Curapedi I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

ChanFamous I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

KnotStronger This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

Kodie Bird True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

fbarthet If this movie is based on Jules Verne (or even simply inspired), well "Ttanic" is an adaptation of Tolstoi's "War and Peace".This is not based on the original book by Le Grand Verne (characters, story, basically everything is different...), this is not even funny. When you look at the very professional cast, you wonder how it was not possible to at least salvage some part of the movie. But, no, they could not even managed to do that."Those Magnificent Men in their Flying Machines" was not a great movie but it looks like "Citizen Kane" compared to that... thing.Truly awful.

richard.fuller1 The transition of these movies is an odd mix to observe. Let's begin with Around The World In 80 Days, decently done. Then Journey to the Center of the Earth, also decently done, and the comedy relief goose is killed. From here, there are other movies, based on H.G. Wells or Jules Verne, and maybe even ERB.Yes, Lionel Jeffries in the '64 Earth To the Moon is very good (rewatched it just this past weekend, after Chicken Run). So where did the glitch emerge? Let's say Mad World ('63), said to be a spoof of the silent movie escapades, triggered it, but it wasn't in the Victorian era. From here, we get efforts like The Great Race, Daring Men In Their Jaunty Jalopies, all which kind of miss and reflect more an idea of the '60s, namely parodying half a century earlier (for some odd reason). What I can best say about this effort is Verne's book actually did not have the characters reach the moon and engage in adventures, so clearly someone thought this allowed space to fill. Unfortunately, we receive these incredibly dull love interests. The movie begins with some idea of Tom Thumb going up, and that is dropped very early on. Why include it then? There will be plot changes throughout the entire film like this. Many figures and characters are astonishingly unnecessary, such as the Hermione Gingold bit. What makes this scornful dismissal so difficult was the intriguing bit of refueling a car by siphoning gas from a street lamp and a family's chandelier, and the automatic bullhorn that didn't work at all. In the end, the movie doesn't stand as novel recreation, or a colorful depiction of a past era and is instead a head-scratcher about what was going on in the '60s in regards to the turn of the 19th century.

MARIO GAUCI From exploitation writer-producer Harry Alan Towers comes this curiously upmarket but essentially lowbrow comic adaptation of the Jules Verne adventure "From The Earth To The Moon" – already filmed straight under that title in 1958, and which I also own recorded off TCM U.K. For what it's worth, both versions managed to attract notable actors to the fold: in this case, it's Burl Ives (as real-life showman P.T. Barnum – apparently, the role had first been offered to Bing Crosby!), Gert Frobe (amusing as a German explosives expert), Dennis Price, Lionel Jeffries (as a flustered engineer – basically a variation on his role in the superior FIRST MEN IN THE MOON [1964]), Terry-Thomas (as a vindictive financier and Jeffries' shady partner), not forgetting Troy Donahue (unconvincing as an American scientist and made to don a silly astro-nautical outfit more attuned to dystopian allegories!), Daliah Lavi and Edward de Souza who supply the obligatory (and bland) romantic triangle.Whilst readily conceding that it doesn't have much of a reputation to begin with, the film itself proved a bit of a let-down for me – especially since, unlike the earlier version, we never even get to go in outer-space!! Besides, the pace is inordinately slow for this type of film; director Sharp was clearly more adept at deploying atmosphere and suspense than at he was at comedy timing. That said, the first half is undeniably pleasant with the amusing trial-and-error experiments of the various people involved (often witnessed by a perpetually unperturbed Queen Victoria) and, later, Frobe's disastrous attempts to find the correct amount of Bulovite (his own invention) to fire the rocket (Donahue's design of which is favored over that of the more experienced, and consequently inflamed, Jeffries) all the way to the moon! Alas, the film's latter stages – involving Jeffries and Terry-Thomas' attempts to sabotage the launching, Lavi's determination (after being abducted by them and escaping) to reach Donahue and alert him of their nefarious plan, and which also needlessly throw in a number of other characters (including even more romantic complications!) – tend to fall flat; the finale, though, as the rocket actually does go off with Jeffries, Terry-Tomas and, unbeknownst to them, a Russian spy inside (and which rather than land on the moon as intended takes them all the way to Siberia!), is quite nicely done.A measure of the film's overall failure can be gleaned from the fact that it was released in several quarters under a multitude of different titles, including THOSE FANTASTIC FLYING FOOLS in the U.S. where it was marketed as a would-be follow-up to the highly successful epic spoof THOSE MAGNIFICENT MEN IN THEIR FLYING MACHINES (1965) which had also starred Terry-Thomas and Gert Frobe. Unfortunately, my viewing of the film was somewhat compromised by the faulty copy I acquired, with the audio being ever so slightly off, while the picture froze – though not the soundtrack! – for about 10 seconds half-way through!!

Wilbur-10 This is a shoddy effort which seems to have been cobbled together to ride on the back of 'Those Magnificent Men in their Flying Machines' (1965) and the like.Proceedings begin with a long prologue introducing the Victorian age of invention and adventure, which leads us on to the P.T. Barnum character whose latest plan is to send a man to the moon.The story unfolds like a third-rate childrens pantomime with lots of sight-gags and silent comedy exaggeration. Caricatures abound with clear labels as to who should be hissed and who should be cheered by any audience member still awake.Even allowing for any post-production difficulties which the assortment of alternative names the film goes under would suggest, the final effort is insulting to the intelligence and all age groups will be bored by the tedium it offers.Even Troy Donahue doesn't add a spark to the dismal affair, his dashing hero character coming off like a poor man's Doug McClure without the charisma or acting ability. An inferior McClure clone would normally be a contradiction in terms, which only goes to show just how low the bottom of the barrel is which 'Rocket to the Moon' scrapes.BEST SCENE - the closing credits had me cheering from the rooftops.