Reviews

This is the first episode of this show I have seen.

I don't know if this is the norm for X-Files but, in this day of quick and short shots linked together to form action like in music videos, there are numerous extended takes which are simply superb! To see Gillian try to get some information to save the agent out of time aboard the Queen Anne, going from floor to floor to the parking garage without a cut in the cinematography is amazing! Also great is the music soundtrack of Benny Goodman-like swing music, appropriate to 1939 when some of this program was set! I have no idea why I missed seeing this series, but I have concluded that I need to see more.

I must admit here and now that I have not seen this film. However, in my research of such B-Westerns, I found that this film was originally shot in 3-D. That has not been mentioned anywhere.

Perhaps the IMDb crew can investigate and make the appropriate notation wherever it is that such notations are made.

I certainly would like to see this film, as it appears to have an interesting cast... John Payne, Dan Duryea, and Lizabeth Scott usually do good work, and the other reviews have generally been positive.

From the reviews, this could perhaps be one of the best 3-D movies made during the 3-D movie craze in the early 1950's... Hondo being another one that could be better.

There have been some write-ups as to why Anthony Mann quit the film, either as a result of not getting along with James Stewart or his criticizing Audie Murphy on his acting ability. Personally, I think it might be the latter because I can't fathom anybdy in Hollywood not getting along with James Stewart! But, one thing is certain... the Mann trademark locations had already been determined before Mr. Mann left. Colorado never looked better! And the wide screen format just enhances this! I like films with trains. Here we see an extended train sequence through that beautiful scenery, including a fairly spectacular crash with the water tower.

It's been written in a couple places here that the cast was somewhat weak. While I do agree that Jack Elam only had a bit to do, we've still got James Stewart, Audie Murphy, Dan Duryea (great over-acting stint!), Elaine Stewart, Dianne Foster, Brandon De Wilde, Jay C. Flippen, Robert Wilke (looking like an older Richard Widmark), Hugh Beaumont, Paul Fix, and a nice scene with Olive Carey. That's a pretty good bunch for TV Director James Neilson to put through their paces.

The Cinematography gets a 10. The rest gets a solid 9. Highly recommended!

A previous commentator wrote: "I was blown away by the beauty of the actress playing the Indian maiden in this film. From the first moment you see her on screen she looks like you could reach out and touch her, she is so realistic. The D.W. Griffith Years of Discovery liner notes say she was "unknown." Well, that is a crying shame! How could someone not document who she was? She was stunning, and completely believable. If anyone knows who she was, please post it here for posterity."

I have not seen the film. However, to possibly solve the mystery... it could have been Ruth Hart, as she was about 16 years old when the film was made. If it was not Ruth Hart, then I agree that it is a crying shame. Griffith usually included credits for the main actors, and it's hard to believe that the Indian maiden actress would go uncredited.

It is films like this that should be shown on TCM or FMC.

Yes the film has faults... plenty of them.

Bo Derek is the most beautiful Jane, but the worst actress of those who have played the role.

Richard Harris hams it up as usual.

The film was based around Jane and the nudity. Did you expect anything else from John & Bo Derek? BUT: Miles O'Keeffe made a spectacular Tarzan, probably second or third of all the actors; Johnny Weissmuller and possibly Gordon Scott were better. Bo is gorgeous. The jungle scenery was some of the best ever for a Tarzan picture, including the escarpment! The story up to when Jane encounters Tarzan rang true (mostly) with the books. The cinematography is excellent.

The film is a valid result of what you would get if the sexual aspects of the story were over-emphasized. Taken in that regard, it's pretty well done.

Robert Morgan's comments about no nudity are true only because he saw the censored version which did get a PG rating. The original version has a fair amount of nudity at the proper time. I'm certain he saw this on some cable channel which prohibits nudity. I am opposed to such censorship. If TV channels are going to show a film at all, they need to show the entire film!

Excellent film, and a bit shocking for its time.

The two lead actresses (Anne Heywood and Sandy Dennis) were very believable, and Kier Dullea gives his usual fine performance. It's been many years since I saw this, so it's hard to be more specific.

I am also interested in seeing this film released on video/DVD.

I have no great knowledge of the Fantastic 4 as they appeared in the comics as that was the time I was getting started in my career and I was too busy. So the movie has to stand on its own. I was half-expecting FX similar to the Hulk, but this was much better! Time was taken in this somewhat shorter film to flesh out the characters to some degree. I did compare Doom to Octavius, of Spiderman, and thought that Doom was slightly more believable. The cast was largely unknown to me, which ended up being a plus. Great blend of drama, comedy, and action!

If this film took any liberties from the comics, then the first Batman must also be zapped mightily for killing off the Joker, as should Superman for skipping Superboy altogether.

Not perfect, but very entertaining! 9 out of 10 for me.

It might be a bit unusual for an American to comment on a Filipino movie, but this one is a lot better than the usual shoot-em-up or bad-special-effects films that are overly done by film makers in the Philippines. The first thing I noted about Naglalayag is the excellent cinematography. Next was the terrific casting of Nora Aunor in the lead role. And, Yul Servo is excellent as her youthful and positive thinking lover! The story was well handled and, except for a couple of points, was realistically played out by the cast. Aleck Bovick played the young girl who Yul Servo's character was supposed to love, tho her actions unknowingly played into the direction the story took.

Locales were good.

Naglalayag took it's time in giving us the characters' backgrounds, but did not provide the needed resolution to one of the two main problems created by the story. Thus, I can only give it a solid 8 out of 10, but I do recommend it. I saw it with English captioning.

There are those few movies that make you sit back and just be amazed at the artistic excellence you've just seen. Citizen Kane, Casablanca, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Star Wars, The Godfather, Ben Hur, and The Lord of the Rings trilogy are a few of these. Somewhere In Time is not a blockbuster actioner, but is perhaps the finest fantasy love story ever made.

The cast is perfect. Christopher Reeve is extremely believable. Jane Seymour is gorgeous as the young actress, as is Teresa Wright as her older self. Christopher Plummer is great as Elise McKenna's manager, and Bill Erwin affords himself fine as Arthur. The setting, music, story, and acting are all top notch! We are slowly drawn (and it's just great to take one's time to get involved) into this mysterious romance as the paradox pair of the watch and the time travel gets our hero to "come back to me."

Simply Superb! If you are one of the very few who has not seen this movie, please get it and watch it one time. I've seen it at least 10 times and enjoy it as much each time.

This presentation, which I saw on HBO many years ago, had so much more energy than the film. Richard Thomas proves here that he can handle comedy, and Bess Armstrong is a very fine comedy actress! There's plenty of witty humor accented by some physical slapstick that kept me laughing virtually the whole time.

The supporting cast is great, led by Barbara Barrie.

In the Redford/Fonda version, the actors seemed to just go through the lines without giving them much meaning. Neither Redford or Fonda seemed to be able to handle comedy as it should be done.

This version is probably very hard to find, but if you do, I heartily recommend it!

A solid 10, while the Redford/Fonda film gets a 6.