Phonearl Good start, but then it gets ruined

Salubfoto It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

Tayloriona Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Hayden Kane There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

malcolmgsw Yes this film is quite sensitive towards disabled people as they were in 1971.However the film cannot resist the maudlin clichés which come with the territory.Mystery illnesses,strict matron and unsympathetic vicar.The ending barely avoids bathos.I also think that the two leads just don't seem to be a likely couple.Bernard Lee seems very merry in his bit part.

Honda Seller I saw this movie on the recommendation of an older friend. They had watched it when it came out way back. I just watched it.I think it is a beautiful love story. A simple kind of love but a real love. Not fraught with obligation or pretense like other relationships of the time. When two souls are drawn to each other undeniably. I think IMDb should consider adjusting their requirement of ten lines. A lot can be said with few words.The beginning was a bit hard to watch but once the two main characters meet up, it was lovely to watch.The main actors both did a good job.I recommend watching this movie. It's unique.

Lee Eisenberg Around the same time that Malcolm McDowell became famous as Alex in "A Clockwork Orange", he also starred in "The Raging Moon" (called "Long Ago Tomorrow" in the United States). He plays Bruce Pritchard, a football player - that's soccer player to us Americans - whose legs give out and he has to live in a home for invalids. Here he meets Jill Matthews (Nanette Newman), and his relationship with her prompts him to start rebelling against the institutions mores. But there's no sugary ending here.I would say that McDowell's role here bears some similarities to Alex in "ACO", but is obviously a totally different kind of person. Neither character really fits in with society, and they both end up confined. Of course, Alex lives a life of ultra-violence, while Bruce is a perfectly calm and reasonable individual.Maybe I'm the only person who even thinks this. I thought that they did a very well job with the movie. It paints not so bleak a portrait of it's town as "Kes" does, but this still doesn't look like a very pleasant setting. Certainly the convalescence home is the less desirable of the two settings within the movie. For me, the setting took precedence over Bruce and Jill's relationship. I recommend this film.PS: was co-star Bernard Lee the same guy who played M in the James Bond movies?

revWayne I accidentally saw this in 1981, just flipping channels. It is a powerful story with excellent acting by Malcolm McDowell, and was ahead of its time on issues of disability. It starts with an injury to a young soccer player (McDowell) and then proceeds to show various stages in his mental adjustment to his permanent condition, the relationships he forms, and moves toward a powerful look at meaning and purpose in life beyond the difficulties we face, without minimizing those difficulties. It is much more than an "overcoming injury" story, of which there are many. It is drama at its best. I recommend it especially for those who work with persons with disabilities, but beyond that to anyone who enjoys great drama.