ReaderKenka Let's be realistic.

Protraph Lack of good storyline.

Jenna Walter The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

Staci Frederick Blistering performances.

fwdixon A tedious exercise in cinematic boredom featuring Joseph Cotten and George Sanders. Unusual in that it had no protagonist - Cotten is an insanely greedy arms merchant and Sanders is a self-righteous, bible-thumping madman. The film plods along interminably with brief patches of action separating the endless preachy talk, talk, talk. Ultimately I found myself hoping for both of them to die along with the sappy couple of Debra Paget and Don Dubbins, just to bring this train wreck of a film to an end. There is no earthly (or lunar) reason to watch this dreadful film.

wes-connors In 1868, following the War Between the States, American inventor Joseph Cotten (as Victor Barbicane) announces his explosive "Power X" will be tested as he sends a manned rocket-ship to Earth's Moon. Joining Mr. Cotten on the trip is skeptical, but Bible-believing George Sanders (as Stuyvesant Nicholl). Stowing away is Mr. Sanders' pretty daughter Debra Paget (as Virginia). She provides a romantic interest for the fourth traveler, Cotten's young assistant Don Dubbins (as Ben Sharpe). Originally an exciting novel by Jules Verne, "From the Earth to the Moon" was started at the disintegrating RKO studio and ended up released by Warner Bros. Perhaps unsure about the ultimate fate of the project, everyone seems a little bored - and it's contagious.**** From the Earth to the Moon (11/26/58) Byron Haskin ~ Joseph Cotten, George Sanders, Debra Paget, Don Dubbins

LJ27 Normally, I try to find some good in every film I watch. In the case of FROM THE EARTH TO THE MOON, I would have to say the cinematography and lighting were very nice and I liked some of the music score. However, when you make a movie called FROM THE EARTH TO THE MOON, it's not unreasonable for audiences to expect to get at least what is promised in the title.*SPOILER ALERT*Now, I have read about this movie for about the last 40 years of my life and I saw it today. Not only is this movie as bad as they say it is, it's worse. I had read that this film was shot in Mexico and someone said it was shot at a location in Mexico formed from fairly recent volcanic activity. They said that scenes on the moon in this movie were shot there. Well, the location actually appears to have been used for scenes on Earth - not the moon and also, here's the part that makes this whole movie feel like you completely wasted your time watching it - you NEVER see anyone land on the moon. Sure, I guess it happens as viewed by someone else but it never seems to happen for me. Adding insult to injury, this climax (or lack thereof) is following 90 minutes of boring talk. The "special" effects are so bad as to defy belief. I'd read that you could see the bar holding up the spaceship in flight or that it flies against a blue sky while from the inside of the ship, space looks black. I suppose they ran out of money because it looks like it began as a fairly well-budgeted movie but perhaps the budget got cut. Regardless of the reason for it, the special effects, except for Lee Zavitz's full-scale explosions and other effects are so bad they wouldn't do in an Ed Wood movie. Sadly, the complaints lodged against this movie are all true.One of the stories is that this was the last movie made by RKO. The print I saw shows a Warner Brothers logo on front while there is an RKO emblem at the end of the movie. As early as 1984, this movie was released by VCI on videotape. Obviously, even Warner Brothers saw no reason to hang on to this. I watched it out of curiosity but I finally concluded I should have listened to the warnings I'd read in books telling me to avoid this boring trash like the plague. I think it's now in public domain, assuming anyone would ever care to seek out this film that is so dull and lacking of anything that might make it worth watching. Just remember if you are curious about this movie that it's not as bad as they say it is - It's worse!

aimless-46 This 1959 movie adaptation of Jules Verne's "From the Earth to the Moon" is the graveyard of declining actors. Joseph Cotton and George Sanders were at the end of fairly successful film careers and about to be relegated to guest appearances on a variety of television shows; the most notable being Sander's Mr. Freeze on "Batman". Debra Paget was in her late twenties; she had lost her glow and was used up by Hollywood standards. The change to an unflattering "strawberry" blonde look exacerbated the problem as few actresses have ever been less suited to a light hair color. On the plus side, the movie itself is a fairly accurate adaptation of Verne's story; at least the book's illustrations appear to have been used as models for the rocket and the cannon. Verne's 19th century take on space travel turned out to be more accurate than most of the speculation during the first half of the 20th century. The adaptation's biggest problem was altering Verne's story by inserting a topical theme about the post WWII arms race. In Verne's 1865 novel, the Baltimore Gun Club itself set about building a rocket to go to the Moon. In the adaptation a munitions manufacturer (think "Destination Moon") concocts the scheme to demonstrate his powerful new explosive. With a lot of discussion about science, weapons, and peace the movie dances around the subject extensively yet never makes a coherent point about its position (regarding the nuclear arms race), as if simply inserting the theme is somehow sufficient. The movie is a cross between "Destination Moon" and "Rocketship X-M", combining the former's good science and bad political message with the latter's dismal sets and comical special effects. The acting in all three films is equally sad. The premise has munitions manufacturer Victor Barbicane (Cotton) discovering an explosive (Power X) capable of firing a shell-like projectile to the moon. His plan is opposed for philosophical/religious reasons by Stuyvesant Nicholl (Sanders), another manufacturer. Although these philosophical differences play an important part in the story, they are never convincingly elaborated on, which undermines the basic storyline. President Grant orders Barbicane to abandon the project because it is considered an act of war by other nations. While this is unconvincing it does serve as Barbicane's inspiration to change the project to a manned space flight. Nicholl then agrees to manufacture the ceramic coating needed for re-entry and to accompany Barbicane on a flight to the moon. Paget plays Nicholl's daughter who hides inside the rocket just prior to take-off. "From the Earth to the Moon" is often confused with "First Men in the Moon" which was made five years later. Probably because both are set in the 19th century and both feature a female stowaway (played by Martha Hyer in the later film). "First Men in the Moon" (while not a great film) is superior in virtually every detail to "From the Earth to the Moon". Rather ironically it was adapted from a story by "H.G. Wells", an early science fiction writer often compared to Verne. Movie adaptations of Verne's books were a big thing in the 1950's and early 1960's. Among the good ones were "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" (1954), "Around the World in 80 Days" (1956), "Journey to the Center of the Earth"(1959), "Mysterious Island" (1961), and "Master of the World" (1961). Unfortunately "From the Earth to the Moon" is simply not in the same league as these examples. Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.