User Reviews

Usually when a film is hailed as the above description, it has to be considered watchable enough to enjoy the film's ineptitude. Some films like this are bad, but to watch them would be asking a whole lot of the viewer. LOST HORIZON certainly does not fit that last description because while CITIZEN KANE it is not, it certainly does not deserve to be trashed.

By the time LOST HORIZON came along, the movie musical was already considered a dead genre, save for the occasional import from Broadway that actually turned out well (OLIVER! & CABARET come immediately to mind). However, the age of the musical where songs were written especially for the movie had long been buried. That did not matter to producer Ross Hunter, who always was a safeguard of Old Hollywood even after the advent of the MPAA allowed for movies to be made of subjects that the studios would not have touched with a ten-foot pole. Hunter may have succeeded in bringing back old-fashioned soap operas with the Douglas Sirk movies, but as THOROUGHLY MODERN MILLIE showed with its original songs that paled in comparison to the classics it stood alongside (well, almost), the musical was perhaps not a genre in need of a revival.

You certainly could have fooled Hunter, who went full-steam ahead with his musicalization of a property that should have been left alone to begin with. Casting actors with little to no musical training & badly dubbing them was bad enough, but choosing a project that worked best in its original format was double trouble. That is certainly not to fault Burt Bacharach & Hal David's music, which is fine enough, though certainly not up to par with their Dionne Warwick spectaculars. But you get the idea that maybe even they were doubtful of this project's bankability. Supposedly the film led to the break-up of their previously infallible partnership, as well as Hunter's film career (he mostly worked for TV afterwards).

Apparently, Hollywood likes to keep its megaflops very secret because LOST HORIZON has not been seen much since its theatrical debut, and has not even made it onto VHS, let alone DVD in the U.S. (I found my copy courtesy of eBay). But if even Ed Wood's hilariously bad movies can be released & enjoyed by people even for all the wrong reasons, then certainly LOST HORIZON can. So I hope that Columbia Pictures can find it in their hearts to bring this movie back into circulation so we can enjoy it (even genuinely because it appears some people actually did). Heck, if only for the camp value, it would be a surefire hit. With CHICAGO & MOULIN ROUGE having indicated the musical is making a comeback, then it would be good to have LOST HORIZON out on the market again to educate people in how not to make one. But it sure is hell of a lot of fun along the way.

Lost Horizon is not nearly as bad as the box office numbers would suggest. Its chief failing is the audience comes to see Shangri-La and sees, well, Burbank. Actually, it looks more like the Huntington Gardens. It would have been better to improve upon the book's shortcomings rather than try to recreate it. Perhaps a "Wizard of Oz"-like plot, where all of the people meet along parallel paths to Shangri-La, only to discover their real sanctuary was where they came from.

I remember getting a preview copy of the album quite some time before the film was released. I loved the music, but would have to agree the vocal performances are a disaster. But, I was looking forward to seeing it in the theater. At nearly 2.5 hours in its roadshow release, I was checking my watch about 45 minutes into the piece. Even when I watch it on DVD today, there are large sections I fast forward through.

As others have noted, why didn't Ross Hunter hire people who could sing in the key roles? Probably studio pressure for "bankable" stars who were "hot" at the time. No doubt someone also observed Bacharach & David are pop song writers, and you don't need to be a very good vocalist to sing pop--right? Well, the more recent musical disaster, the aptly named "Mamma Mia!" ABBA tribute also suffered from dreadful vocal performances. So much for the "anyone can sing pop" theory. Make no mistake, Meryl Streep and Pierce Brosnan are fine actors, but they should never the be the leads in a musical! Why not cast Glenn Close?

But back to "Lost Horizon," I think the other problem is by the time this was released in 1972, the music and presentation were considered dated or "old school." Similar complaints were leveled at Hunters 1970 film "Airport"--calling it "old fashioned filmmaking."

So, you've got three things working against the film: a dull plot, dated music, and principal vocalists who can't sing. Now some have commented that the Hollywood musical was dead by 1972. There were some other big features that only had mediocre results at this time, but just 6 years later, "Grease," with a budget of just $6 million, earned almost $400 million at the box office. No doubt it was helped by a couple of hit singles, but there was certainly some audience interest still out there.

Disney seems to have found a formula that appeals to a new generation with its "High School Musical" series and its forthcoming "Teen Beach Musical." Several of the studio's animated musical features have been remade into successful Broadway musicals. Time will tell if there is a revival of interest in big budget, big screen musicals with principals who can actually sing.

The musical remake of 'Lost Horizon' has been almost uniformly panned over the years and has long been unavailable on home video. So is it really that bad? Comparisons with the 1937 Ronald Colman classic aside, this Bacharach-David musical starts as an adventure story and only moves into song and dance fantasy about 45 minutes into the film, when the mixed bag of plane crash survivors (Peter Finch, Michael York, Sally Kellerman, George Kennedy, Bobby Van) discover Shangri-La, led by Oxford graduate Chang (John Gielgud) and the High Lama (Charles Boyer).

So the cast looks strong - and in Shangri-La is boosted by wimpy Olivia Hussey and pouty Liv Ullmann. But aside from Van there's no one with experience of musicals. More of that later.

The songs are not that memorable, aside from the melody which first introduces the fantasy village up in the mountains. The staging of musical numbers, by Fred Astaire's associate Hermes Pan, aren't that fascinating. However, there is still enough here to keep you watching: but whether it is from the impulse to watch a real turkey unfolding or from a need to watch the story to the end, I'm not sure.

I wouldn't really class this as a musical; there are too few songs. And Finch in particular is wasted in this although he plays his part dead straight.

The remake of Lost Horizon is a misfire, but not completely awful. Some criticisms of this film are justified, but by no means all. Give it a go and make up your own mind.

I have a confession to make.....in August 1974 I re-opened an old cinema and this was the premiere attraction. The sound gargled away from behind the flabby screen and the invited audience sat on the lumpy seats. I looked like Top Cat in a tuxedo, and this film unfolded across the joins on our cinemascope presentation. What a night! Unforgettable in its mangy charm and an intro into the glamorous world of second rate showbiz to which I am still magnetized today. As a result I have a special place in my heart for this gloriously awful musical. All I can say was that the opening night crowd fled into the darkness after the last reel flapped off the projector. Some even promised to return and asked what was on next week: "MAME ...with Lucy" I grinned as I locked the door. Somehow the business survived and I even got to showcase AT LONG LAST LOVE the next year. LOST HORIZON was quite successful in Australia and was first released in Sydney as presented in 70mm for 13 weeks.... families liked it and for a while it was considered the sort of Brady Bunch family sort of musical. I just wanted to open my crummy seaside cinema with something nice. So I did and thank Neptune the locals forgave me. I deliciously look forward to the DVD release with the infamous deleted scenes, especially the legendary diaper dance with the guys swinging teapots and extended versions of Bobby Van leaping about with Liv Ullman. Am I correct in believing this was Ross Hunter's last production?

I was an extra on this film, in the part shot at the airport in the first 15 minutes or so; I was one of the fleeing (mostly Mexican) Bangladeshi refugees running across the runways at Ryan Field in Tucson. At one point, standing around in our turbans as we waited for another shot, one of my fellow extras turned to me asked me what the move was going to be about. I told him it was going to be a remake of Lost Horizons, only as a musical. There was a long pause, then he replied: "Man, this movie is gonna suck". Pretty perceptive of him, I thought. I had a good time and made a bit of money, but even with some interesting personal memories attached to this movie I can't sit through the whole thing.

If you ever saw the movie "The Swarm", you can pretty much get the idea. You get to see a lot of famous and talented people wasted on an an idea that on the face of it is just BAD. The idea seemed to be that if you throw enough money at a movie and hire enough big names, then a good story and good writing aren't necessary. Just turn the big crank, and out comes the product. It's just not worth watching.

I was flipping through the channels the other night with the volume down when I skipped past what appeared to be a documentary on Nepal or Tibet. I flipped back to see a beautifully photographed religious procession of oriental monks of some sort who were singing as they marched. Curious, I turned up the volume, and heard - to my disbelief - what appeared to be the outtakes from a recording session by the 'Mamas and the Papas' on a bad day, being sung by these monks. The combined sight & sound was unbelievable. Unable to avert my eyes, I watched, fascinated, in the same way one watches a train wreck.

This was "Lost Horizon", a mid 70's stinker that deserves a place among the top flops of all time, and could replace 'Plan Nine from Outer Space' as the worst movie ever made. It stars Peter Finch [sic!], John Gielgud (must have been desperate for work at the time), George Kennedy, Sally Kellerman, Liv Ullman , Michael York and Charles Boyer (his last - understandably - film). It is a MUSICAL based on the James Hilton novel about a band of westerners who discover the idyllic land of Shangri-La in the Himalayan mountains. Boyer plays the aged monk who founded the place; his makeup looks like wood putty applied with a trowel.

The costumes are by the people who just missed getting the contract for "Sgt. Pepper". The dialogue is like 'Brigadoon' meets 'The King and I' by way of 'Hair'. The big question is how they held back their laughter at the final screening.

The real stunner, however, is the musical score. I did not catch Burt Bachrach's name in the credits, and I can understand why he would want to be anonymous, but he is the perpetrator. These tunes are as easily remembered as the index to a software manual, and the lyrics sound like an unimaginable cross between Timothy Leary and Eleanor Roosevelt (with Leary straight and Eleanor strung out).

This film is SO bad it is worth seeing. Only then can you believe it. As Newsweek said at the time: "It cannot be enjoyed even as camp."

Everything you've heard about this movie is true, except the part about its awfulness being "enjoyable." To paraphrase Ghost World, "it's so bad it's gone past good and back to being bad." The movie begins promisingly enough, after a mundane folk ballad and long credits sequence, with a scene of intense conflict as a diplomatic crew attempts to flee a war torn country. Enjoy this scene while it lasts because it is the only genuine conflict you will see in this film. The pilot crash lands in a place called Shangri La, which despite being totally cut off from the outside world is well-maintained and full of food and all the worst of hippie New Age fashion. All of the characters, except one – Michael York – seem to enjoy living in Shangri La, and no source of menace or tension appears in the plot to dissuade them. Although this is a musical, the first non-integrated number appears about 50 minutes in. And it's a lousy rehash of Joni Mitchell's "The Circle Game." The musical staging appears to be that a character states a thought, and then a song begins that reaffirms the thought in the most glaringly obvious manner ("Am I in Shangri La, or is Shangri La in me?" "Different people have different points of view." You don't say). The staging of the numbers is very similar to The King and I; although it only serves to remind you that you should be watching that instead. As the characters decide either to stay in Shangri La, or to leave for no apparent reason (since the script has no villains or conflict), we are lead to a non conclusion that resolves nothing and says nothing. I suppose this was sold as some kind of Age of Aquarius, anti Vietnam, "Imagine no countries," type of deal, but it just comes off as a lame hippie high school production. I could literally have written better songs and staged better dances, and I have no rhythm or musical talent.

A huge cast gathered for this remake which sadly was a box office failure notwithstanding a great sound track. I can't say it was riveting entertainment, nor a cure for insomnia. Nevertheless I enjoyed the film - it provided the escape I was after one afternoon.

A good look for those of us looking for the ideal life, albeit a fantasy. Expect some corny moments, few thrills, and an occasional laugh.

After hearing about it's wonderful awfulness for years, I finally was able to see Ross Hunter's Lost Horizon on HDTV. Ouch! Everything I had heard proved to be true; the songs were dreadful, the acting fourth rate, the casting ridiculous and on and on and on. The only saving grace for me (especially in HD) was the beautiful photography of Bruce Surtees. Otherwise, disaster.

One thing that disturbs me about this film is that it is often lumped together with the O'Toole/Clark Goodbye,Mr.Chips and Star as the three films that drove the nail into the coffin of the once popular musical film genre. Star, though overlong and somewhat clunky, has a certain charm and some wonderful music, and Goodbye,Mr. Chips, to me,is quite wonderful, working on every level. (I think Chips got crucified mainly because it just happened to be an old fashioned musical in a time that was thriving on being "Mod.") Lost Horizon, on the other hand, had no redeeming features(except for Surtees) and was just terrible.

Producer Ross Hunter gets the blame for this dreadful mess, but lest we forget, he was also the guiding force for the wonderfully entertaining Throughly Modern Millie. He should have quit when he was ahead!

I won't change anyone's minds with this post. A lot of people who are fans of musicals- especially classics like "Singin in the Rain" and "My Fair Lady"- disdain this musical version of "Lost Horizon" because it is an anti-musical. Unlike Arthur Freed, who produced (and co-wrote the songs for) many classic musicals at MGM, producer Ross Hunter hired mostly non-singers and non-dancers to sing and dance. First mistake. Then he gave the actors a script that was a watered-down version of the original. Second mistake. Then he hired a highly-competent British director, but one who had never directed a musical before, to helm it. Third mistake. And so on and so on. Yet the passion displayed by posters on the message boards here suggests that not everyone is put off by the shortcomings of this wretched big-budget movie that plays more like a TV musical. Too bad you supporters weren't around when it first hit the big screen. You might have saved LH from becoming what one critic called "Lost Investments".

Even if you do like this film, you must admit that there had to be some validity to the criticism. Burt Bacharach and Hal David, who respectively wrote the music and lyrics for this epic, never worked together again, even after years of success. The question is- who talked who into taking the money to write songs like "Question Me An Answer"? I'm guessing that is what the post-release estrangement was all about.

Why don't you LH fans see a real musical from the classic period of the 30s to the 50s, when they were made by pros who knew how to "put on a show"? Check out "On the Town", or any of the Astaire-Rogers musicals. That way, even if seeing them doesn't change your opinion about one of the only disaster films of the 70s not produced by Irwin Allen, you'll at least understand why this "forgotten" film holds up so badly when placed along side one of the real classics mentioned above.

While the songs and dance numbers, in general, aren't as strong as many would have them be, the film's storyline and message are still there and ring out loudly above the simple 70s-style musical numbers.

Keeping in mind that this film was made after the Hollywood Musical had nearly died out (with few exceptions being rock musicals), the audiences that went to see it new didn't appreciate the fact that it was a brave attempt at something that hadn't been done to date. Audiences that see it today will tend to judge it against the films and musicals of today and, perhaps, the huge all-star casts of musicals gone past. But to do that to this film, or any for that matter, is an injustice to the film itself.

There are some good musical moments in the film. The first is that of Bobby Van. Mr. Van took his role of Harry Lovett just after closing a 2 year Tony nominated (for best actor) run of the Broadway revival, "No, No, Nanette." He is a song-and-dance-man from way back and, honestly, the only one in the cast that was truly talented and experienced for musicals. He never misses a step in his "Question Me An Answer" and rightly so ... he was totally at home as Harry. Other pleasant numbers are done by Olivia Hussey when she welcomes the new visitors and while the lyrics are weak, James Shigeta shows his strong voice in the "Family" song, as well as a nicely done staging of the full piece.

View the film for what it is ... a fantasy about a place where you never grow old, hidden in the ice and snow covered mountains of Tibet, found by a group of unsuspecting modern-day people wrapped up in the strife of any modern culture. Take this and compare it to reality and you get a film that falls short of a goal. But ... take this film for the message of love and peace and tranquility and brotherly love and you get a warm and refreshing message and a positive one at that.

To some this film may seem corny to others a welcomed release from the hectic pace of reality. To the first, try to not judge and just enjoy the message. To the second, you have discovered the secret of Shangri-La!

I watched this movie some years ago, and it's still hard to get some of the songs out of my head. "The World is a Circle" and "The Things I Will Not Miss" are two of the strongest of the musical numbers supplied by Bacharach/David, and both have choruses that will stick with you like flypaper. Unfortunately both these and the other songs are victims of very poor choreography, as pointed out by many of the other people here who have commented on the movie. Especially the Sally Kellerman song by the pond, towards the end of the movie, will make you cringe and wish she would just slip on a rock and fall in instead of moving her hips about like that. One of the all time masters of choreography, Hermes Pan (Pal Joey, My Fair Lady, Top Hat), seems to be at a total loss as what to do with the music he has been provided. It must have been way too hip and pop music-like for him at the time to fully understand and appreciate it, as this was quite late in his career and he was an old chap at the time. Most of his best movie musical efforts were made during the 30s up to the 50s. Bear in mind that most of the actors also have no or little previous musical experience (Liv Ullmann was even dubbed in the movie), and one can understand why the numbers just fall flat. Just to see the Bergman queen of angst do a Julie Andrews impression, as a happy Von Trapp dancing (or at least swing her arms) around the mountainside, is reason enough alone to check out this movie (in fact, Ullmann refuses to talk about this movie when doing interviews nowadays).

That said, this movie ain't half bad. It starts of as a promising drama about people on the run from a war ridden China, who crash land in a picturesque, mountainside utopia where time stands still. In fact, before you hear a single song almost a third of the movie has already been played out. After that the producers tried to stuff in as much music as possible, to justify the label 'musical'. A real cult classic that helped sink the musical genre. Still, there's something about it that holds your interest to the very end. For a serious interpretation of the story, watch the older Capra version instead, but if like a bit of creamy fluff on your pudding, this may very well be your dish. 'Everything depends on where your are in this circle without a beginning... lalalala'

The musical remake of "Lost Horizon" is truly one of the worst films ever made. What makes it so exceptionally awful is that so much genuine talent was assembled to create this Stinker. Take away the music and you have a servicable Technicolor remake of a moody classic. Yes, there's lots of dopey dialogue and some silliness like polar bears in the Himalayas. But it's pretty to look at and Peter Finch is a commanding presence. But Lo! Now cometh a collection of Bacharach-David tunes so hopelessly out of place that every song causes an audience reaction reminiscent of the play-goers in "Springtime for Hitler." It hurts to watch. And hurts worse to listen. The Kellerman-Kennedy duet will make your skin break out. And that goofy "Living Together" number is the only thing keeping "The World is a Circle" from being the most painful five minutes any film watcher could ever sustain. Films such as "Plan Nine from Outer Space" are generally regarded as the industry's worst. But considering the Academy Award talent and big-studio budget behind "Lost Horizon" it stands (more probably stoops) as two of the most horrific hours ever birthed by Hollywood.

I watched this film when I was a young girl in Taipei, Taiwan. I loved the film! From the wonderful cast, to the scenery and the musical scores! It has stuck with me throughout the years as being one of my favorites. My sister and I had the sound track and played it all the time during our teenage years. If I had it today, I would still play it.

To remake "Lost Horizon", as a musical, the need for a Rodgers & Hammerstein or Lerner & Lowe type musical composition was needed. Burt Bacharach and Hal David were the wrong choice. Having said that, my favorite thing about "Lost Horizon", is its score. It's just that the score doesn't fit the piece. The cast, is made-up of mostly non-musical talents (Ullman, Finch and Hussey, were all dubbed, and still don't sound all that great).

Frankly, the novella, on which this, and the earlier non-musical film versions were based, is mediocre, at best. While the possibilities for a truly good, cinematic musical version exist, they are not realized here. The film succeeds at being a good, rainy-day vehicle, to pass the time. Otherwise, you are better off, buying the CD of its soundtrack. Only recommended as a curiosity piece, due to the film's awful reputation. I've seen much better; but I've seen MUCH worse.

LOST HORIZON is the dreadful 1973 remake of the 1937 film classic about five passengers on a snowy journey on a plane that crashes in an exotic fantasy land where the weather is always beautiful and no one ever grows old. This idea probably looked a lot better on paper than the finished product, but it is a definite curio. It features static direction by Charles Jarrot and some really awful Burt Bacherach/Hal David songs like "The World is a Circle", "Share the Joy", "The Things I Will Not Miss", and "Reflections". The obviously embarrassed all-star cast includes Peter Finch, Liv Ullmann, Michael York, Olivia Hussey, George Kennedy. Sally Kellerman, James Shigeta, Bobby Van,John Gielgud, and even Charles Boyer. I have never seen a musical put together with more non-singers and non-dancers in the cast in my life...what were these people thinking?

I can imagine what happened for this film to come into being: a bunch of studio guys are sitting around, drinking gin-and-tonic, maybe a joint, and one of them comes up with the idea that it would be great if they could find a film that would bridge the generation gap, which at that time was about as far apart as Archie Bunker and Mick Jagger. Something that both college-age rebels and their parents would find equally interesting-- for different reasons, perhaps, but still, a ticket is a ticket. What interested hippies? Asia, philosophy, pacifism, and wild sets and costumes. What interested their parents? Musicals, eye candy, a feel-good script, and nostalgia. Very well, then, "Lost Horizon", the old classic, as a musical, in color. Can't miss, right? It was a bomb. Lost Horizon, by James Hilton, is perhaps less than a classic, but not a bad novel. In broad terms, he sketches out a utopian society in Shangri-la, "The Valley of the Blue Moon", near Tibet, inhabited by peacefully contented villagers who serve an abbey of <i>very</i> long-lived monks. Intruding into paradise is a Gilligan's Island-like planeful of outsiders (a veteran of WWI, a missionary, etc.) each with their own spin on the situation -- what plot there is concerns the reaction of each of them to being presented with a choice to live in paradise, or try to return to the tumult of the Twentieth Century. Taken on its own terms, it's gentle, pop-lit fluff, presenting Hilton's own conservative British views in "Oriental" dress, as exotic and as familiar as a fortune cookie. As captive honored guests of the monks, the castaways are forbidden to leave the valley, but never pressed into work or prayer (not that the monks do too much of that themselves), treated royally, and given simple, yet luxurious accomodations --who'd want to escape? In this Middle American Heaven-on-Earth, the monks are both cultured and wise, the climate is warm, the food is plentiful and tasty, the villagers are picturesque nonentities and nothing ever changes. The nuns are chaste, but encouraged to look pretty, and even flirt a bit ( the reason given is one of the most hilariously inaccurate explanations of Tantric Sex I've ever read). Even their religion is nonthreatening: revealed as a best-of-both worlds blend of Christianity and Buddhism, there's little to offend any but the staunchest fundamentalist or the oddballs out there who actually knew something about Tibet (which in the early Thirties was a very small number).

As a Capra film focussing on the adventure/character interplay angles it was enchanting; and perhaps Steven Spielburg could have made it fly, if he'd been around. As an early-Seventies Hollywood product, the adventure was over too quickly, and the updated roster of characters too bland, to make much of an impression. Deprived of the sketchy, suggestive qualities of classic B&W, the monastery resembles a de luxe beauty spa in white and pale blue, and while at least some of the monks' robes tried for historical accuracy, most of the rest of the inmates looked as if on their way to a morning massage and fango bath, with a couple of holes of golf in the afternoon. Maybe Stephan Sondheim could have restored some grit to the story, playing up the very real conflict inside each character's reaction; just five years afterwards, Brian Eno would have captured the tranquil atmosphere to a T; instead, Bert Bacherach and Hal David were given the job of writing the songs, which marry Muzak-like melodies with some of the clunkiest New Agey lyrics ever penned. Quite naturally for the time, every song calls for a dance number, which range from the merely forgettable to the completely boring, and so is the script, which has not one line worth quoting.

Tie-ins with this movie were legion -- there were everything from cookbooks to posters planned to promote this film, and such was the hype that I actually went out and bought the sountrack album. Just about the only thing good I can say about it is that it made enough of an impression on me to write this review completely from memory nearly thirty years after -- the next month I read Aldous Huxley, bought a copy of the Bardo Thadol, and hence learned about real Tibetan culture. Moan.

This latest version of "Lost Horizon", a musical remake of the 30's fantasy about a group of people who find Shangri-La after their plane crashes, was a big, fat, juicy, and notorious flop when originally released in 1973, and has often been cited in numerous articles and books about Hollywood's celluloid mistakes. (It's said that, at the time, Hollywood's nickname for it was "Lost Investments".) Having finally seen it a few years back, thanks to the cable channel AMC (this was before they started adding commercials), I have to admit - and I am a huge, HUGE fan of bad movies! - it's not as bad as the lore would have it. Oh, sure, it's overlong and overproduced (typical of Ross Hunter productions) and some of the Burt Bacharach-Hal David songs are indeed cringe-worthy ("Living Together, Growing Together" and "The World Is A Circle", at least as they are presented here; perhaps with a different arrangement and better direction and choreography they could work) and the acting often a bit overbaked, but there ARE some positive qualities to be found: some of the cast display admirable - albeit definitely untrained - singing voices, in particular Liv Ullmann and Olivia Hussey (Sally Kellerman's is actually interesting); the cinematography and costumes are spectacular (again, typical of Ross Hunter productions); some of the music is actually pretty decent, though it sure ain't Bacharach & David's finest hour by any stretch of the imagination: while their undeniable stamp is in every note, the lyrics have that unmistakable feeling of treacly, heavy-handed 70's "self-help" running throughout. The whole film definitely belongs in that "what might have been" category: another cast, another score, another director and producer, and it may have found the success that all involved here expected. Overall, what works, works adequately, and what doesn't, doesn't at all. Still, it's worth taking a look at, though I doubt any but serious musical devotees will bother. It is, unfortunately, apparently unavailable on VHS or DVD (though it seems a Laserdisc was released in 1992); when and if it's released on DVD, it'll be interesting to see if any of the cut musical numbers and scenes will be reinstated, and presented in widescreen (AMC's showings are strictly pan-and-scan: whole musical scenes have nothing in the middle while actors remain securely to the sides - NOT a plus!). Check it out, if you get the chance.

Utterly devoid of any saving grace, it might be watchable if one had just the right mix of drugs or alcohol to appreciate the (very unintentional) humor.

A gigantic waste of several stellar talents, when I first saw it in the theater, most of us were laughing too hard to really hear the music, which (I realize after seeing it on TV) was truly a blessing. Words fail me in describing the true horror of this THING that virtually killed the musical as an art form. Several friends tried getting really stoned before watching it, but even that didn't work. One of them held a symbolic burning of the video tape and invited her friends.

The embarrassing poverty of the music and dance was exceeded only by the inappropriateness of both of them, both in substance and timing. I can only sympathize with those that were desperate to leave this saccharine Hell

In some yin-and-yang karmic balance, I can only conclude that the brilliance of Peter Finch in NETWORK simply had to be somehow offset by featuring him in the most unspeakably bad and embarrassing role of anyone's career. It was worth the trade, artistically, but surely we need some sort of legislation whereby the tiny minority of people who weren't grossly horrified by this flash-frozen turkey could somehow be forcibly sterilized. PLEASE !! For the sake of our gene pool..

This version of "The Lost Horizon" is actually not a bad film at all. I think the problem is people like to pick on musicals, especially those made in the 70s. I saw the film upon its original release in 1973 (I was ten) and really enjoyed it, the music especially. (Burt Bacharach has always been a favorite.) The story is fun, the acting is good, and technically it's excellent. Sure, there are one or two rather silly dance numbers, but hey, you can't win 'em all. I have this film on video and watch it every so often...and I enjoy it each and every time!

..but unfortunately no one thought about having Van killed in order to save this doomed production. The only positive thing about him in the film is his nice singing voice...too bad the songs are mostly insipid and sappy. Why did I hate Van so much? Well, throughout the film he seemed like he was doing a third-rate Soupy Sales imitation--with lots of mugging, bad jokes and way too much energy spent trying to make everyone laugh. The worst of these moments was when he was "teaching" the class--these kids laughed at EVERYTHING he did. Heck, Van could have read the phone book or showed them autopsy photos and they probably would have laughed! Now Van was not the only bad casting decision in the film--he was just the most obvious. Of course, having John Gielgud (a lovely actor) play an Asian was ridiculous as well as having Michael York play Peter Finch's brother!! The bottom line is that because of these insane casting choices, the film was doomed from the start....and the worst of them was the god-awful Bobby Van. Now in real life, he might have been a lovely person and it's sad that in real life he died so young, but with the material they gave him here I just wanted to rip out his tongue to get him to be quiet.

Now I also mentioned the songs--egad, those terrible songs!! The original LOST HORIZON by Frank Capra was a subtle delight throughout--and not a single song and dance number in the film. So why did they decide to add a bazillion songs that did nothing to help the film? They only served to make it seem like a gooey mess--like the original DOCTOR DOOLITTLE combined with LOST HORIZON. The end result is a sickly sweet children's movie--not one that can be enjoyed by anyone over 8.

Now if you can remove these problems, you have the basis of a decent film. After all, the plot is lovely and is still hidden beneath all the goo. Peter Finch is particularly good (though certainly not the equal of Ronald Colman in the original). But, considering that the original was a near-perfect classic, why bother with this sticky confection. Who wants to wade through the treacle?!

By the way, this film was included in "The 50 Worst Films" book by Harry Medved. While I, too, disliked the film, it wasn't bad enough to merit inclusion in the book. I think it was included mostly because it was such a huge box office failure and because it was released just a few years before the book appeared. An excellent book--just not one of the best selections to the "hallowed hall" of dreck.

Much better than it is generally given credit for, this version of "Lost Horizon" not only had great music and beautiful scenery, but also some stunning mountain photography. A special edition laser disc was released some years ago which added more than 30 minutes of previously deleted material, extra music, and lots of bonus material. So why isn't this on DVD?! Hard to figure the studios out sometimes. Certainly the roles could have been given to people who could sing better than Peter Finch, Liv Ullman, George Kennedy and Sally Kellerman, but what do you want in a movie, good acting or melodious pipes? Song and dance man Bobby Van is great fun, Michael York is a suitably tragic villain, and seeing Sir John Gielgud decked out as Chang may sound silly but actually works very well on screen. Trust me, you need to check this movie out - if you can find it!

This version of Lost Horizon pretty much finished the job Rex Harrison's Doctor Doolittle began: that of burying the Movie Musical for years. But the question is, why? What exactly went wrong with this production? Well, the answer is... a lot.

Let's put it in context. We're dealing with the cynical Nixon years and Watergate and Vietnam are both dragging. Here's a film with a message about how terrible life is, and how the planet is falling apart, save for one small place that no one can reach... Shangri-La. That's probably not a message anyone wanted to hear at that moment.

OK. If the theme doesn't put you off, the stars probably would. Granted, casting non-singers in a musical and having them dubbed is a long standing Hollywood tradition. But who thought to have George Kennedy and Peter Finch as "singers?" Burt Bacharach's score is actually pretty good (though it's clearly not his best work, Bacharach on a bad day is still worthy of a listen), and the film has some cute moments (mostly provided by the children of this paradise along with Bobby Van who mugs his way through the bulk of his material), but they are outnumbered by the stilted ones... Sir John Gielgud makes the worst on-screen Asian since Mickey Rooney in "Breakfast At Tiffany's!" On the better side, there is Sally Kellerman, who really deserves a lot of credit for her efforts to make this palatable, even in trying to sing a romantic duet with Kennedy!

I'm not familiar with the background of how this film got made, but it seems like people cut deals, signed on for the project, and then, as they began making the film, they discovered it wasn't working. But, rather than go back, rewrite and correct the problems and re-shoot, they tried to force fit the jigsaw pieces together, producing the final result which was destined to fail.

I find this film a fascinating curio, but I can see where others would dismiss it as trash. However, it's not a complete waste, and that's where I think some people are too harsh. You can view it as camp, as comedy or as commentary on life in the post Ecology 1970s, a theme that has become timely again with the resurgence of caring for the environment and Global atmospheric issues.

It's funny that this film came out in the midst of the Irwin Allen "Disaster" film era with their all-star casts... The Posideon Adventure, The Towering Inferno... In its way, Lost Horizon fits right in!