Cubussoli Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

CheerupSilver Very Cool!!!

Lidia Draper Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

Dana An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

MonsterVision99 "Pánico en el Transiberiano" its one of the best films I have seen that stars Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing, its on the level of even the best Hammer movies. I found it to be quite interesting that this is my favorite adaptation of "Who Goes There?" while many people prefer "The Thing" movies I think this one's better by a huge margin.Our beloved horror duo certainly elevate the material, but that's not to say that the movie would have been sub par without them, there's enough good elements in the movie itself to make it worthwhile. This is such a fascinating concept, it lends itself for many twists and turns.I really love how weird it got, it touches subjects such as the usual religion vs Science debate, the unknown and it even has some political overtones, and at the same time it features a silly ape-like creature with glowing red eyes attacking people. I wouldn't dare to call this a B movie, given that for many people that's a pejorative term, but lets just say that people who like bizarre monster movies wont have a hard time enjoying this.

Michael Ledo Prof. Sir Alexander Saxton (Christopher Lee) discovers a frozen man-ape in Manchuria which he takes on a train. It thaws and kills passengers. Peter Cushing plays a doctor and Telly Savalas has been billed higher than his role. The science in the film is a joke, even when the film was made. The microscope scenes were funny, but would pique the interest of preteens. I watched this film on a multi-pack and it was not restored. The newer offerings of this film have been restored.Guide: No swearing, sex or nudity.

classicsoncall Well, some writer's imagination was working overtime on this one. The story posits an elaborate theory of an organism or energy form entering a host body two million years ago, which now transfers from host to host when the prior one dies. Once situated, it claims further victims by sucking out their brains through their eyes. Yikes! This must all have been very confusing to Father Pujardov (Alberto de Mendoza) because he thought this was a vampire flick, exclaiming at one point - "Beware the Law of Satan". You really can't blame him though, there was plenty of confusing stuff going on.One of those confusing things was Captain Kojak showing up about an hour into the flick. I know, I know, it was really Captain Kazan, but Telly Savalas was just about ready to begin his run as the lollipop sucking detective of the popular TV series in a short while. He really did look fine decked out in that bright red Cossack costume, no wonder he was such a hit with the ladies.Considering this wasn't a Hammer film, it was a treat seeing Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing team up to solve a problem here instead of being adversaries. For a horror movie, I thought it was a bit surprising that the monster creature was done away with after about forty five minutes, but as I mentioned earlier, the life force kept hopping around to take advantage of whoever came it's way. Which led to a puzzling question - since the monster wanted Professor Saxton (Lee) to set him free inside the body of Pujardov, why wouldn't it have simply taken off earlier when it was atop the train's baggage car after taking it's first victim? Seems like a little plot hole there.What I got the biggest kick out of though was when the professor addressed the assembled passengers aboard the train, warning them all that they should remain situated in groups or pairs so as not to be left alone. So what does he do in the very next scene? - He's wandering around alone investigating things by himself - that just cracked me up. Almost as much as when he explained to Dr. Wells (Cushing) and the Countess (Silvia Tortosa) that his autopsy of the first victim revealed that the man's memory was removed! What!?!? How could he figure that one out? Well, I like to pan these flicks for their pseudo-intellectual babble, but all in all, this wasn't such a bad little horror film. It had an interesting cast and as I say, a lot of pains were taken to fabricate the wild story line. I tell you what though, by the end of the film, it'll make you think twice about booking your next red eye flight.

Andrei Pavlov Good sides Location. The whole story happens on the train. It's peculiar. Remember "Blood" (the video game)? The most thrilling level (my opinion) was on the train that was running through the darkness. Music. It's impressive. Actors. They are grand and gorgeous. All the ladies and gentlemen are hoity-toity from top to toe. Cossacks. To witness this kind of cliché (in costumes and behaviour) is entertaining.Bad sides Cossacks. Yes, they are in a bad one too. They are not just funny but pathetic too. And they are speaking English which makes them unrealistic (couldn't they hire real Russian actors with minimum lines and maximum show-off?). Russian characters here DO look fake. Western audience will not notice it probably.Ugly sides Words. Too much explanation near the ending (by the beast itself). It spoils the enigma of the initial scary moments. Too many words in a horror flick should be avoided. And making speeches about the terror from the outer space is boring. Fake monk. Absolutely unrealistic and loony monk. Instead of battling the beast he kneels before him asking for power, but in the beginning of the movie he acts like a prophet. His way of behaviour and looks are very unorthodox for an orthodox priest (too much make up is used by the actor, by the way), so the director shouldn't have put him in the movie (or at least on the train) at all to keep this feature running in the right direction. In "Exorcist" the priest is credible and perhaps that is why that cinema became a worthy classic. And do you remember the priest in "Prince of Darkness"? He is depicted as a buffoon too. Can't put "a worthy classic" tag on it too.Verdict: being very well polished on the outside (costumes, music, scenery), the cinema is shallow in its impact upon the viewer, mostly due to unrealistic characters. And there is not a single tough screen guy or a memorable lady to rely on or to sympathize with - just cannon fodder.Sorry for this sketchy comment, much is left to be added still.The IMDb rating for this one is OK, - a 5 out of 10 from my side. Thanks for attention.