First Men in the Moon (1964) User Reviews

makes you smile

[laura572 · 8/10 · 23 March 2002]

I watched this film for the first time recently and as a 22 year old brought up with E.T. and Star Wars I have to say I was still impressed and thoroughly enjoyed the whole film. The effects are great, the story is well adapted to fit on to your screen and is believe it or not, thought provoking. I would recommend this film to anyone of any age and especially those who enjoyed the original Time Machine and Journey to the Centre of the Earth. Great fun.

FIRST MEN IN THE MOON (Nathan Juran, 1964) ***

[Bunuel1976 · 7/10 · 10 July 2007]

The Schneer/Harryhausen team’s follow-up to the Jules Verne adventure MYSTERIOUS ISLAND (1961) is this similarly colorful turn-of-the-century spectacle adapted from an H.G. Wells novel. While not as popular or as exhilarating as the earlier film perhaps, it’s nonetheless a delightful yarn and one of the team’s best overall efforts.

Starting off in a modern-setting as the ‘first’ landing on the Moon is taking place (about 5 years before the actual fact), the astronauts are flabbergasted to find the Union Jack and a note indicating that an English scientist had already claimed it back in 1899! We’re then introduced to the character played by Edward Judd (currently institutionalized in old folks’ home) – who, with his fiancée Martha Hyer, had accompanied Professor Lionel Jeffries on that fateful yet unsung trip to the Moon; the story proper is then told in flashback. The film has been criticized for its over-abundance of comic relief in the persona of the buffoonish Jeffries; however, for my part, I was totally taken with his eccentric character and his performance is an utter joy to behold. Judd is his typical roguish self, while Hyer adds charm and loveliness to the already attractive scenery (of Victorian England and the imaginative lunar landscape with its cavernous interiors).

It takes quite some time to get to the scenes on the Moon and, once there, we’re treated to just two of Harryhausen’s trademark (albeit marvelous) creations – a couple of giant caterpillars, whom our heroes have to fend off, and the mass of Selenite inhabitants, who seem eager to study the intruding Earthlings (the script, co-written by famed sci-fi expert Nigel Kneale, is at its most introspective during Jeffries’ trial before The Grand Lunar). Further reason why the expedition proves insufficiently exciting is the fact that we learn precious little of Life on the Moon…and it all concludes on a somewhat anti-climactic note (even more disappointing because Wells was basically repeating himself!).

That said, the film does looks great in color and widescreen (luckily, the DivX copy I watched didn’t suffer from the distracting jerkiness which had plagued my recent viewings of other vintage sci-fi titles on this format), and Harryhausen’s various props – such as the makeshift space-gear (actually diving-suits), the spherical ship, and “Cavorite” (the substance invented by Jeffries which enables the flight into outer space and back, simply by being applied as a coating on the spaceship’s surface!), add to the fun and pervading sense of wonder. Laurie Johnson’s rousing score, then, emerges as the perfect accompaniment to the fantastic proceedings and, undoubtedly, one of the film’s major assets. By the way, Peter Finch famously appeared in an unbilled cameo in this film as a messenger for the local bailiff (apparently, he visited the set and then offered his services to replace an actor who had failed to show up!).

Ultimately, rather than being considered a visionary sci-fi epic, the film rightfully belongs amid the long-running cycle of entertaining (if somewhat juvenile) adventure films based on classic literary tales – 20,000 LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA (1954), AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS (1956), FROM THE EARTH TO THE MOON (1958), JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH (1959), THE LOST WORLD (1960), MASTER OF THE WORLD (1961), the aforementioned MYSTERIOUS ISLAND, FIVE WEEKS IN A BALLOON (1962), THE LOST CONTINENT (1968), THE LAND THAT TIME FORGOT (1975), etc.

Highly Under rated

[NerdBat · 7/10 · 28 May 2018]

Wow! I'm pretty surprised. Well, I shouldn't be, good old H.G. never lets you down. Fact is, this really should be higher on the list of the most iconic science fiction of the early years. The effects are marvelous, and it's some of Harryhausen's best work in my opinion. Awesome concept, an alien race eager to learn about the humans, what their planet is like, only to become paranoid at the idea of violent humans coming to the moon. It's a bit different from most films of its time in the fact that the alien race isn't exactly the enemy of the humans. They are more so concerned and ready to defend themselves from an oncoming invasion...to the moon, from earth. Overall I could totally watch this film again, which is something I don't usually do. I would highly recommend it to anyone who truly loves science fiction.

Another winner from the master animator!

[Bruce_Cook · 9 February 2004]

This is movie number ten for the great Ray Harryhausen, who provides his usual stunning animation, although the plot is a bit cynical for some taste, lacking the cheerful charm of such movies as "Journey to the Center of the Earth". In this one we get animated Selenites, giant caterpillar-like "Moon Cows", and a big-brained Grand Lunar on his regal throne. The special effects in the scenes of Professor Cavor's spherical spaceship en route to the Moon are beautiful.

The opening scene is clever: the "first" astronauts to land on the moon (an international group) is stunned by the discovery of a tiny British flag on the lunar surface. A message attached to the flag identifies the real first Moon landers, and the authorities on Earth get in touch with one of them, an aging Edward Judd, who tells the strange tale of his turn-of-the century expedition with Professor Cavor (Jeffries) and Judd's fiance' (Hyer).

We Need to Accept It as Is

[Hitchcoc · 7/10 · 10 December 2016]

This is one of those adaptations of works of authors like Jules Verne, Arthur Conan Doyle, and H. G. Welles. While short on science, it's a fun venture into the stars. Of course, there is a simplistic romance that goes on. The space ship is primitive at best and wouldn't work at all, but we are in the realm of the speculators. This is played tongue in cheek and there are lots of funny bits. But it is a story of courage and effort to find out about the great beyond. There is an interesting confidence in the principle character. These writers weren't accurate scientifically, but they brought joy to the people of the time. Watch this for its colorful presentation of the great stories.

That First Lunar Voyage

[bkoganbing · 7/10 · 13 July 2008]

Five years before the Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin touch down on the moon, this film adaption of the H.G. Wells story First Men in the Moon came to the screen. A moon expedition has finally landed and to the amazement of all a perfectly preserved union jack is found and presumably claiming this large piece of real estate for the United Kingdom.

And a diary with three names in it gives the names of those people who were on this first lunar expedition. One of them is still alive and in a nursing home in Great Britain. It's Edward Judd, now in his eighties or nineties as you'd have it and he has an amazing adventure to tell.

I use the phrase deliberately because such an amazing adventure is the kind of stuff Stephen Spielberg would find ideal. And if he reads this, maybe he'll think on it as a future project. But if he does it, it will have to be without the special special effects of Ray Harryhausen who created an enchanting, but very dangerous world on the moon.

Judd's story is how he and his fiancé Martha Hyer got involved with an eccentric scientist Lionel Jeffries. Jeffries may look eccentric as he usually does in his roles, but he's developed nothing less than a totally unique form of propulsion and he knows what he wants to do with it. Nothing less than a trip to the moon.

Like Jeanette Macdonald in Maytime or Gloria Stuart in Titanic, Judd from the man's point of view tells the story of his lost love Hyer and that unique trip to the moon. As to what happens there and what happens to Jeffries, Judd, and Hyer you have to see the film for that.

Since it's a Ray Harryhausen film you kind of know what to expect and Harryhausen delivers in grand style.

It almost makes you believe that it was Judd, Jeffries, and Hyer who took that one small step for man first.

Stunning Visual Sci-Fi

[DKosty123 · 7/10 · 31 January 2014]

I rate this one fairly high based upon the visual effects. The H G Wells novel is followed so faithfully that the script at times borders on the ridiculous. Still, it is quite an effort. 5 years before man went too the moon, this is not the first version of this, but it is the best visual of it.

There are some cave sequences of this which look very much like the caverns used in Abbott and Costello Meet the Killer, Boris Karloff. The images in this one and the sets are amazing. This one comes off as rather simplistic for todays audience.

Martha Hyer and Lionel Jeffries are the best known members of the cast. Though it is dated, it is quite watchable.

While the story is only fair, the moon effects are very nice.

[planktonrules · 7/10 · 8 November 2010]

Compared to "2001: A Space Odyssey" (which came out just a few years later), the special effects in "First Men in the Moon" are somewhat primitive. However, compared to the other sci-fi films of the 1950s and 60s, it is quite lovely--and a nice step forward. Aside from a few cheesy scenes here and there (such as VERY obvious wires used to make the astronauts seem to bounce due to the Moon's gravity and the cheesy alien costumes), the film is lovely and I wish I could have seen it on a big screen. The matte paintings were fantastic and some of the sets were wonderful. All this serves to give the film a nice look--one that overwhelms a story that, at times, is a bit weak.

The movie begins in the present time. A landing of Earth astronauts on the Moon is shocked when they discover relics left by an earlier landing--one made many decades earlier!! They are able to track down one of the people responsible for this prior moon flight and this elderly man is able to recount what had occurred. The rest of the film is an extended flashback.

It seems that a supposedly inventor (Lionel Jeffries--who was wonderful in the film) has created a serum that makes gravity disappear! And, using this 'Cavorite', he plans on eventually making a trip to the Moon. Joining him for the ride are an annoying woman and a man who likes to kill things--both are VERY weak characters, indeed. Their behaviors simply make little sense at times--reacting instead of thinking. I don't want to ruin the film by saying too much, but suffice to say that they find alien life on their journey! What exactly happens next is really up to you to find out yourself.

Aside from two dumb characters, occasionally cheesy effects and a story that occasionally drags, the film is a treat for the eyes and is quite enjoyable--particularly if you are a fan of sci-fi or the work of Ray Harryhausen.

Good reasons changes are made between page and screen

[lwjoslin · 10/10 · 5 September 2001]

Someone who had read H. G. Wells' "First Men in the Moon" and then sat down to watch this adaptation may well be aghast at the opening sequences, which deal with a "modern-day" mission to the moon, as opposed to the 1899 setting of the novel. But stay with it, and you'll find that the contemporary setting is just a framework to introduce us to the story basically as Wells wrote it: a fantasy about a trip to the moon in the Victorian era.

So why did the filmmakers choose to frame the story in this flashback format? Simple. At the time Wells wrote his novel, the very idea of a trip to the moon was fantastical; heavier-than-air flight hadn't even been invented yet, let alone space travel. But by the time the movie was made in the '60s, we were on our way to the moon, JFK having stated it as an objective. While still a gripping, exciting idea, a trip to the moon was no longer a fantasy, but a hardware-based reality. (In fact, the modern spacecraft depicted are very much like what ultimately made the trip in 1969: an orbiting command module and a spidery-legged landing unit, not the old saucer-craft or delta-winged ships of the '50s. So while "dated," these opening scenes aren't foolish. And the international crew on board--since it's a mission of the UN, not just the USA--reflect today's reality of the International Space Station; reality has finally caught up with this fiction.)

So, how to make what was becoming a here-and-now reality (in 1964, the Gemini missions were beginning, paving the way for the Apollo program) back into a magical fantasy? By having the modern explorers discover evidence that their "first" lunar landing had been predated by a trip in 1899! One of the voyagers, Bedford (Edward Judd) is found to be still alive and very old at the time of the contemporary mission, and his tale is told in flashback, a structure much like that of "Little Big Man" or "Titanic."

Some other changes are made as well. The long trip to the moon reads well in the book, but if filmed as described (the two men float in darkness and silence inside the sphere, as the unsecured baggage gradually gravitates to the center of the "room"), it would have made incredibly boring viewing, so the scripter adds a few vignettes to lighten the journey. The riot of plant life that erupts across the lunar surface at sunrise would have elicited hoots from a modern audience, and so is eliminated on screen; yet the just as unscientific touch of having the men cavort around the surface in diving suits (which would have swelled up like balloons in the vacuum of space, to say nothing of the men's exposed hands) clearly signal that this is, after all, a fantasy, and not "true" science fiction. And Cavor's audiences with the Grand Lunar, which take place in the book after Bedford has returned to earth, are reduced in the movie to a single hearing which happens while Bedford and his girl (keep reading) are still on the moon: rather than just hear it described, we see it happen, which is, of course, a much more cinematic handling.

While Bedford and Cavor make a stag trip in the novel, the movie adds a woman, Kate Callender (Martha Hyer), Bedford's fiancee. Her inclusion isn't gratuitous; by being in places on the moon where Bedford and Cavor aren't, she helps the story cover more ground in less time than otherwise would have been the case. Besides, she's the sort of woman whom Wells, a feminist and self-described "free thinker," would have liked: she's tough, smart, brave, and doesn't put up with much. She's the epitome of the "new woman" of that turn-of-the-century era, the sort of restless woman who was learning such manly things as how to operate a newfangled typewriting machine so she could get a job in an office. As an American in Britain, she's a bit of a traveler herself; she symbolizes Britain's exploratory, empire-building, "new world"-seeking, colonizing impulses (indeed, upon arrival, Cavor claims the moon for Her Majesty); and she's the only person involved in the mission who has enough sense to bring a gun.

While all the performances are equal to the task (especially Lionel Jeffries' comically high-strung Cavor, plus a one-scene appearance by the impish Miles Malleson as a city clerk), this isn't an actors' picture, but an effects picture. And Ray Harryhausen delivers, as he always does. The Grand Lunar in particular is a haunting, whispery presence, curiously but coolly regarding these human intruders and weighing their fates. Even the music works: Laurie Johnson's score, evocative of an awed sense of wonder married to a towering adventure, is worthy of Bernard Hermann.

You may have guessed this is an old favorite of mine. I saw it as a child, when it was new. It hasn't aged a day.

"Soon others will be coming from Earth. Our galleries will be strewn with dead."

[utgard14 · 7/10 · 5 February 2014]

A 1964 moon landing discovers they were not the first men to arrive there. Turns out there was an 1899 expedition to the moon. Upon investigating, they find the only living member (Edward Judd) of that voyage. He tells the tale of how he and his fiancée (Martha Hyer) accompanied brilliant scientist Professor Cavor (Lionel Jeffries) to the moon through use of a special gravity-defying substance called Cavorite. Once there, they encounter an insectoid race of creatures known as Selenites. It's a fun old-fashioned sci-fi adventure. Beautiful sets, great Ray Harryhausen special effects and a script by venerable Nigel Kneale, adapted from the story by H.G. Wells. Most of Wells' social commentary is absent from the film. Some of it is still present, particularly in one of the film's best scenes -- Cavor's talk with the leader of the Selenites, the Grand Lunar.

Didn't like it as a kid...still don't!

[BorgoPass · 2/10 · 7 January 2006]

Possibly due to its being shown seemingly every other Saturday afternoon when I was a kid in the early 70's, I was hugely burned-out on this movie at an early age. I guess it was the let down of expecting this movie to be more "The Thing" or "Earth Vs. the Flying Saucers" than what it was.

Let me not diminish Harryhausen's contributions, but they seemed a bit under-whelming here, perhaps due to them being used sparingly.

But my main beef with this film is this: I didn't care a scintilla for any of the main characters! We have a nutty professor, a woman who's "marry me, or else" attitude is nauseating and and our "hero", a meandering playwright, investor (gambler?), squatter...who knows what else? I didn't care if these people made it to or off the moon or not. Let the bugs have at 'em.

This movie is not a thriller, not moody or atmospheric, just silly and uninteresting. Again, this opinion is largely due to this movie popping up in the TV Guide too many times for my liking 35 years ago, taking up valuable viewing opportunities for "Frankenstein" or "The Invisible Man."

Great color restoration, good sound quality

[TBRay · 10/10 · 11 June 2003]

This recent DVD re-release (May, 2003) now has Dolby 4.0 stereo along with a remarkable color restoration. While not up to today's Dolby (THX) standards the soundtrack and musical score are quite good for a vintage 1964 classic. The color of this version is actually better than what I remember in the theater and much better than any TV replays (which are quite rare for this film).

This was one of my all time favorite Harryhausen films as a kid and I'm glad to see it given a decent treatment to DVD. No spoilers here other than to say I still find this film as intriguing and interesting now as I did almost 40 years ago.

For pure fantasy buffs and sci-fi fans "First Men in the Moon" is a fun flick to enjoy.

Grab the popcorn, take the phone off the hook, and enjoy this DVD.

A Film Of Two Halves

[Theo Robertson · 6/10 · 20 February 2008]

Judging by the comments of my fellow IMDb contributers it seems FIRST MEN IN THE MOON is a film that doesn't cheat the memory . If for example you loved this movie as a kid you'll still love it as an adult . I'm afraid I have to disagree with this groundswell of opinion because I too loved this movie as a child but watching it again today I came very close to switching it off on a couple of occasions

Why ? Well let's look at the story structure . The opening contains a hook of the first manned flight to the moon where a British union flag is found and it's discovered that Senior citizen Arnold Bedford was in fact part of an expedition who had visited the moon several decades earlier . So far so good but then the film spends almost a whole hour back in Victorian England setting up the characters of Bedford , eccentric inventor Joseph Carvor and Kate Callender . You'll spend most of this running time trying to work out if Carvor is more irritating than Kate in much the same way as historians debate if Stalin was a worse dictator than Hitler . It's not helped by the performances of Jeffries and Hyer

Things do radically improve when the trio take a long awaited trip to the moon and it's very easy to see why so many people fondly remember this film . You could complain that the selenites are obviously small of stature ( Child ? ) actors dressed in cloth , some of the sets are unconvincing etc but at least director Nathan Juran has tried - And to a certain degree succeeded - in bringing a sense of wonder to the movie . It should also be pointed out that the special effects are very impressive for their day and still hold up well . Also take note of the eldritch sound effects for some of the scenes set in the selenite base and the chilling voice of the Grand Lunar

This is certainly a film of two halves and its glowing reputation is all down to the second half . It's also a film where the effects from Ray Harryhausen are more important than the story structure . It's a film that will almost certainly disappoint fans of the original novel and will equally disappoint fans of co-writer Nigel Kneale whose work here lacks the compelling intelligence of much of his other work

Dozing to the moon

[funkyfry · 3/10 · 10 October 2002]

This movie seems to have been designed to put audiences to sleep. To start with, the prologue, in which international astronauts discover, on the first lunar landing, that Victorian era explorers already walked on the moon, is the best part of the movie. It's downhill from there and it takes an hour or so for the first Harryhausen monster to appear. When it does, it just ambles around and roars and then is dispatched with no drama. Poor acting adds to the film's woes -- Lionel Jeffries should be scolded in particular for his mugging and constant scene-stealing (just watch that man's eyebrows, wow!). Interesting script can't make a good film without any help from cast and crew.

Fly Me to the Moon and Let Me Play Among the Stars...

[BaronBl00d · 2 March 2003]

The heart and spirit of H. G. Wells's novel remains intact in this Ray Harryhausen/Nathan Juran vehicle. A 20th century frame story about American led international crew landing on moon and finding an old Union Jack flag and a letter giving rights to the moon to Queen Victoria in 1899 add a brilliant touch to this story about a professor and his two neighbors exploring space and landing on the moon. The scientific explanation for space travel is absurd as are many other plot contrivances, but the story is a fun, entertaining romp about what exploration use to be like when man relied less on machines and more on brains. Director Juran and Harrysausen have created a film with many funny moments, beautiful moon landscapes, and even some thought-provoking questions about human nature and what humans are all about. Although this is not like any other Harryhausen picture - really only one large, cumbersome, rather mundane creature, Harryhausen really evokes awe as he creates a total vision of what a society might look like underneath the surface of the moon. The moon is a startling set and impressive. Laurie Johnson(Avenger's Theme) adds her brilliant touch and creates some beautiful music for the film. But when is all said and done - for me - the brightest star in this galactic romp is Lionel Jeffries as Professor Cavour. Jeffries lights up every scene he is in. His ability to use humor in every reflex and word make him a joy to behold. Does he overact? Perhaps. But in the same way that Vincent Price did. He steal his scenes and this picture. Edward Judd does nicely in his role as does Martha Hyer, who is beautiful as well.

Painfully stupid first act, joyously fun action and adventure after.

[happyreflex · 7/10 · 31 January 2009]

9 out of 10 times, when a movie fails, it fails because it does something stupid. Something gets placed into the movie that was never a good idea in the first place. Fortunately, this movie came back in the second act to redeem itself.

It's an idiotic first act that keeps this from being a better film. They never should have added a woman into the cast. She practically screams out, "I wasn't in the novel!" For the whole first act, she gets in the way, bothers people, meddles, does all the stupid and annoying things a stereotypical leading lady would do in a film like this that make us worry that we won't get to see what we want to see. And for what? To fill a role that never needed to be filled in the first place. We need jokes based on the differences between men and women to keep people interested in the movie. After all, we can't expect them to simply be interested in a voyage to the ****ing moon! To top things off, the first act (after the framing device, which I will come to later) thinks this movie is a comedy. The professor is introduced as a funny old eccentric, with tuba music underlining the supposedly funny aspects. For a time in the 50s and 60s, comedy stopped being funny. Tired stereotypes of women, the battle of the sexes, things like that took the place of clever writing. Thank god for French New Wave! Then there's the framing device. Our astronauts, who include representatives from the Soviet Union in a nice bit of forward-thinking, find the evidence of our heroes' adventures on the moon. Then U.N. representatives on Earth seek out our leading man, now many years older. People thought he was crazy, but no, his stories were true all along! Apparently what has endured in print was not good enough for these filmmakers. They couldn't just dive headlong into the story in the year 1899. No, they had to frame it. And then at the end, (skip if you want to find out for yourself,) they shamelessly steal the aliens-killed-by-earth-viruses twist from War of the Worlds.

Now, what the movie does do right is actually provide solidly fun action and adventure when it finally gets to it. Aliens, giant carnivorous caterpillars, fanciful sets in vivid color, men in alien suits, a gray and orange sphere hurtling through space, Ray Harryhausen creations. This is the stuff that dreams are made of! Plus the stupid comedy elements stop completely. This redeems the film after its fatally flawed first act.

Diverting H. G. Wells Fantasy.

[rmax304823 · 6/10 · 8 June 2008]

Lionel Jeffreys is Dr. Cavor, a loony English inventor who takes Edward Judd and Martha Hyer along on a trip to the moon in 1899 in a sphere propelled by his anti-gravity paste ("cavorite"). The moon, at first, looks rather like the imaginations of 1964 would picture it -- barren, mountainous, and dark. The image of the distant earth had not yet acquired its stippling of white clouds.

It isn't long, though, before the intrepid trio discover one of those secret civilizations dwelling beneath the surface, where they've built a giant oxygen-producing machine that makes the atmosphere breathable. The society seems to be built around a three-caste system -- giant caterpillars, big furry soldiers, and technologically advanced eggheads. Conflict ensues. The trio escape and head back to earth for a happy landing.

I nodded out once or twice towards the end because the story wasn't actually gripping in any sense, though it was nice to see Ray Harryhausen's special effects. That monster caterpillar was pretty spooky.

The problem that fantasists like Wells, Verne, Edgar Rice Burroughs, and H. Ryder Haggard had was that they generally had some illuminating intuitions about how to get from the ordinary to the fabulous, but then sometime stumbling while figuring out what to do once they reached the alien corn. Welles' "The Time Machine" was fine until we wound up with the pale and naive Eloi and the cannibalistic subterranean Morlocks when, unless you were clued in to the fact that Welles was trying to predict the future evolutionary status of the working class and the aristocrats, it seemed a little confusing and arbitrary. "The First Men on the Moon" has a similar problem. F/X aside, I kept thinking, "So what?", through the cerulean haze of stage one sleep.

Edward Judd, formerly of "The Day the Earth Caught Fire," was okay. And Martha Hyer gives her most animated performance on film, which is kind of like watching a digital clock click from one minute to the next. Lionel Jeffreys is more than your usual quirky scientist. (Miles Malleson, here as the Dymchurch registrar is quirky.) Jeffreys is positively manic, running around screaming, stumbling over things, repeating himself -- "I've got it! I've got it!" -- when he should be begging for lithium.

And the photography is great in many ways, images that are crisp and sharp, but a fable like this deserves to be bright, cheerful, and inviting, like George Pal's "The Time Machine." This fairy tale is dark, too dark, rendering every background object minatory. I mean, a murky hole in the ground filled with terrifying monsters is depressing. Reminds me of my childhood. The subdued lighting is expertly used in the scenes at Cherry Cottage, though, deep greens with the subtle pink of flowers in the shrubbery. And the rich score is impressive.

It's still a light-hearted and appealing movie, though. The kids ought to get a big kick out of it too.

In your face, Neil Armstrong!

[Coventry · 7/10 · 26 February 2011]

With names appearing on the billboard such as Nathan Juran (director of the delirious "The Brain from Planet Arous" and "The 7th Voyage of Sinbad"), Nigel Kneale (writer of the exquisite "Quatermass" trilogy), Ray Harryhausen (notorious visual effects designer of "Jason and the Argonauts" and "It Came from beneath the Sea") and H.G. Wells (legendary novelist of "The War of the Worlds" and "Food of the Gods"), I was already preparing for a vastly entertaining and completely relaxing Sci- Fi adventure. What I didn't expect or even secretly hoped for, actually, was that "First Men in the Moon" would be THIS much shamelessly brainless fun! Literally from start to finish, this over-enthusiast British adaptation of Wells' novel is fast-paced, comical, exhilarating and unpretentious camp fest. Every aspect about this film simply provokes a big fat smile on your face, whether it's Lionel Jeffries' over-the-top nutty scientist performance, Harryhausen's stupendous moon caterpillar creation or just the complete negligence of all the most basic laws of science.

TV journals and high school history teachers always taught us that Neil Armstrong was the first man on the moon, right? Wrong! Good old Neil wasn't the first one and neither were the randomly nameless astronauts at the beginning of this film who are landing on the moon whilst the entire world is watching. Barely five steps on the surface, the astronauts find a Union Jack flag and a note claiming the moon belongs to England's Queen Victoria. Talk about sloppy seconds! The authorities track down Arnold Bedford, one of the three pioneer explorers who traveled back and forth to the moon in the year 1899 already! Arnold is a nut job in a retirement home and he warns about the current astronauts being in great danger. The rest of the film is a flashback to the year 1899, narrating in great detail how Arnold and his American fiancée Kate Callender became acquainted with the bedazzled but undeniably genius scientist Joseph Cavor. Cavor invented a gooey substance that makes any type of material weightless and, rather than investing in groovy anti- gravity boots, he wants to build a bizarre and shapeless contraption into a rocket ship and fly to the moon. Don't bother questioning the ten million little details they overlook, but the cheerful trio arrive on the moon alive & kicking and begin their exploring in deep sea diving suits. To their amazement, the inside of the moon has a normal earthly atmosphere and is inhabited by a eerie community of critters.

"First Men in the Moon" is an awesomely entertaining Sci-Fi gem from the early 60's. The concept is absurd and ludicrous, but at the same time irresistibly charming. The interstellar landscapes and Harryhausen's creations are quite impressive whereas other set pieces and scenery are almost too cheesy for words. Some of the dialogs are priceless but, in good old late 50's/early 60's Sci-Fi tradition, the screenplay contains quite a number of confronting questions about human nature and a typically abrupt ending. I loved it and I can only highly recommend it to people with a weakness for old-fashioned Sci-Fi and a healthy dose of humor.

Top of the Line Sci-Fi - First Men in the Moon

[arthur_tafero · 7/10 · 26 July 2021]

This is one of my favorite HG Wells' s books, and the producers did a wonderful job with it. Easily the best science-fiction writer of all time, Wells was a master of the genre in every way. Not only did he fully develop his characters, but he developed the plot of his books with them in mind. The British did a good job of employing the most expensive stop animation of the era with Harryhousen doing some of his best work. The story is fascinating, and makes you want to find out more about what made Wells tick. How did he come up with so many fantastic stories that eventually proved to be highly realistic? Don't miss this one.

Loved it as a kid, love it now

[horrorfilmx · 10/10 · 27 May 2006]

One of Ray Harryhausen's best movies. As big a fan as I am of the Master Animator, one of the things that makes this film great is that it's one of his few films that works just fine without his effects. George Pal could have produced this with the same cast and script but without Harryhausen's (admittedly wonderful) special effects and it would still have been a delight. The acting, humor, production design, and music are all first rate. I am well aware that audiences of a certain age will consider this "cheesy" because it doesn't have the latest in (cheesy) CGI effects, and consequently will miss out on some great entertainment. They have my deepest sympathy.

The last half on the moon is the best

[garrard · 7/10 · 20 May 2006]

This 1964 production has several things going for it: an interesting premise of 19th century astronauts exploring the moon, the always-satisfying special effects from master creator Ray Harryhausen, and a great Laurie Johnson score. Though Bernard Herrmann was originally sought for the production, the studio couldn't afford his asking price; thus, Johnson filled in and produced a great accompaniment for the on-screen activities.

The first half of the movie is a bit light, as it deals with Mr. Cavor (Lionel Jeffries), developer of "Cavorite" and his recruitment of Mr. Bedford (Edward Judd) and his fiancé' "Kate" in the planning of an excursion to the moon. The humor is adequate but the movie doesn't really "lift off," literally until the moon ship heads for the moon.

Upon arrival on the moon, the crew meets the inhabitant, the ant-like "Selenites" and their fantastic world below the moon's surface. An encounter with a "moon calf," along with an "audience" with the Selenite leader, are just two of the marvelous effects in this movie.

Though not one of the best of Harryhausen's works, it is still an enjoyable treat for sci-fi fans and a family film that stands the test of time.

Harryhausen's worst movie.

[13Funbags · 4/10 · 24 April 2017]

H.G. Wells and Ray Harryhausen,how can that fail? In more ways than you can imagine. Even if you can buy into the ridiculous scenario that gets them to the moon,the movie quickly falls apart. I was really expecting it to get good when they got there but it got much worse. The bad guys are bugs that are sometimes people in bad bug suits and sometimes dolls that aren't really there.Very disappointing for Harryhausen. And they don't hurry up getting to the moon.It starts with some reporters in present day and then they find an old man who tells a very long story about the past. When it is interesting,it doesn't make much sense. Watch this if you like Harryhausen(that's why I watched) but don't be expecting a mind blowing epic.

Popcorn out kids!- And forget the corn!!

[Europa66 · 9/10 · 17 July 2000]

The effects may be dated, and the love interest a bit tedious at times, but Lionel(pre-Chitty Bang)Jeffries' whacky professor enthuses enough to keep the kids happy. Actually, the story-line isn't that bad at all (compared to more recent Sci-Fi offerings) and as an H.G. Wells rendering is actually quite good. I may have my rose-tinteds on though, I remember this with much affection as I saw it myself as a child of five or six in the early sixties. But, boys and girls, when they eventually get to the moon (or do they?) assure yourselves that as an exercise in escapism it's right up there with Jason and the Argonauts. And, after all, that's what movies are for - aren't they?

Early sci-fi at its best.

[senortuffy · 7/10 · 29 August 2003]

Let me just add that this is also one of my favorite sci-fi films. Unlike many of the 50's trip-to-the-moon films that featured monsters and horny women living in caves, this one follows H.G. Wells' novel about humans encountering another race of beings below the surface of the moon.

There's a sort of childlike innocence to the film, which is probably why we remember it so fondly from our youth. And there's enough real science to intrigue the adult mind. Ray Harryhausen's special effects are also terrific - the leader of the moon civilization shown as a shadowy figure behind a crystalline wall is especially striking.

I haven't seen the DVD yet, having taped this years ago off the Sci-Fi Channel, but I'm glad they've restored this classic. Fun for all ages.

1899 Landing.

[AaronCapenBanner · 5/10 · 1 November 2013]

Nathan Juran directed this adaptation of the H.G. Wells novel that stars Lionel Jeffries as Inventor Joseph Cavor, who creates a method to propel his sphere into space by deflecting the gravitational pull of the Earth. He blasts off to the moon with another man and a woman on board(played by Edward Judd and Martha Hyer). Once there, they encounter an insect-like race that is most curious yet suspicious of these visitors, and whose intentions are not so benign... Framing device of modern day astronauts finding the British flag left behind by Cavor is amusing, but film is overly comedic and inconsequential. Only the fine F/X of Ray Harryhausen give it any distinction. Mostly for kids.