Conquest of Space (1955) User Reviews

HOW THE FUTURE USED TO BE!

[sataft-2 · 7/10 · 23 November 2000]

Disregard the critics on this one. This unpretentious film has much to offer on many levels. First of all, the acting is very good, especially from first time non-actor Phil Foster, whose primary occupation was that of a 'stand up' comedian.

Also, the performance of the highly under appreciated character actor, Walter Brooke, is a winner. Brooke is believable as the General in charge of the Mars mission, whose mental fabric is rapidly deteriorating under the pressure of evolving religious misgivings about the divine role of humans in space. This challenge to religion, within the framework of a science fiction film, was quite daring for the time.

Although not one of Director George Pal's best, the film, nevertheless, affords an informative and highly entertaining look at how the "future used to be", as viewed by the 50's generation. And incredibly, among all of the things they got wrong, how very much they got right.

Are We There Yet,Dad?

[scttwortman · 7/10 · 3 April 2001]

Not George Pal's best,but at least he had us farther along then we are now.His unflagging optimism was all up there on the screen.As a kid who built space ship models I loved this stuff.The film drags a little now,but the dead astronaut's body tagging along for the ride till his "at sea" burial,kept me awake all night at age 8.movie trivia moment:character actor William Redfield who washed out of the mission crew got to pilot the miniaturized sub in "Fantastic Voyage".Talk about perseverance!

Change of plans...a trip to Mars.

[michaelRokeefe · 6/10 · 17 May 2008]

Although it has George Pal written all over it; it is not his best project, but a pretty darn good Sci-Fi flick for its time. A team of American astronauts assemble a space station called "The Wheel" to enable a spaceship to be built. Gen. Samuel Merritt(Walter Brooke)and his crew that includes his son Captain Barney Merritt(Eric Fleming) believe their mission is to eventually land on the Moon. Change of orders; new destination...Mars. Special effects are redeemable with the most striking color and depiction of the 'angry red planet'. Religion and human emotions are the subplots, because in the mid 50s we want to see space travel. Most of the cast will be remembered for later work: William Hopper, Benson Fong, Ross Martin, Mickey Shaughnessy and Phil Foster.

Enjoyable

[samos · 11 July 2002]

I saw Conquest of Space as a 6 year old when it was first released. I was impressed with the Space Station, the Mars Rocket, the space walks and the landing on Mars.

I saw it again when it re-released in the 60's. I was older (teenager) and I was still impressed with it. The Mercury and Gemini programs were in full swing and I was looking forward to the establishment of a space station as a stepping stone to the conquest of space. The space ships were a little dated compared to what was actually being used.

I noticed the plot beyond the space ships. (1) The crew was right out of the Air Force movies of the 1940's and 1950's. (2) An Japanese-American was one of the crew: he hoped that with the resources they might find on Mars that the nations of the world could put an end to war. (3) The Commanding Officer was a little on the strange side about the exploration of another planet. My mother voiced pretty much the same thing: man wasn't supposed to mess around in space; that was God's domain! (4) The Sergeant was a typical Sr. NCO (Non-Commissioned Officer): loyal to the Chain of Command. (5) Just when things seemed to be working (growing the first plant on Mars) nature did it's best to upset everything. (6) The mission was accomplished with a minimum of casualties (2 dead) and the rest of the crew returned to base.

I got to see it again on the big screen (IMAX) in the 1980's when the Air and Space Museum (Washington, DC) showed it as part of a series of films on Science Fiction. Also included in the series was Forbidden Planet, 2001, Star Trek: the Wrath of Khan, and the original Star Wars.

This time I noted the special effects: very good for that day but a little dated by 1980's and today's standards. Imagine what George Pal could have done with CGI!

I recorded it years ago when it came on cable and took the commercials out. I've let my two sons (ages 7 and 4) see the movie. They like it almost as much as Star Wars. And it's a whole lot less violent!

Bigger Game

[bkoganbing · 7/10 · 13 November 2014]

Producer George Pal was a man of vision and accurate imagination. The one thing that he can be given undeniable credit for is how accurately he portrayed the surface of Mars. The Mars Explorer photographs when we had them revealed a world not unlike what we see in Conquest Of Space. Of course a lot of credit is also due to scientist Willy Ley whose books are the basis of the film.

Conquest In Space is a future world concept from 1955 where we now have a World Space Organization where the USA is taking the lead in space exploration. An international space station is constructed and people live there months at a time. It's under the command of General Walter Brooke who is concerned with the psychological problems of being too long in space. So he wants a handpicked crew for the exploration of the moon.

But the authorities on earth are shooting for bigger game. Kind of unrealistically they decide to forget the moon and aim for Mars. Brooke is in command and his eventual crew is his own son Captain Eric Fleming, Sgts. Mickey Shaughnessy, Benson Fong, and Phil Foster. In this future world no blacks or women are on the space station. The presence of the latter might well have cured at least some of the problems the guys were having.

On the way there Brooke develops some space problems of his own as he gets downright metaphysical, wondering if God meant for us to leave the planet earth that He bequeathed as a domain for man. Those issues cause all kinds of problems for the rest of the Mars expedition that are the basis for the plot of the film.

Conquest Of Space is imaginative but also intelligent. No hostile Mars creatures are found at least not in the corner of Mars they land. It was a realistic assessment of man surviving in a hostile environment and one of the better science fiction films of the Fifties.

"Set Your Gyros For Mars"

[utgard14 · 7/10 · 21 February 2014]

Classic sci-fi film from producer George Pal about astronauts on board a space station known as The Wheel. The Wheel's crew is made up entirely of men. There's no obligatory female crew member for all the men to make passes at. Had there been one, rest assured handsome leading man type Eric Fleming would have been all up on that. The commander (and creator) of The Wheel, General Merritt (Walter Brooke), has to assemble a small team for the first manned mission to Mars. The General's not happy about this but he gathers the team anyway. It includes his son (Eric Fleming), a medical doctor (Ross Martin), an electronics expert (Phil Foster), and a geologist (Benson Fong). Soon after their mission is underway, the General has a mental breakdown and begins to have doubts not only about their mission, but whether God would approve of man's exploration of space altogether.

I've seen people describe this film as both pro and anti-religious. It's funny how people's sensitivities and prejudices flare up on both sides when it comes to religion and politics. I don't find the film anti-religious at all. It's maybe anti-religious NUT but what sane person isn't? As for the flip side, it's certainly hard to argue the film is pushing a religious agenda when the General is shown as being mentally unbalanced to the point of trying to murder his own son. The film also ends on a positive note about man's exploration of space, as well as a cute wink that the Almighty approves.

The cast is solid. Walter Brooke has the most difficult role but he handles it well, I think. I didn't always understand his character's thought process but I did believe that he was losing his grip with each passing moment. Eric Fleming exceeds expectations, particularly in the later half of the movie. He has "stock leading man" written all over him but he does a good job. Comic relief Phil Foster grated on my nerves the first time I watched this but in subsequent viewings he's grown on me to where he's become one of my favorite parts of the film! Benson Fong represents an earnest attempt on the filmmakers' part to include some diversity in the cast. You would think this would be applauded but a lot of reviews simply point out a few stereotypical facets of his character. Admittedly, his "little man" speech is deserving of a few laughs, well-intentioned though it may have been. Regardless, his character is an intelligent, thoughtful man who is presented as an equal to his Caucasian peers and plays a significant role in the film. How is this not worthy of admiration?

I love sci-fi films from the '50s. I see so many complaints about this and other space exploration films of the time that nitpick all the technical errors. The dreaded word "realism" is often used as a bludgeon in these critiques. They say this or that isn't possible, so therefore the story fails. The best of these old films are full of imagination and wonder and a sense of awe at what might be possible, not dwelling on what isn't. That, to me, is what science fiction is all about. As for Conquest of Space, it's an extremely entertaining sci-fi movie with good special effects for the time. It also has rich colors and fun sets. This was back before all sci-fi films were drab and monotone. If you're a fan of classic science fiction movies, you should like this one.

Interesting visuals, but the plot is horrible.

[otto4 · 5/10 · 16 December 2004]

This movie recently came out on DVD so I rented it from Netflix. I'm reasonably familiar with the plot and the work of Bonestell, Pal, and Willey Ley, so I don't think I had unreasonable expectations for this movie. Sadly my expectations were still to high, as I didn't enjoy this movie despite the interesting visuals done up by Chesley Bonestell and George Pal.

Compare this movie to the 1956 movie Forbidden Planet, and think about which one gives you a better 'futuristic' portrayal of how mankind has advanced in 'the future'. Even allowing for the un-PC aspects of the 1950's (which I find amusing/enjoyable, not offensive), the plot devices of Conquest of Space are absurd. There's no way that a mission to mars wouldn't catch the mental problems inherent in one of the main characters, which is the primary plot device for causing peril in the mission.

Buy/rent this movie for the visuals of the space vehicles and Mars, and for the place in sci-fi history this movie occupies, not because you expect this to be a 'good' movie. The basic premises of the plot are pretty heavily flawed and therefore annoying.

A bad 1st half blossoms into a memorable 2nd half

[dinky-4 · 6/10 · 16 April 1999]

If you, as a 10-year-old boy, saw this when it was new and "cutting edge," it'll always have a special place in your heart. Admittedly, the first half is dated and burdened with corny humor, but once the trip to Mars commences, there's one semi-classic sequence after another: the near-collision with an asteroid, the funeral for the dead astronaut, Christmas on Mars, the Mars-quake etc. It'd be hard to write a history of the science-fiction film without a section devoted to this uneven but influential work.

It took me four tries to make it through this muddled space opera.

[AlsExGal · 4/10 · 18 October 2019]

Nice special effects by George Pal, and a good musical score by Van Cleave don't save this mess of a movie. The script insists it's man's' duty to explore space, then turns on a dime and says it's a sacrilege to explore space. The clip that's from "Bring On the Girls" (1953) just made me wish I had watched a different film. Movie is just about a massive collective case of cabin fever and who will crack up first. This one always makes me laugh, especially Phil Foster calling out, "ROSIE!" and the dial indicating "Space Speed". Gotta love it, even as it bores me to tears.

After you've seen everything else George Pal ever did, you might want to see this one just to be a completist.

"You Forgot Your Toothbrush"

[ferbs54 · 7/10 · 28 July 2010]

"Conquest of Space" is a wholly likable but decidedly second-tier sci-fi film from 1955 that should just manage to please fans of the genre. In it, Man's first flight to the Moon is scrapped in favor of an even grander project: a trip to Mars and back! Thus, blasting off from an orbiting space wheel 1,000 miles out, Earth's first space cruiser departs with its complement of five: General Sam Merritt (Walter Brooke), a ramrod martinet who, suffering from space fatigue, will question mankind's "blasphemy" in attempting to invade God's celestial domain; his son Barney (Eric Fleming, who, three years later, would enjoy some conquests of his own, in "Queen of Outer Space"); Sgt. Siegle (Phil Foster), the obligatory wisecracking palooka from NYC; Imoto (Benson Fong), a Japanese botany expert; and Fodor (Ross Martin), the ship's doctor. The film looks fine (for 1955, that is), with decent enough FX and superb painted backdrops courtesy of legendary "Astounding Science-Fiction" cover artist Chesley Bonestell; indeed, Bonestell had rendered the illustrations for science writer Willy Ley's 1949 textbook "The Conquest of Space," which very loosely inspired this film. The FX just mentioned were brought in by producer George Pal and director Byron Haskin, whose work, together and separately, on such sci-fi classics as "Destination Moon," "The War of the Worlds," "The Time Machine" and "Robinson Crusoe on Mars" certainly eclipses that seen here. Still, "Conquest of Space," despite its at-times silly humor and unusual Christian subtext, gets the job done. The picture looks just good enough, the characters are sympathetic and well drawn, the acting is more than passable and the script, for the most part, is fairly intelligent. Like I said, not a top-rung effort, but surely worthy of any sci-fi fan's attention. The picture may not itself be a total conquest, especially when compared to the following year's superb "Forbidden Planet," but you won't be bored. And, oh...the film's best line: "You forgot your toothbrush."

Ouch!

[skallisjr · 3/10 · 3 May 2005]

In 1950, Robert A. Heinlein, technical adviser for Destination Moon, and author of the story is was scripted from, wrote an article in the leading science fiction magazine of the time on the production of his film. He indicated in the article that the producers were getting nervous, and suggested that they inject some sex into the film, and other things to "enliven" it. Some of that spilled into The Conquest of Space. Presumably the telecast of the sexy girlfriend breaking up with the astronaut was to enliven the start of the film.

Spoilers abound ahead.

The book, "Conuest of Space," lent only its title to the film. The film, detailing a trip to Mars, crawls with technical errors known at the time, from the shutlecraft slowing as they entered their docking stations with no explanation and no retrorockets, to "nutrition pills," which were known to be impossible back in the 1950s. The "space burial" wouldn't have imparted sufficient velocity difference to send the body to the Sun; it would have just taken up a slightly different transfer orbit.

These errors were common knowledge at the time. Even as a teenager, I knew better. Physics and chemistry aren't *that* arcane. By definition, this wasn't a science fiction film, just Sci-Fi.

Incredible color and visuals highlight the trip to Mars!

[pbsbkb · 8/10 · 29 May 2004]

The Technicolor process was seldom put to better use than on this George Pal production of mankind's first journey to Mars. The scenes on the space station (an elaborate wheel design) feature outstanding, beautiful star fields in radiant, cobalt blue. The ensuing trip to Mars contains the usual meteor episode, however it is carried off with a good degree of panache for a film of its time.

Sure, the "spiritual' story line is delivered heavy handedly; but once again the visuals (many taken from famous Chesley Bonestell paintings) fill you with awe as the ship lands on Mars and the crew struggles for survival.

"Conquest Of Space" should be enjoyed for its imagination(given its production time frame), its top-of-the-line, saturated Technicolor vistas; and also the interesting, enjoyable film score. The DVD version, just announced for October, 2004 release from Paramount, will undoubtedly be a visual feast for those that value the George Pal films of the 1950's!

This comment contains spoilers.

[tedpringle · 7/10 · 4 August 2006]

Warning: Spoilers ahead...

This film contains some amazing predictions: The movie was written in 1953, filmed in 1954, and released in the spring of 1955. The time setting of the story is, I believe, the mid-1980s or early 1990s. The older Americans on the station are veterans of a war fought (in their past, our future): in "Indo-China" (Vietnam).

One of NASA's greatest concerns, as they plan the Mars expedition, is how to prevent tensions among the crew from escalating to the point of physical violence, or worse. The time line, 8 months to get there, and another 8 months for the flight back, plus many months of time spent on the surface present one of the biggest problems that they face -- and who's "solutions" are not guaranteed.

Mars is shown as containing liquid water, which is probably true.

"The Wheel" has an international crew.

Not a bad period SF.

[rmax304823 · 5/10 · 31 October 2008]

There is a space wheel in orbit around the earth, not unlike Kubrick's that came fourteen years later. Half a dozen of the crew are being trained for an exploratory trip to the moon. They take off as scheduled, but at the last minute their orders are changed. They will land on the planet Mars to find out if it is fit to add to earth's diminishing supply of basic materials. En route, the general in charge goes berserk and is accidentally killed while trying to destroy the ship. Another of the crew is hit by a tiny meteor fragment and is lost in space. The landing on Mars is successful and, in fact, it looks as if the planet can support crops for transport to earth. The final take off is perilous but the crew survive and their solidarity and confidence are enhanced.

The effects aren't bad for the period. Oh, they look clumsy by today's standards, but not by the standards of, say, Flash Gordon serials of the 1930s and 1940s. Seen from space, the earth has at least a few scattered clouds and doesn't look like an illustration from a fourth-grade geography textbook. And there is a nod to weightlessness, with the crew having to wear the usual "magnetized boots." The paintings of the Martian surface must have looked realistic at the time, and the soil is as red as in upland Georgia.

That's about it for the good part. The bad parts fall into two classes. (1) Scientific implausibilities too outstanding to go unnoticed, and (2) an unfocused script involving stereotyped characters.

I'll skip most of the questions about the technical aspects of the film except to wonder here how it is possible to grow a terrestrial flower in soil that has never known life and is bereft of nitrogenous waste. True enough that "only God can make a tree," as one of the comments. (Except in California, where anybody can make them.) One more lapse can't go uncommented upon. A Japanese crew member (actually Number One son from the Charlie Chan movies, born to a Chinese family in Sacramento) explains earnestly why he wants to make the trip. Japan had just fought a bad war, but they were forced into it because they had no natural resources. (More or less true. They still don't, except for labor and ingenuity.) Well, in the absence of resources, the houses were made of paper and people ate with chopsticks because there was no metal for forks. And this idealistic Japanese doesn't want to see the rest of the world reduced to the condition the prewar Japanese occupied -- "Too many people and not enough food." So he years to address the supply side of the equation without even mentioning the demand side. Too many people and not enough food? Then fewer people = enough food. His perspective is strictly utilitarian and he leaves out any mention of population control. The mission is short-sighted and ultimately self-destructive. We've been there before. We're there now, and it's not working too well. One of the more majestic sights in the United States is the Giant Meteor Crater in Arizona. The first thing entrepreneurs did after it existence became public was to establish a mining camp at the bottom of this huge hole and dig for whatever might be left of the meteorite in order to retrieve the metal and melt it down into dollars. The remnants of the camp are still there, an irritating speck under the eyelid of the scenery.

The crew themselves. Right out of a World War II movie. One a Japanese, another an Austrian, two stern officers (father and son), an Irishman with a sweet temper, and the unavoidable Brooklyn wisecracker. Things cannot hold. The center falls apart. Why does the skipper start spouting gibberish from the Bible? Or -- okay, let him quote verse -- but why does he try to destroy the ship? What's the point of having the son kill the father and take over command in order to save the space ship? Or should we call it "the mother ship" and start ruminating about Sophocles? I mean, it's possible to be driven TOO far in trying to fit this meandering script into a coherent whole. Phil Foster, who plays the wise guy from Brooklyn, turns in a weak performance. When he speaks it's as if his speech organs were made of blubber. He and the other stereotypes are sometimes painful to watch and listen to.

I don't mean to bomb the movie. I only wish that as much talent and skill had gone into the script as had obviously gone into the special effects. As it is, the former undermines the latter.

Not quite a classic, but a must for George Pal fans

[newfunk-2 · 26 March 2000]

Conquest of Space is certainly worth a look for anyone examining the more realistic (at least at the time) cinematic examinations of space exploration. The space "wheel" scenes might be viewed as primitive precursors to the station in 2001. The acting and script are typical of the era--the comic relief in particular is grating at times. But the effects are well-done, especially shots of approaching rockets viewed from space, and meteoric fragments which bombard a hapless spaceman. A minor effort next to Pal's other films of the period, but not a bad way to spend an hour and a half.

A Realistic Space Movie

[dstillman-89383 · 6/10 · 23 April 2019]

This is the closest to an actual NASA space mission to that time. They launch from a space station, go eva when necessary, deal with gravity free environment and other things. It is well acted and well scripted and has a good story. The general reflected a lot of religious people of that time who objected to space travel on religious grounds. This is what happens when you mix religion and fear. However, it is unlikely that a general would hold these beliefs. And if he did, he would excuse himself from the mission or resign his commission. Plot wise, though, it works and intrigue abounds. Nonetheless it is a good science fiction story.

decent sci-fi tale for 1955

[disdressed12 · 7/10 · 31 January 2010]

for a science fiction film released in 1955,this one is pretty good.the effects are above average.the acting is good,the story is good,as is the dialogue.all of these elements are much better than in the later released television show Lost in Space,which i was reminded of.there's even a message that isn't pounded into the viewer with a sledge hammer.there are a couple instances of stereotypical characters behaving in a stereotypical way,but these moments are kept to a minimum,thankfully.certainly with the era and the genre,there ample opportunity for hammy and over the top dialogue and acting but there is little of that.what we do get is an entertaining and sobering 81 minute tale that makes you think.for me,Conquest of Space is a 7/10

Obviously "Unscientific Junk Drama" Mars "Conquest of Space"

[Bob-45 · 4/10 · 28 July 2005]

Having produced the first "science fact/science fiction" film with "Destination Moon," George Pal should have been the perfect choice to produce "Conquest of Space." However, what Pal has assembled is a mess; for "Conquest of Space" consists largely of substandard special effects and plot implausabilities. Space is blue with stars that look like dots of white paint. When the space station moves erratically, it looks like the tiny model it is, since Pal didn't have it photographed using high speed cameras. The writers would have us believe "Sergeant Siegle" (Phil Foster), a character who would be more at home in a Jerry Lewis comedy is an "electronics genius" and that a man with virtually no knowledge of space travel would be "hand picked" to fly to Mars.

I have few problems with the plot device of having the psychologically unstable "religious fanatic" commander suddenly questioning the mission and space exploration in general. Modern audiences might find this baffling or illogical; but, those who viewed "Conquest …" in 1955 were likely familiar with stories of J. Robert Oppenheimer and other scientists who worked on the atom bomb and later denounced its development. More recently, Admiral Hyman Rickover, father of the US nuclear submarine program did much the same thing, in testimony before Congress.

WARNING: SPOILERS I had slightly more problems with the Martian quake that conveniently begins just before the spaceship is to blast off from Mars. While this could easily happen in "real life," it would have been more dramatically plausible had there been a few "gentle" tremors during the year the crew was stranded on the planets surface.

I had a slightly bigger problem with the deliberate "spill" of hypergolic fuel by the unhinged commander. That stuff is nasty, toxic and VERY corrosive. However, even that could be overlooked because of the crew's protective space suits.

The movie makes a big issue of the crew conserving water and energy during their long period of being marooned on Mars. Yet the interior of the ship is always show brightly lit. It's also virtually impossible for the crew to have survived without heat on the surface of Mars, and this information was well known at the time.

END OF SPOILERS

"Conquest of Space" was a missed opportunity for George Pal. I can think of only two other purely "science fact/science fiction" films, "Destination Moon" and "Riders to the Stars." "Conquest of Space" is the weakest of the three, despite having much better special effects than "Riders ..." I give it a "4".

Not as good a Destination Moon-

[ARIES560 · 6/10 · 8 April 2005]

Conquest of Space came out about 5 years after Destination Moon which was another George Pal production. The story takes place what looks to be about 1965-70. Aboard a space station in orbit around the earth, a Captain and his son are in charge of building a spaceship. They are later told that the ship is to be sent on a mission to the planet Mars. Along the way the Captain gradually loses his mind and causes the ship to crash. They spend the better part of a year trying to survive until the orbit of Mars is close enough to return to earth.

While the special effects have improved since Destination Moon (there is some use of blue screen, using full scale sets)and quite impressive, the story lacks quite a bit in terms of plot. Also, it is very similar to DM. Still it is somewhat enjoyable and features a diverse cast (look fast for the black crewman way in the back!)

Talky

[Panamint · 4/10 · 11 January 2014]

I don't know what to make of this film- it is OK production-wise. It is way too talky definitely, but the acting is quite good by the some of the cast (although Phil Foster is just terrible) so when most of them talk its OK as such. The talk is well staged and competently written. Its almost as if the producers and director were thinking in terms of producing a stage play- not usually a good approach to an outer space movie.

The artwork is above average and excellently done. Even the spacecraft are above average for the 1950's.

The whole film is competent but they forgot one thing- THEY FORGOT TO INCLUDE ANY ENTERTAINMENT VALUE. The main reason for this is simply lack of action. Even the increase in activity at the end is not given much punch by the cast.

Its good to see the young William Redfield and young Ross Martin. However they aren't given much to do. Would Ross Martin have been well used in "Wild Wild West" if just standing and talking? His acting would have been good but... unless you're doing Shakespeare an excessive amount of talk probably isn't satisfying enough to a movie audience.

Someone should issue an edited version with Phil Foster cut out- and why not, he doesn't add anything anyway.

While quaint and old fashioned, this is a pretty good film compared to other 1950s sci-fi films.

[planktonrules · 7/10 · 22 July 2009]

During the 1950s, Hollywood made a ton of films about voyages to the Moon or Mars. Most of these films look very quaint and old fashioned when seen today, but you must allow for the fact that they simply couldn't produce the grand special effects we take for granted in more modern films. Plus, while the way the trips occur seem pretty strange compared to the actual moon landings, you must also allow that back in the 1950s it was still all speculation--they simply didn't know better about many of the important aspects of such a journey.

However, despite some very old fashioned ideas about such a voyage, CONQUEST OF SPACE is a very good film for its day. Much of this is because unlike most of the other films of the genre, this one does not use stock clips of old V-2 launches and features all original rocket and space shots. Sure, the models in this production are a bit on the cheesy side, but you can tell they at least tried to get it right. In particular, what I founds interesting is that they used a space shuttle-like craft to go to Mars--not a more traditional rocket.

The film was also interesting because instead of the traditional bug-eyed monsters or malevolent external forces like some films employed, the big nemesis of this film is space fatigue and mental illness caused by this exhaustion. The only negative about this was later in the film when the general obviously was insane due to these effects and yet his best friend so doggedly refused to admit it--even when the guy did everything but put on a hat and declare that he was Napoleon!!

The only other thing that bothered me about the film is that like some of these types of films, there was a crazy notion that the film needed a comic relief crew member (Siegel). While not an uncommon plot device, you'd sure think that the Earth with its billions of people would have someone better and smarter than him!!

Overall, an excellent film for people like me who like this genre, though I can pretty safely assume that many people today would not be particularly interested in the film. It's a shame, as it's an interesting glimpse into the 1950s.

Sub-Par Pal

[flapdoodle64 · 5/10 · 22 September 2011]

This film has good-for-the-time FX, but unfortunately has a few really egregious errors depicting astronauts kicking themselves off a space platform in a zero-g vacuum. In a better film, that kind of error would be more tolerable, but this is not such a film.

There are some good actors and some good moments here and there, and by virtue of this being a big budget George Pal 1950's production, an old school scifi fan is going to have a bit of fun here and there with this film. But the enjoyment is radically impaired by numerous instances of over-the-top and embarrassing sentimentality, emotionalism, and feeble attempts at comic relief.

This is a good film to make fun of, but is no fun if you try to take it seriously. It has little in common with the good Pal films, such as Destination Moon, War of the Worlds, When Worlds Collide, other than FX.

It is interesting, however, to note that this movie contains many plot elements and scenes that would later be included in '2001: A Space Odyssey:'

1. Ferris Wheel type space station and shuttle scenes 2. Repairing an antenna on a space walk scene 3. Picture phone communication between an astronaut and his lover exposing the emotional estrangement of the couple ENGAGE SPOILER WARNING 4. Decompression of space vehicle scene 5. Crew member going nuts and trying to kill everyone on the mission

In the 1980s, an international crew of astronauts explore Mars

[Rambler · 8/10 · 29 July 1998]

Although not the caliber of Pal's earlier space operas, "Conquest of Space" is still highly enjoyable. Besides the unique experience of viewing our future through the eyes of our past, it's interesting to see how many things they got right (and wrong) about space exploration. One of the most interesting devices, especially in light of the International Space Station, whose construction is supposed to commence in 1998, is "The Circle" a rotating, doughnut-shaped space station circling the earth, that is the main setting for the first half of the film. Along side The Circle is being built an enormous rocket ship that resembles a Northrop Flying Wing with a V-2 rocket strapped on it's back.

Sadly, Pal's special effects budget was cut short on this project leaving him somewhat short ended on the spectacle. All in all, however, this film is well worth a look.

A colorful view of a world outside our own we perhaps should have avoided exploring.

[mark.waltz · 6/10 · 17 July 2018]

O.K., so in the 63 years since this film came out, no actual earthling has walked on Mars, but the desire for space travel and the expansion of our overcrowded earth has continued. For this beautifully colorful George Pal adventure, the audience is taken into the somewhat restricted world of the astronauts where small cramped quarters, lack of real oxygen and a desire for something as simple as healthy water is a major concern. The first half of this film takes place on both the giant space wheel sent into orbit and the rocket sent up with supplies and other astronauts to prepare for its journey to Mars. Conflicts between father and son over their different ambitions for their lives as astronauts creates an interesting family subplot and interesting dimension past the science fiction themes 10 years prior to actual human space travel. The second half shows them on Mars dealing with the inability to get off the planet and the lack of water to sustain life. Sudden "Mars quakes" opens up the ground beneath them, giving me the hint that giant creatures were about to emerge from them. While that is not the case, what does happen is equally as thrilling, creating some brilliant special effects and some shocking visuals as the astronauts strive to leave this strange world and return home.

Not a great movie so much as it is an entertaining one, it does get a bit talky in the first half, but is still never dull. The often boring lives of the astronauts is interrupted by moments of their personal interactions, as well as a brief glimpse of a colorful musical number featuring Rosemary Clooney in "Here Come the Girls", a 1953 Paramount film that seems to parallel the mythical view of outer space with its Arabian Knights costumes. Walter Brooke and Eric Fleming are father and son, much conflicted with their differing views, and give very good performances. Benson Fong, as the wise Japanese astronaut, is most thoughtful in his performance, while Mickey Shaugnessy, Phil Foster (Laverne DeFazio's TV father) and William Redfield are certainly representative of the common no-nonsense American, out to have fun wherever they can, but still very determined with their mission. The final sequence is rather scary, and while I wouldn't call this a truly realistic view of what the conquest of space was really like, it gave film audiences a fun way to imagine it as only special effects master George Pal could do.

Where's Jackie Gleason?

[Hitchcoc · 4/10 · 17 September 2001]

About the only positive I can come up with from this dinosaur is there are some reasonable good special effects for its time. Forbidden Planet is one of my favorite films--how this could have been seriously made is beyond me. At times, it's like "The Honeymooners Meet Captain Midnight." A large crew lives on a space station (the wheel). Several are being groomed to go on a lunar trip. Paul Drake (William Hopper) or whatever his name is brings the news. They are going to Mars. Suddenly the leader of the crew goes into a religious funk. He selects his crew, one of whom watches on TV as his bombshell girlfriend wishes him well, though her new boyfriend, Seymour, yells to her off screen to hurry up. This hand selected bunch are a pack of noodleheads who are right off a 50's sitcom--meanwhile fearless leader goes off his religious nut and tries to kill everyone, his son included.

One of the dumbest scenes is the chosen few, eating big nutrition pills while the rest of the crew pigs out on steak and potatoes. What waste of time. Of, course, they probably thought space travel was just a fad.