I Got You Babe".

Cher has almost as many wardrobe changes during this film as Natalie Portman does in the Star Wars films. The director (William Friedkin) seems to have some sort of weird obsession about the scene where Cher is dressed as a (kind of creepy) clown. It's shown TWICE in flashback form. It also appears that character actor Paul Frees did a lot of (uncredited) voice overs for this film. If you like Paul Frees, you'll get to hear a lot of him in this movie.

The DVD contains a fairly clean print and it is presented in widesceen format. The color booklet contains a short plot summary and lists the chapters. Anchor Bay released this with no extras. A trailer, bios, and photo gallery would have been a nice plus. Captions would have been appreciated too. It's too bad that Sonny is gone because I think he could've recorded an interesting audio commentary track for this film.

If you or someone you know enjoys music and films from the sixties, by all means check this out.

Good Times Sonny & Cher video
This is such a colorful, whimsical video that it shows the beginning of the struggles & climbs and the raw talent & determination both Sonny & Cher had early on. It has various skits meshed into a movie that highlights both singing and Cher solo too, shows personalities & love toward eachother, clothing styles outasite,segments actually shot in their first home amid the fanciful 60's, at a time when producers really tried to do things their way.Segments include Sonny as bumbling sheriff, spy & Tarzan-type, carousel scene & show S & C as independent innovates, who vow to continue to value love over any dumb movie.

Good Times
If you dig Sonny and Cher, then you'll dig this movie filled with groovy threads and great music. Sonny and Cher are a blast to watch as they fantasize about being big shot movie stars after being contracted to make a movie together. Sonny is crazy for the idea, while Cher finds it tedious to the point that she wants no part. Sonny tries to come up with a plot for this movie (failing at every attempt) as Cher continually puts her two cents in, which consist of tongue-in-cheek put-downs. The fact that this movie involves Sonny trying to come up with a plot for the movie they have been contracted to make is kind of ironic since this movie itself has no real plot, just a bunch of enjoyable slapstick comedy. You will laugh your way through their goofy movie spoofs and sing along with their catchy tunes. My favorite spoof has got to be the one where Sonny plays Tarzan, jungle cry and all. He even has a close call with a lion he wrestles. . . yikes! What were they thinking not using a stuntman? Incidentally, several scenes were filmed in Sonny and Cher's home due to budget restraints. This movie picks up on the chemistry between then husband and wife, which I think might have sparked the idea for "The Sonny and Cher Comedy Hour". For some inoffensive and fun-loving humor, watch this!

Must Have For Cher Fans
This is actually nothing for somebody who is not a big fan of either Cher or Sonny & Cher. ... Read more

Reviews (29)

Snap that mainspring
Of all the whacked-out, loopy, unhinged and nutso stories that have made it to the sci-fi screen, this one takes the cake. It's the ultimate, the greatest science fiction movie ever made in English. Seeing it is what you might expect an episode of schizophrenia to be like: you just get drawn further and further away from reality and you're helpless to resist. H. G. Wells reportedly had a close hand in fashioning this pre-vision of what World War Two and its aftermath might be like and his eccentricity just adds to the enjoyment. Ralph Richardson lets it all hang out as only the English can do when they get unbuttoned, and Raymond Massey is equally fine. His eagle-like profile gazing into the heavens while a choir sings "Which Will It Be?" is an image you won't forget in a hurry.

GREAT movie, LOUSY video transfer
"Things to Come" was the "2001" of its day.

In the late sixties, I saw a clean print of this movie in a New York theatre and it blew me away. Although it is in black-and-white, it is visually spectacular; the story is exciting; and it has a wonderful score. The sound was mono optical sound, but it was crisp and clear and capable of delivering the impact of the Arthur Bliss music.

For years, I've owned a disappointing VHS copy, which looks as if it were made made from a dirty, blurry, over-contrasty 16mm print, and the sound quality is poor. I've yearned to see a clean copy.

So when I got my DVD player, one of the first things I did was to buy this release, which says that it "features a pristine new film-to-video transfer from original source materials."

I am sorry to say it looks EXACTLY like the cruddy old VHS version, and the mushy sound is completely unworthy of the composer and music director.

So, I don't know what to say. If you've never seen the movie _Things to Come_, I recommend the movie highly. But the image quality and sound on this DVD have, alas, that "lousy old 16mm print look."

Eerie, but worthwhile
Okay, enough already about the transfers, let's talk about the film itself.

In a nutshell, this 1936 Brit sci-fi feature deals with war and progress. Everytown (London?) is shown in 1940 about to celebrate Christmas amidst blaring headlines of war (in a nifty bit of symbolism, the children play with war toys around the Christmas tree). Then war hits the city (in an eerily accurate foretelling of the German blitz that DID rock England in 1940). As time goes on, the war drags into decades ending up in a post-apocalyptic society in 1966.

Because of the war, Everytown/London has regressed into a crude, medieval type society without electricity which wastes its resources on senseless wars and is led by a Hitler-type warlord ogre called "The Boss." The world is also famished by a deadly, incurable disease called "Wandering Sickenss" whose victims are shot by the boss (reminds you of Castro's quarantine of AIDS patients). John Cabal (Raymond Massey) is a leader of scientists who return to civilize Everytown/London and establish a scientific technocracy. But the Boss demands the technology to wage more war, which he tells his followers is necessary for the peace (he begins to sound frighteningly like George Bush Jr. during such speeches). Anyway, the Boss and Cabal face off, and I'll leave the rest to your imagination. A moon shot and some anti-progress protesters (simialr to today's anti WTO protesters) play major parts in the latter third of the story.

For those of us who are into history, this film is extremely eerie, yet fascinating and worthwhile to watch. It's scary in that some of what H.G. Wells prophesized did indeed come true in ways that are even more so than what I just mentioned. (Think of some of today's so-called Third World countries whose resources are wasted by boss-like dictators among other things). Basically, this film, despite the overtly speechike dialogue (Raymond Massey's soliloquy about the need for progress near the film's end is a bit hard to take), is an eloquent sermon on the hindrance that war makes on the progress of humanity and the need for education to triumph over ignorance. It would be great for a high school or college history teacher to show and have a discussion with their classes about this film.

An exceptional period piece
This movie, made between the two World Wars, preserves a complex and varied view of its time. The movie opens on a holiday, with family scenes, caroling, and the rest. The background, however, is a constant threat of war, blared from the news media. In an uncomfortable foreshadowing of 1984, the aggressor is never identified clearly, even when the bombs start to fall.

The next scenes were, I'm sure, as horrific a the director could make them, within the standards of the time. The city, the families in it, and the civilization that it stood for were bombed to the ground and the wreckage gassed. This must have had a special horror at the time. WW-I was still strong in living memory, and the veterans crippled by gas were still alive. But this movie's war went on for decades, long after were no more weapons left to fight it with.

The post-war population was slashed by plague - again, something vivid to people who still remembered the deadly Spanish Flu. Society collapsed into village-states, each governed by the biggest bully around.

New hope for the world came from pure technological optimism, the belief that scientists and engineers could create a moral society in their Buck Rogers laboratories and factories. Don't get me wrong - it is not possible to create a humane society without the labs and factories. We now know that it takes a lot more, as well. The arrogance, techno-tyrrany, and 'weapons of peace' in that new order seemed natural, even proper in that era. They chill a modern viewer, since we now know that a lab coat isn't a mantle of moral authority. That technological utopia was not perfect. It carried its own inherent vices, the easy life and the sense of entitlement to every comfort imaginable.

This movie is a time capsule. It recorded the beliefs and hopes of its age, and plays them back for us 60+ years later. I am boggled by what was then the most advanced thinking; it now seems so naive. We've had a chance to the predictions that came true (mostly, the negative ones) and the predictions that failed miserably in practice (most of the positive ones).

The science fiction aspects of this film will seem hopelessly dated to today's effects-junkies. Even the style of acting will seem stilted. No matter, this one is worth watching and re-watching. It makes me wonder which of today's hopes and fears will come true, and how they'll look half a century from now.

Historical pageantry fast-forwarded
The British, for some reason, were obsessed with historical pageants in the 1930s, and this peculiar product (one of the most expensive films made in Britian up to that time) is an odd by-product of that obsession. It plays like Noel Coward's CAVALCADE in reverse. It opens in 1940, when war against a foreign power is declared at Christmastime (these are the best and most famous sequences, and are performed nearly like a kind of pantomime). Then the film advances episodically at first about decade at a time, showing the devastation wrought by war and plague, the barbarian society that becomes built over the carnage, and finally the superscientific cryptofascistic organization that defeats the barbarian power and its own problems.

Aside from Alfred Hitchcock's work, british cinema just wasn't very good prior to the Second World War, and this film shows why: everyone from the evil barbarian dictator and his Lady MacBeth to the children in the street speak with absurdly posh BBC accents, and there's a ridiculous amount of posturing and posing. The film is mostly of interest today as a kind of curio, especially in its relaization onscreen of the popular futuristic fantsies of the period: giant Art Deco turbines, and oversized flying wing aircrafts that sweep the skies. The striking visualization of the Wings over the World society, with its towers and plazas, and its citizenry bedecked in caped togas with plastic tubing (the costumes were co-designed by the Marchioness of Queensbury!) clearly provided the inspiration for DC Comics illustrators in the United States in their depictions of Superman's Krypton for the next fifty years or so. ... Read more

Reviews (142)

Fasten your seatbelts, you're in for a bumpy ride!
Bette Davis is perfect as aging movie star who takes newcomer Anne Baxter under her wing. Little does Bette know that Anne is only too happy to walk all over Bette as the former climbs the ladder of success. -- This is Hollywood looking at Hollywood; with all it's glamour, back stabbing and the insatiable desire to be on top. The story line as well as the acting are dated, but even today you can have a grand 'ol time with this entertaining classic! Look for a young Marilyn Monroe in a bit part as a party guest!

Classic NY Theatre comedy
Biting, satiric comedy of the New York theater world. Bette Davis is aging stage actress Margo Channing who finds her career (and her romantic life) threatened when "adoring" fan Eve Harrington (Anne Baxter) worms her way into a job as Margo's assistant. Seems Eve has plans of her own for her future and they may include Margo's next stage role and her fiance. Incredibly witty script by director Joseph Mankiewicz is acted to the hilt by all, especially Davis and Baxter and, in standout supporting roles, George Sanders as a bitchy critic and Celeste Holm as Margo's loyal, long-suffering best friend.

Bette Davis, Bette Davis, oh why are you so great?
And god she is. The Best actress ever, in the best screenplay ever. If I had one thing to say about "All About Eve", it would probably be about Bette Davis. There's nothing else to say. If the film had been less witty, less wise, it would still be a classic because of her performance. She just put herself right on the showcase and and did it. She never wondered, or feared anything. She pushed everybody out to make her way, and changed herself into an instrument for Margo Channing. There's no doubt that Bette Davis was very like Margo Channing in real life. But that just adds to the character, she knew she was Margo Channing, and used it to push the boundaries further to what and actress could do, to what was the limit of what was tolerable or not. But she didn't mind that, and look how it paid off at the end. Never, and I insist on never, is there a moment in the film where you don't believe here. Not a second, not the blink of an eye. It is the perfect performance. And the movie has everything else as good as Bette Davis. When you think of Thelma Ritter, or Celeste Holm, or Marilyn Monroe, or George Sanders, or even Hugh Marlowe, in this picture, they're all astonishing. The dialogue is so brilliant you just can't help to wonder, how long can a writer take to write this? A month? A year? A decade? I don,t know, but it every word in it is placed there for a reason. That's "All About Eve". Every bit of it is carfully put in the perfect ensemble, surrounded by Bette Davis. And to say that Claudette Colbert was suppose to do it...

No good deed goes unpunished
"All About Eve" excels on so many levels it's hard to keep track of them all. It won eight Oscars and was nominated for 14 (a record that wasn't tied until "Titanic"). It has been called "The bitchiest film ever made." It's probably one of the most literate films ever made, too, with references to "paranoic outbursts," Fort Sumter and the dramatists Beaumont and Fletcher. (It's unlikely that its screenplay could be produced today.)

The story of how an innocent-seeming young ingenue slowly worms her way into an older actress's heart and takes her career away from her is now fifty years old but is as fresh as if it were filmed yesterday. The performances are outstanding across the board, and feature Bette Davis as star Margo Channing, Anne Baxter as usurper Eve Harrington, Celeste Holm as Eve's best friend, Thelma Ritter as Eve's live-in companion, and Marilyn Monroe in a small role as Miss Caswell, "a graduate of the Copacabana School of Dramatic Art." This is a film to treasure and to enjoy over and over.

There is also a brand-new book devoted to the movie: "All About 'All About Eve'" by Sam Staggs.

"You can always put THAT where your heart ought to be"
This film is an example of the superb writing talent that Hollywood boasted before the 80's and 90's (when American filmgoers became addicted to special effects and vulgar physical comedy). Whereas the film was one of the most successful of 1950, chances are today even with the Best Picture Oscar under its belt, 50% of Americans would probably lose interest halfway through. The casting is perfect - there was no better choice for Margo Channing than Bette Davis (by the way - stage actress Tallulah Bankhead thought the character was a sendup of herself, and granted, there are shades of Tallulah in Margo). And if I had one wish, it would be to have George Sanders's deep, snide voice - you can just hear the sarcasm dripping in every line he speaks. Some feel that "Sunset Boulevard" lost Best Picture to "Eve" because where the former directed its animosity toward Hollywood, the latter took exception with the theatre; yet after viewing the film several times, it becomes apparent that "Eve" aimed its barbs at all forms of media (stage, screen, television, and even newspapers - the party scene alone sufficiently skewers the glamorous yet empty side of Hollywood and television). It makes one think - just how real ARE these actors and actresses we see on the screen, and how exactly did they get where they are today? The acting business is certainly one of the most competitive, and I can't imagine they all got where they are by being sweet and gentle.

By far, the lion's share of praise belongs to Mankiewicz, who had just won an Oscar for "A Letter to Three Wives" and not only directed this masterpiece but WROTE it (and before simply dismissing such an accomplishment, I dare you to compare a script of this film to any of today's film scripts - 90% aren't NEARLY this tight or fluid). Just one thing - toward the end, what exactly happens to Thelma Ritter's character? She just kind of vanishes, and yet she's one of the most lovable characters in the film. I think it would have made a nice touch if Mankiewicz could have given her a chance to get a couple zingers in on Eve at the end, too. But that's light criticism - this film is one of the most flawless Hollywood films ever made and, if you haven't treated yourself to it, by all means, do so immediately. ... Read more

Description

All Day Entertainment's ongoing DVD celebration of the films of legendary indie pioneer Edgar G. Ulmer began in 1999 with two DVD volumes that have since become very hard to find collector's items. This deluxe boxed set collects these first two special edition discs, covering three complete features and a bounty of extras. Disc One includes "The Strange Woman" (99 min.), a 1946 riff on "Gone with the Wind" restaged in New England, without the Civil War, but with Hedy Lamarr as a conniving manipulator who exploits her sexual allure to destroy the men around her. "A beautifully shot melodrama with Ulmer's balletic camerawork and set design shown off their best" raves Film.com. This disc also includes the rarely seen 1939 noir musical, "Moon Over Harlem" (68 min.), which Ulmer likened to a "Black Porgy and Bess." Disc Two includes "Bluebeard" (73 min.), a 1944 horror thriller starring John Carradine as a murderous puppeteer. One of Ulmer's most highly regarded works, in a deluxe DVD edition that the San Francisco Examiner calls "very highly recommended." This disc also features never-before-seen color footage from the famous puppet opera sequence and a reproduction of the pressbook. ... Read more

Reviews (7)

SENSATIONAL!
The movie is a hilarious spoof on Hollywood, a lighthearted comedy that has you laughing all the way through it. My favorite part was when Sonny, as a gunfighter enlisted to protect the town, is requested to sing for the townsfolk. He protests, stating that he can't sing. Cher, the dancehall girl, chimes in "Don't let that stop you!" The whole movie shows how real and lighthearted Sonny and Cher were, and how deeply they loved each other. This film is worth a look! Plus it's cool to see Cher so young and fresh-faced!

"Cher" this DVD with a lover of sixties films
I wasn't quite sure what to expect from this movie when I first viewed it. I ended up being pleasantly surprised. It's certainly watchable and a fun period piece. Sixties fans will get a kick out of seeing scenes of Sonny and Cher going around town and the brief concert footage that is shown at the beginning of the film.

The plot concerns Sonny accepting an offer to make a film but Cher doesn't feel it's the right thing to do. Sonny images them in a Western, a Jungle picture (watch for Micky Dolenz from the Monkees in a quick cameo!), and a detective drama. The duo find the time to sing a couple of songs, including an accoustic version of "I Got You Babe".

Cher has almost as many wardrobe changes during this film as Natalie Portman does in the Star Wars films. The director (William Friedkin) seems to have some sort of weird obsession about the scene where Cher is dressed as a (kind of creepy) clown. It's shown TWICE in flashback form. It also appears that character actor Paul Frees did a lot of (uncredited) voice overs for this film. If you like Paul Frees, you'll get to hear a lot of him in this movie.

The DVD contains a fairly clean print and it is presented in widesceen format. The color booklet contains a short plot summary and lists the chapters. Anchor Bay released this with no extras. A trailer, bios, and photo gallery would have been a nice plus. Captions would have been appreciated too. It's too bad that Sonny is gone because I think he could've recorded an interesting audio commentary track for this film.

If you or someone you know enjoys music and films from the sixties, by all means check this out.

Good Times Sonny & Cher video
This is such a colorful, whimsical video that it shows the beginning of the struggles & climbs and the raw talent & determination both Sonny & Cher had early on. It has various skits meshed into a movie that highlights both singing and Cher solo too, shows personalities & love toward eachother, clothing styles outasite,segments actually shot in their first home amid the fanciful 60's, at a time when producers really tried to do things their way.Segments include Sonny as bumbling sheriff, spy & Tarzan-type, carousel scene & show S & C as independent innovates, who vow to continue to value love over any dumb movie.

Good Times
If you dig Sonny and Cher, then you'll dig this movie filled with groovy threads and great music. Sonny and Cher are a blast to watch as they fantasize about being big shot movie stars after being contracted to make a movie together. Sonny is crazy for the idea, while Cher finds it tedious to the point that she wants no part. Sonny tries to come up with a plot for this movie (failing at every attempt) as Cher continually puts her two cents in, which consist of tongue-in-cheek put-downs. The fact that this movie involves Sonny trying to come up with a plot for the movie they have been contracted to make is kind of ironic since this movie itself has no real plot, just a bunch of enjoyable slapstick comedy. You will laugh your way through their goofy movie spoofs and sing along with their catchy tunes. My favorite spoof has got to be the one where Sonny plays Tarzan, jungle cry and all. He even has a close call with a lion he wrestles. . . yikes! What were they thinking not using a stuntman? Incidentally, several scenes were filmed in Sonny and Cher's home due to budget restraints. This movie picks up on the chemistry between then husband and wife, which I think might have sparked the idea for "The Sonny and Cher Comedy Hour". For some inoffensive and fun-loving humor, watch this!

Must Have For Cher Fans
This is actually nothing for somebody who is not a big fan of either Cher or Sonny & Cher. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

"THE MOST ATTRACTIVE WOMAN IN FILMS"
Lamarr is visually stunning and gives very good performances in both of these underrated gems. Both movies are gripping and have believable plots and dialouge. In addition the content is very racey for the time.

The image quality of this Triton DVD is good. While not up to Criterion or tier 1 studio quality it is very watchable. Most of the image is semi-crisp. I did not notice alot of hiss, though there is some. On "Strange Woman" there is one part lasting 1-2 minutes where there is a loud hum.

Overall this is a very good buy. You get two movies with the beautiful Lamarr(she turns her head, lifts her eyes and a man would do anything). The quality is better than average. The plots and acting are great. ... Read more

Description

The mysterious island village of Balfe is experiencing unexplainable phenomenon--from grossly oversized sea-life to half-buried bodies in the dark woods. Is the town water being contaminated by radioactive waste? Is there a vengeful mutant monster lurking in the woods? Or worse, are the townsfolk being punished for their past sins? It is up to Dr. Del Shaw and the dedicated scientists at Doomwatch headquarters to discover the cause of these horrific mutations. Based on the British television series of the same name, "Doomwatch" is a haunting telltale film that just might be hazardous to your health! ... Read more

Reviews (12)

Groundbreaking science fiction
This double feature DVD includes one of the best science fiction films, an adaptation of H.G. Wells' story "The Shape of Things to Come." This melodramatic tale, released in 1936, foresees a second World War beginning in 1940 and continuing into the 1970s, devastating the Earth. Eventually, mankind rebuilds, constructing a new and better civilization, culminating in the beginning of space travel in 2036. The film's striking production design, first rate photography, literate, intelligent script, and fine performances (especially by Raymond Massey) make this an essential film for science fiction fans.

Unfortunately this DVD is a low-budget, no-frills disc, made from a smudgy print. The audio has not been cleaned up; it's scratchy and dialogue is not always intelligible. Hopefully a remastered version will be released someday, with perhaps a few extras.

The less said about the second film, "Journey to the Center of Time", the better; it's worthwhile only as an example of how not to make a movie.

This DVD is worth buying for "Things To Come"; at least until a remastered version is available.

What are they thinking?
This is a review of the combined product and the rating has no relationship to the individual movies. Some one is getting over zealous they just tied a Sci-Fi Classic "Things to Come" to a lackluster dud "Journey to the Center of Time". Just incase some one has not pointed out the differences. I figure there was room left over on the DVD and instead of adding extras they would fill the space with no cost fluff. You will want to look at the reviews for the individual movies before buying this hybrid or low-breed.

This must have been the Canadian prototype for "Time Tunnel"
To say this was low budget would be too kind. The stereotype acting is not stereotype enough. The stereotype actors are not stereotype enough. Let's face it; this whole stereotype project is not stereotype enough. If the budget was just a tad lower maybe this would never have been made.
Basic premise is an attempt to look into the future and into the past actually forces the lab to go into the future into the past. The lab is stuffed with good guy, bad guy, and screaming girl. The good guy does good things. The bad guy does bad things. The girl screams a lot. While back at the ranch, they talk of a lot about how they've lost the lab.
This DVD is perfect for testing the fast forward option.

Gave 1 star because I can't give a zero.
Poor quality film. Poor DVD transfer. No Extras. Waste of time. At least I didn't throw a lot of money away on it. Terrible film.

Things To Come: Good film, bad copy
“Things To Come” is one of those intelligent sci-fi films that you dream about. It is an adaptation of H. G. Wells book of the same name. Filmed in 1936, it traces the history of a (fictitious) world war that begins in 1940, and is continually fought until the 1970’s. The film show life before the war, life during the apocalypse, and finally traces world society into 2036, with a planned space mission, and a group of futuristic luddites who are opposed to the plan.

The sets and cinematography is pure eye-candy, and remind me of a rough Fritz Lang, and life during the apocalyptic war has become chilling, considering the possibilities that may happen in this war on terrorism.

It is an anti-war film. However, Wells naively thinks that scientific endeavor can save humanity. Contrast this with the idiotic statements that we got when the genome was cracked:

“Perhaps most surprising, two analyses released this month suggest that the entire human genome may contain fewer than 40,000 genes - about half the number that scientists have presumed (no more than a worm and a fly combined, Collins quips).”

Would you want scientist Collins, who can’t see the difference between a fly, a worm, and a human, to operate on you? And we are to build humanity on this foundation? Science had given us many trinkets, but she has failed to give us any meaning—due to the Naturalistic Fallacy. How do you get from “E=mc2” to “Love your neighbor?” The scientific endeavor, therefore, would just be a type of busy-work.

The copy is very rough and blurry at times, and the dialogue fades in an out, and the DVD has no frills that we love and use. But this rough copy is better than no copy at all! This is a perfect classic, and a must for an sci-fi junkie.

“Journey to the Center of Time” is bad. But I think it should be mandatory viewing for people who think that Star Trek: The Original Series was bad, since “Center of Time” makes Kirk look like Shakespeare! ... Read more

Reviews (6)

Though not a masterpiece, a movie worth watching!
A pretty good movie considering the fact that it was made in 1954, years before Ben Hur, Spartacus, The 300 Spartans, Cleopatra, the Fall of the Roman Empire, El Cid and other classics.The story unfolds during the Third Crusade a.k.a. the Kings' Crusade (1189-1192), in the Holy Land with the combined armies of the English, French and Germans preparing for a showdown with Saladin's Saracens.The hero is a Scottish knight, who is an enemy of England, but loyal to King Richard (no explanation given/do not ask why or how).

On the positive side: a) some very nice desert shots and a beautiful looking castle, b) excellent costumes of Crusaders and Saracens, and c) a wonderful feel of History and the Crusades (accurate description of conditions found within the two camps i.e. Complete loyalty in Saladin's encampment and severe disunity in the Crusaders').

On the negative side: a) it is an old movie by modern standards with the battle scenes/tactics very much outdated, b) the acting is not as much "natural" as it is staged, one could say it is way too "theatrical" (the poses and all...), c) the Lady's accent is 100% American, definitely not the way the English King's cousin should sound like (do I hear Kevin Costner in Robin Hood?), while the Scott sounds nothing of the Highlands (King Richard at times does give off a little of Sean Connery though).

Strongly recommended to those who love History and the Crusades in particular.One should seriously start thinking about re-doing the movie or a similar Crusade-related one with today's technology...

The Talisman - 50's Hollywood style
Well, the film didn't follow the book but that's not surprising. This was an obvious B- movie for the masses. I did enjoy watching Rex Harrison ham it up as Saladin, he obbviously had a good time with the part. Virginia Mayo was gorgeous, Laurence Harvey was stiff/predictable, and George Sanders was a disappointing King Richard. Although acting like the real King Richard would be tough for most hollywood actors in the 50's. The close-up horse-riding scenes were silly (moving background - static horse) and the battle scenes were lame. The jousts were OK and the desert dune scene was fun. All-in-all it was what I expected from a low budget 50's flick.

djb

Dumb, Dumb, DUMB
They couldn't have miscast this film even worse if they'd tried.
I nearly collapsed from laughter.Don't watch it for history,
great acting, costumes, or sets.And lose the popcorn.You
don't want to choke between giggles!

High-priced junk
Big budget doesn't always mean quality.The producers of this movie had plenty of money to spend to make this picture.However, it should stand as an example of how not to make a picture.Talents of a big-name cast are abused and wasted; this film is filled to the brim with lousy overacting.Also, the screenplay is not very historically accurate.Most viewers would probably stop and rewind the tape before seeing very much of this movie.If you watch this film on television, you'll probably change the channel to see what else is on.

Take the boat back to England, guys...
Oh, this is a really bad movie! Having joined the film in medias res, when it was rewound for viewing again, I was surprised to find thatRex Harrison actually has top billing--the reason for my surprise was that at every turn, one had to be confronted with the untalented preening of Lawrence Harvey as an ersatz Errol Flynn "dashing" hero, offering self-satisfied King Richard (George Sanders) advice he really doesn't want to hear, and proferring love to Richard's cousin Edith (Virginia Mayo) even though she is too high born to be courted by a Scotsman like himself. He's a very bad Scotsman too; if George Sanders didn't keep repeating ad nauseum, "Never trust a Scot", one would quickly lose that thread.And there leering away whenever the limelight hits him, is our old favorite, Rex Harrison as the Saracen leader Saladin, though he first masquerades as an Arab physician who must save the life of King Richard, laid low by a poisoned arrow. That shooting part hadalso happened before I joined the film, so I was mystified as to why George Sanders was playing all his scenes from a bed, since he didn't convey mortal illness at all, just indolence. I usually enjoy Rex tremendously, but his shameless mugging, with rolling eyes and stilted speech is a tad too much to be borne. Evidently young Rex was often employed as an exotic foreigner, as in "Anna and the King of Siam", and his accent is pretty much the same here, so this might have been titled,"King Richard and the King of Siam" .If you want to see abetter Hollywood movie about the Crusades, check out Cecil B. de Mille's "The Crusades"--less preposterous, and much better acted. ... Read more