Good But Not Great
24 January 2017
This picture had a story by H.G. Wells, good cast members and outstanding special effects for the 1930's. What happened? something got lost between the book and the screen. I didn't read the book but it's hard to believe H.G. Wells could write a book so uneven in it's treatment of a man suddenly endowed with a gift for miracles. At first he is timid and reluctant to do anything noteworthy, then by the end he goes completely overboard in the opposite direction - and that is an understatement.

But then there are the special effects, which are eye-popping for this time period. Did you think the effects were remarkable in "King Kong"? This picture makes those look simple by comparison, and that's the real reason for my rating. The cast was fine and it's hard to quarrel with Roland Young in any movie he's in, but overall the story was a disappointment. You can 'suspend your disbelief' to a point - to approximately a half-hour from the end.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed