FeistyUpper If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Stevecorp Don't listen to the negative reviews

Casey Duggan It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny

Donald Seymour This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Jonathan Roberts I remember reading Daniel Defoe's classic novel, 'Robison Crusoe'. I remember it because I vividly recall finding it very tedious and repetitive, and I spent a lot of time questioning its "classic" status. Around six months later I watched Luis Buñuel's 1954 adaptation, starring Dan O'Herlihy in the title role, and this has redeemed 'Robinson Crusoe' for me. The parts of the novel that I didn't enjoy largely sat in the middle, where Crusoe is in the process of upgrading his settlement, practising animal husbandry and performing other chores. Buñuel mercifully condenses such elements, and the result is a more coherent (and therefore enjoyable) narrative. Like in the novel, some of the best scenes in this film occur after Crusoe has met Friday, and I'd say that the second half is somewhat stronger than the first. However, I never grew bored of this adaptation; given its constraints, I believe that a 90-minute runtime is perfect for the story. The handful of actors comprising the cast for this film are also fairly good, and a perceptive viewer will see O'Herlihy's performance improve as the film progresses. Whilst Luis Buñuel's 'Robinson Crusoe' isn't exactly a great film, it remains commendably loyal to Defoe's original work whilst making it more palatable for the present day.

SnoopyStyle It's 1659. The British aristocrat Robinson Crusoe (Dan O'Herlihy) is a third son with a wish to travel despite his father's objections. He's on trip from Brazil to buy slaves in Africa when his ship is caught in a storm. He is marooned on a deserted island. He finds the shipwreck, salvage some supplies and rescues Sam the cat. He finds Rex the dog on the beach. He would battle loneliness, cannibals, and joined by Friday.Robinson Crusoe is one of those classic novels that gets remade over and over again. This one is pretty good. It doesn't always take advantage of the lush outside shoots. The interior is rather bland. I like the splashes of color from the exterior shoots. Part of the charm of the movie is to see Crusoe change over time. Dan O'Herlihy is able to stretch the character although he doesn't instill the required sympathy. Crusoe is a haunted lonely man on the verge of madness. He's also very an aristocratic englishman. It's not quite as cute as Tom Hanks with a volleyball. The direction isn't daring enough. The camera work is functional. Also the non-stop narration feels like an easy cheat. It's still a well-made movie with an immersive performance.

sddavis63 It's been a very long time since I read Daniel Defoe's novel "Robinson Crusoe," so a good deal of the story matter in the movie seemed relatively fresh to me, although from what I do remember of it the movie is a pretty good adaptation of the novel. It revolves around the most obvious theme of loneliness, as Crusoe deals with life on this deserted island, with only a dog and a cat who also survived the shipwreck as his companions. As such, the movie has every now and then some spiritual reflections (not surprising, since Defoe himself was a Christian and a religious "dissenter") as Crusoe also finds himself having to make peace with God. For the most part all that was well portrayed by Daniel O'Herlihy, who for the majority of the movie is putting on a one man show.One thing that I thought was lacking in this, though (and it's a significant weakness) is any real sense of emotion. Much of the story of Crusoe's time alone on the island is told by a rather cold narration of Defoe's writing, and that basically matched the overall emotional feel of the movie. It was well filmed, and it did a decent enough job of portraying Crusoe's struggles and adjustments, but O'Herlihy never really drew me in to the character and never gave me any feel for him. To be perfectly honest, the only real sense of emotion I got from this revolved around Rex, the dog - his death and the last shots of the film. I admit that as Crusoe walked toward the boat that would finally rescue him I thought "aren't you even going to go to Rex's grave to say good bye?" So the last shot (of Crusoe looking back at the island from the boat and hearing Rex's bark) hit a bit of a nerve with me.Otherwise, it's a technically well made movie; just surprisingly lacking in real feeling. (5/10)

MartinHafer I am sure that fans of director Luis Buñuel probably have very mixed feelings about this film. On the one hand, it's an exceptionally well made film from start to finish, but on the other, it's way too "normal" for the usually anarchic and often surreal director. In other words, the fact that this is a relatively straight retelling of the classic Daniel Defoe story may be held against it. There are no eyes being cut with razors, no devil coming to tempt Robinson nor is there any sexual chemistry between him and Friday--all touches you might expect from Buñuel. However, I am not a huge fan of the director's odd films--though I have enjoyed several of his more "approachable" films. So, it's not surprising that I liked this film very much. It was a fine quality product throughout. I also liked that in this version, Robinson is NOT a perfect man or some sort of saint--he's very flawed--especially in his initially paternalistic attitude towards Friday. It had a lot to say about slavery and the tendency to see all the natives as "savages". Well done--well directed and especially well acted by Dan O'Herlihy. A touching and interesting film.