Hottoceame The Age of Commercialism

Merolliv I really wanted to like this movie. I feel terribly cynical trashing it, and that's why I'm giving it a middling 5. Actually, I'm giving it a 5 because there were some superb performances.

Gutsycurene Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

Candida It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

davidcarniglia When the reviews are more entertaining than the movie, then the movie probably isn't so hot. A Jules Verne adaptation is a good idea, a decent rivalry between the two leads doesn't hurt, and Victorian sci-fi is a rare treat.But it doesn't really 'get off the launchpad' for me. The main problem is the agonizing length. Never has there been a spaceship that survives so many meltdowns. I kept wishing that the meteorite shower would come back and finish them off. The spacecraft itself is pretty cool--as others have noted, the copious woodwork and generally ornate fittings make it seem very 1868. The nostalgia here operates on many levels. We're seeing a sixty-year-old film about mythical events occurring ninety years before that, involving a futuristic premise. Therefore I can easily buy into the drawing-room atmosphere of the spaceship, with its decent 1950s glowing hardware on board. But I can't buy the ever-present crane holding the ship up whenever we have an exterior shot. With the exception of the 'X' cannon demonstration, and Cotten's character meeting a very believable President Grant, most of the preliminary scenes just get in the way. I agree with others that 'Yankee Doodle' dumps its corny tone onto too many scenes. Some of the period details are haphazard too.The guys milling about in some of the public scenes look more like marching bandsmen than soldiers. As Cotten gives a speech to his workers, we see what appears to be a Russian and a French officer in full-dress uniforms among the luminaries standing behind him. The French guy shows up in a later scene too. But, if foreign nations have supposedly cold-shouldered us for developing the 'X' energy source/weapon, why are they sending observers? It's also weird, and tied more closely to the plot, when Cotten wins over his nemesis by pointing out how 'X' will "save millions of lives." But it's stunningly obvious (by 1958) that misuse of nuclear power ('X') has actually put humanity at greater risk.I also don't see that the subplot of some of the experts/investors insisting that the whole thing is a hoax. They saw the crew enter the spaceship and watched it take off; anybody sneaking out at the last minute would have been blown to bits.I really wanted to like From the Earth to the Moon, but it kept sabotaging its mission.

utgard14 After the Civil War, arms inventor Victor Barbicane (Joseph Cotten) creates a super explosive he calls Power X. But he faces public opposition from steel manufacturer Stuyvesant Nicholl (George Sanders), a supporter of the Confederacy who has an irrational hatred of Barbicane. After being forbidden from using his formula by President Ulysses S. Grant, Barbicane turns to building a spaceship that will be shot to the moon by a cannon. And he needs his arch-rival Nicholl's help to do it.I'm perplexed as to why this one is so hated on here. At first I thought maybe it was Mystery Science Theater 3000, which is often to blame when you see an older movie on IMDb with a lot of negative reviews and a lower than deserved score. But it doesn't appear this was featured on that show. Many of the reasons given in the reviews I've read here could fit a dozen other respected sci-fi films from the same era. Complaining that the movie has dated special effects? Really? The only reason I don't rate it higher myself is because it's basically 100 minutes of the rivalry and reluctant partnership between these two men with nothing much in the way of sci-fi spectacle that you expect from a movie based on a Jules Verne novel. But those men are Joseph Cotten and George Sanders, who both give charismatic performances. This wasn't challenging stuff for either actor, and both have certainly done better, but they do very well with what they're given here. Debra Paget (with dyed blonde hair) is largely wasted. Fantastic job by Morris Ankrum in his one scene as President Grant. There isn't much in the way of effects but the little bit there is has the kind of quaint charm to it that I enjoy about period sci-fi films. Like I said, I don't get the fervent hatred of this movie. It's not one of the great sci-fi films from the Golden Age, nor is it the best Verne adaptation brought to the screen, but it's not a terrible film. It's actually quite enjoyable and a good way to pass the time. Love that final corny scene. It's a good corny, in my opinion.

marinaro44 I have seen a lot of bad movies but this one ranks up there (down there?) as unique in its multiple levels of badness. That badness has depth here. Very bad special effects, incredibly bad script, and inane dialog kind of killed it for me.I could forgive the filmmakers as I assume they were working on a low budget and time constraints, so you could guess they just "knocked it out" as fast as possible. I could forgive the lame let's put a hot chick on a spaceship for romantic appeal. I could forgive the pathetic special effects that are on a level of Captain Video. I could forgive the let's get distinguished actors at the end of their careers who are willing to work for small change so as to at least create name prestige.But whoever wrote the script insulted the audience at a level I have rarely ever seen even, in "B" movies. Little of what happens makes sense. There is no continuity, no sense that the characters are real people making intelligent decisions. The actors woodenly read their inane lines with no conviction. And you can't blame them. Cartoons and comic books are more intelligently written. The one redeeming thing I found about this film is that it could be used in filmmaking classes as an example of how not to write a story and script it.

bkoganbing Forgetting that this film version of From The Earth To The Moon is nowhere near the spirit of the original tale Jules Verne was trying to tell, usually his work requires a big budget and a ton of good special effects. This film got neither.Looking at the credits tonight I noted it was an RKO production released by Warner Brothers. My guess is that the film was finished and in the can when RKO went under and was sold to Warner Brothers to distribute. Also the fact that it was produced by Benedict Bogeaus who was a producer of B films of varying quality tells me why it did not get the budget for decent special effects.Bogeaus was not the guy for this kind of film. Take a look at his list of credits. He did several westerns with John Payne, noir films with George Raft and some of them pretty good. He was out of his element doing science fiction.Verne's original novel had a bit of humor in it. But someone at RKO drained every bit of it. They even added a stowaway love interest in Debra Paget who does not make the trip in the book. She's paired opposite Don Dubbins who is scientist Joseph Cotten's assistant in creating the rocket.So instead of humor we get a lot of high falutin' claptrap coming from the mouths of Joseph Cotten and George Sanders the armaments manufacturer who is jealous of Cotten. Sanders especially looked ill at some of the dialog he was required to speak. He came across as a pouty kid and George knew it.I do wonder if Jack Warner looked at this thing before he bought it for Warner Brothers.