MovieChat Forums > Lost Horizon (1973) Discussion > FOR SOME UNKNOWN (TO ME) REASON, THIS VE...

FOR SOME UNKNOWN (TO ME) REASON, THIS VERSION (1973) SANK IN BOX OFFICE


I don't know why. I loved this movie and I'm a big fan of Burt Bacharach since I was 11yo in Brazil (Now I'm 45 and living in California).
And it seems that this "sink" of the movie was one of the (if not the main) reasons that made Burt Bacharach and Hall David split. Later in the 90s they reconciled.

But like everybody else here, I never understood why we don't have this movie in DVD yet.

Let's do something, guys!

Gustavo ([email protected])

reply

Well, where shall we start? Maybe at the end (for my husband and me) when we were almost forced from the theater, no longer able to control our howls of laughter, as much at the audience as the film.

Ahhh, it's coming back...it was the scene with the villagers toting the lovers down the mountain, snaking around the turns, bearing torches and singing, "Living Together, Loving Together" and a woman in front of us actually started weeping from the utter beauty of it all. Hubby and I beat a quick exit before the local natives turned on us.

Now, for the beginning, polar bears do NOT live in the Himalayan mountains! For goodness sake! Thus one could not have been ambling by when Sally was adjusting her chic beret after having trecked through the blizzards at the roof of the world. Then again, maybe the bear was lost too.

And didn't you love the stomping about, singing in the library? Pregers Olivia should have passed on that one, she couldn't dance well enough for one, much less two.

Let's not forget the charming number in the schoolroom with Liv and the kiddies bobbing and weaving to "The World is a Circle." That one will go down in movie history.

All is all, one of the more memorable theater going experience I can lay claim to. And I survived. Hey, that would have been a great way to make a few bucks- have a tee shirt stand outside when the show let out, charge ten bucks for one that says, "I survived Lost Horizon!"

reply

STOP bad mouthing this movie, it is good in a rather bad movie camp sort of way, listen to The Things I Will Not Miss !!! fantastic song

reply

This movie had good points and bad points just like any other film. One of the bad points was Bobby Van. He was miscast and the character should have remained non-musical, like the George Kennedy character.

A good point is the performance of Peter Finch. He had big shoes to fill in comparison to how Ronald Colman handled the character decades earlier, but I feel he filled them admirably, especially considering the year 1973, when the events in Vietnam were coming to a head. His character wrestled with loyalty to his overly emotional younger brother and the peace and love he found with the Liv Ullman character in Shangri La.

Most of the music does tend to linger in the memory after you've seen the picture, which tells you something right there about how enjoyable it is. When you have a melody stuck in your head for years after seeing the picture, for instance as I did with "Share the Joy", then it has touched your heart in some inexplicable way. I could have done without "Question Me An Answer" song, which made no sense to me, but most of it was quite pretty.

The most impressive scene in the film is when they trudge into Shangri La for the first time. It was like Dorothy entering Oz for the first time, after being in brown and dull sepia color Kansas. The music swells for "Share The Joy", Peter Finch's face is marvelling at the magnificence of the place, lovely Liv Ullman stares down at him like a vision, and it's all very beautiful. Who wouldn't want to live in a place like that? It would be like heaven on earth.

reply

I know it's mentioned elsewhere here, but I can't resist throwing in that this is the film which inspired Bette Midler's immortal line "Of course I'm going to see it - I never miss a Liv Ullmann musical!"

"I don't use a pen: I write with a goose quill dipped in venom!"---W. Lydecker

reply

Have there been any petitions for this to be released on DVD
This needs to be released, my bootleg from ebay is scratched to bitz

reply

Of course, we all have a different take on this..

Bobby Van, hmmm, one of my favourites in Lost Horizon, like Red Buttons in The Poseidon Adventure. His 'Question me an answer' scene - one of the best musical moments in the movie. Of course, in my opinion. I can see the washed-up character he is playing quite clearly, see that he had potential. I can see that he has just fallen out of favour. And, can see that this 'just' has been happening for longer than was acceptable for him. I find it easy to have empathy and am happy when he finds a place to be.

The thing here is that we are not formula-driven machines, we are humans. We have our own buttons, buttons we don't even share with our siblings, and amazingly a motion picture can be a gem when so many say this would be an impossibility. That is just the nature of being human.

George Kennedy was awesome, wasn't he? But, then, I have never seen a George Kennedy role I haven't liked (I suspect I just like the man -- and he does what most popular actors do, simply reacting to situations).

I agree Finch did remarkably well.. his performance had gravity, I wanted to believe his character was real. I was not so impressed with Colman's character (actors from that generation of film-making lack believability for me) but that's how it goes.. and if I have to be fair, I have never been that impressed with Michael York's roles. Just not one of his fans, I guess. So, back to my point: buttons.

I would have to say if I had to pick on a miscasting it would be John Gielgud as Chang -- but, I like Gielgud, so the more the merrier!


To Be is not to be: it is to exist with confidence in sublimation.

reply

[deleted]

I finally saw the film (I've had the Soundtrack Album for years, and I love the score)and I liked it. But I'm still laughing at annmason1's great post. (Especially the part about the woman weeping from the ''Utter beauty of it all''). I must add that my best friend and her parents went to see it when it was first released, and all three HATED it. Oh, well, to each their own, I guess.

reply

It was a good film with good music, but alas, like the year it came out in 1973 as now-we have a world filled with war, strife and most of all among the Europeans and Americans-cynicism like no other time in history. If it is nice-crush it, if it offers some degree of betterment in it's message tear it apart. I could go on, the saddest thing of it all-it is reviled by folks who are both liberal and conservative minded. It was a nice film, it was not supposed to be like the great original, and as for it's caliber of musical worth, the same can be said for just about every film genre from the 1970's-save science fiction, every genre from the 70's has been smashed to pieces by the better decades before and after the most meaningless decade ever lived on this planet. A bright spot like this movie in an otherwise sea of nothing that the 70's sadly were gets bashed by ironically the sad, discontent people of that era-we few who wanted a better world and some nice films to go with it-instead were made to feel like outcasts for even wanting to see this film. I recommend it to anyone who has not seen it, as for it borrowing things from other musicals-so what? Does it really matter? Personally it has a more interesting story overall than some musicals mentioned it copied from-as for books on shelves not meeting this persons taste or why children were still learning if they were a 150 years old-one only has to look at the jackasses in this country who think learning is all you do until your maybe 18-22. I get off my soapbox now and end with a salute to those of you who liked the movie-stand firm in your beliefs of something better, we see what the majority has done to our planet-ruined it.

"It's the stuff that dreams are made of."

reply

"I could go on, the saddest thing of it all-it is reviled by folks who are both liberal and conservative minded."

It's not sad. It proves that there are things so lousy that dislike for them can be bipartisan. And exactly what has being "liberal and conservative minded" got to do with it?

"...every genre from the 70's has been smashed to pieces by the better decades before and after the most meaningless decade ever lived on this planet."

"Meaningless"? For you, maybe. Crack a history book and find out about some things that happened then.

"A bright spot like this movie in an otherwise sea of nothing that the 70's sadly were gets bashed by ironically the sad, discontent people of that era-we few who wanted a better world and some nice films to go with it-instead were made to feel like outcasts for even wanting to see this film."

If you allowed yourself to feel like an outcast for seeing this film, you have no one to blame except yourself. As Mark Hamill once said about "Star Wars" (which came out of that "otherwise sea of nothing," incidentally,) "It's only a MOVIE!"

"An Archer is known by his aim, not by his arrows."
-Li Chen-Sung (Richard Loo) The Outer Limits

reply

I have to go with the consensus - this film was simply dreadful and a major embarrassment to all involved in it. I also haven't seen it since it first came out (when I was 10), but I really have no desire to (except maybe for a good laugh).

reply

[deleted]

I agree!
Burt Bacharach is THE MAN... Pure and simple. I also, have loved his music since I was 11 or 12. I even have the music track that he did with Whitney Houstan's MOTHER! This film as well, was WONDERFUL! I got a copy for the first time last week and the only reason I ordered it was because of Burt's music and also the fact that the Twosome from Romeo & Juliette were in it. [Michael York, Olivia Hussey]. Really a wonderful version. Too bad it didn't fare well at the box office.

Janai P. Canada

reply

O.K lots of debate on here through afew years concerning this movie and the music...

I was 10 when this was released and I saw it in the theater, mainly because my mother knew I was (an still am) a huge Bobby Van fan *RIP*...

I adored this movie and thought the music was cool and classic soft-mellow rock.. Also note that at the time, Burt was on television constantly (usually with Dionne Warwick in tow), so as a kid you were "used" to him being on the tv and the radio, even if you didn't like/appreciate any his music or musical style in particular...

I adore this movie and always did.. I owned the vynal, and happened to wear it out so much that I had gotten multiple copies of it...

Yes, the movie was a flop by the critics, but I normally don't agree with critics.. Case in point.. "Bringing Up Baby" was a flop. and the critics hated that too, yet now it's a classic...

There are parts of the movie that are silly/stupid like the "Living Together" scene.. And yeah, from a previous poster, the monks should not have sang, because not only is that plain foolish, but the vocal tone did not match... The idea of the ceremony was cool with the choreography.. but...

Reading somewhere online, I find it true.. Many people don't take under consideration that this movie was in turbulent times (well as of what's been going on the past 10 years. it was a joy ride back then ;-) but we all thought it was a nasty time).. Along with that, it was, in the USA, the time for "Brady Bunch" and "The Partrige Family" on Friday nights.. I believe those that created this musical wanted the "Feel Good" type movie, and along with the basics of the story, the additions of a "Funny man" like Bobby Van (who was huge on tv at the time) was needed... As far as George Kennedy, he was in soooo many films to list at the time, he had to be in it... Liv Ullmann and Peter Finch were the "new classic" actors... Sally Kellerman was still riding high from the movie "M*A*S*H"... Olivia Hussey was a stunning beauty (how anyone could think she looked terrible in this movie... uuummmm....)...Michael York, well Hello Sweetheart!!! *drool*....

I've seen the origional many times, I find it boring, but adore the book.. I rather see this version...

Back in the 1990's, TNT had shown it without commercials *suprise!! (They did that with a movie like once a week) and I taped it to video *LOL*.. Periodically I still pop it on and haven't put it on dvd, mainly because it isn't that great of a copy, and also I've expected it to be released on DVD.. Reason I thought it would be on DVD, is due to the reality that so-called bad "flop" movies are always being released...

To be honest, I don't watch musicals... I adore this movie just the same... How could you watch this movie, or the origional, or read the book, and not wish you were on the plane and landed there...

It's a Feel Good Movie and it should be taken as so.. Why do people over-complicate things and then watch garbage on TV nightly?? I never understood... This should be released on DVD...


*************
"I am a donut" (Eddie Izzard as JFK in Berlin)

reply

I agree Com-freakin-pleatly!!!!

JPC

reply

The film bombed because of a disconnect between the score and the screenplay. If you look at just the non-musical sections, it's actually a pretty straightforward retelling of Hilton's book. Kramer added a few things (like changing Miss Brinklow from a missionary into a drug addict), but most of it is pretty faithful to the novel. And there are some good performances, such as John Gielgud as Chang.

The score contains wonderful 1970s pop songs by Burt Bacharach, many of which hold up quite well, if you accept that they're dated. Many Bacharach songs are firmly set in their time (look at the score for "Promises, Promises") but there's no shame in that. (Had David, on the other hand, drops the ball when facing the challenge of getting his lyrics to fit Bacharach's funky rhythms: "nobody knows where it really ends," "if you really want the things I have" etc.)

The problem was the attempt to mix the two. The first sign that things are going badly comes with the "Living Together, Growing Together" ceremony. Tibetan monks singing an "Up With People" type song is truly embarrassing. A number of other songs that are fun when heard as standalone pieces fail because they just don't fit with the story.

Maybe Columbia should've released two films: Lost Horizon without the songs, and a concert of Bacharach's score. Mixing the two just didn't work, and an objective viewing of the film today makes that clear.

Mark

reply

[deleted]

Actually I think LIVING TOGETHER, GROWING TOGETHER could work if it was sung by a background chorus instead of the monks. The song it's self and the procession and ritual I like.

One thing about this version is you have to suspend disbelief and flow with it. It also has a distinct anti-war sentiment the one has to over look. I prefer to start the film when the enter Shangra La.

reply

[deleted]

So I popped this in the tape deck again and saw it.. Also heard/read it was online somewhere..

I think the problem with many is that some are comparing this version to the original and that's where the whole mess is.. You can't compare the two at all since a musical cannot be compared to a drama.. Plus one needs to think about the time in which this was filmed..

*************
"I am a donut" (Eddie Izzard as JFK in Berlin)

reply

This movie is bad because of the following reasons: There aren't enough songs to make it a real musical, the first song does not appear until 45 minutes on the film or something like that. The actors are dubbed when singing. Even though the some of the songs are not bad by themeselves they have ridiculous choreographies that make them look lame, like those monks singin or the other guy singing "Question me an answer", it was ridiculous, or the number when Liv Ullmann sings "the world is a circle", just lame. Maybe it would have been better without the songs. The cinematography and sets were quite unrealistic, I know it's meant to be this ideal place, but the sets looked like a theme park and the costumes looked a bit tacky. It's got a good cast though, it's a pity they're all wasted. It doesn't surprise me it made it into the top 50 of some list of the best worst films ever made. I watched this movie out of curiosity to check if it was that bad. Even though I don't think it's as bad as some people say it is still bad. It's good fun to watch if you know how to enjoy a bad film.

reply

winonaforever2,
You are so full of it. You can't even come up with anything original. Everything you wrote somebody else has already said. Add to that you're cynical and jaded. BORE BORE BORE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDvKJcq9ZCQ

reply

Try this site:

www.freewebs.com/vhs2dvd

Read the reviews page and see why it isn't out on an official DVD. And watch TCM when they have one of the classic musicals on. Then you'll at least see, by comparison, how low this musical aimed- and missed.

reply

i try to keep an open mind about taste in films..i'm a frankenhiemer,coen brothers,sergio leone type of guy,but many of my friends dont like their films..so,different strokes,etc..i saw this movie when i was 21..what stood out was how many people laughed out loud at the leaden romantic scenes and the awful production numbers..hollywood had seemed to become way too lazy about the evolution of film in general and musicals specifically..george kennedy,liv ullman,finch gielgud.york and rhe rest(except for kellerman)could not sing or dance,yet they were cast in a MUSICAL..bacharach wrote ditties..popular ones,but ditties none the less(raindrops keep falling????).lost horizon was an esoteric novel that philosophically examined what constituted happiness,even the meaning of life itself,and this movie was insipid in its approach to such heavy fare..the movie wasnt just universally panned,it was a punchline to jokes at that time..by the late 60s,movies were transforming from simplistic entertainment to meaningful statements,in order to compete with TV and theatre..lost horizon ,the musical,drove a stake in the heart of the hollywood musical..over the next quarter of a century,very few were made;and most,like a chorus line and hair,won few awards and made little money..

reply

I'd say it's high time for "Lost Horizon" to be found and re-evaluated, especially with the passing today of Mr. Hal David.

reply

Peter Finch and Liv Ullman were critically acclaimed actors but they were never considered box office stars. It was a major mistake to invest $12 million on a movie that didn't have a real superstar in a lead role.

But of course, I could be wrong about this. Darling Lily, after all, had Julie Andrews.

reply

I remember the tremendous publicity the film got back in 1973. Everybody knew it was out there, but few (including myself) went to see it. The Fifth Dimension recorded a beautiful version of ''Living Together, Growing Together'' as part of the effort to make the score popular-but no such luck. A few years ago, I bought the Soundtrack Album in a thrift shop, and I LOVE the score. Still haven't seen the film, but I might order it on DVD.Whether or not I like the movie doesn't really matter. I will always love the music.

reply

Still haven't seen the film,

That line made me laugh. What's it been two generations now?

I haven't seen LH. I don't know why exactly I probably would have if certain op's were there but they were not. So I haven't.

As for why it wasn't a hit I'd have to say two reasons. People just didn't relate to the plot on any level and the times were really serious to put it mildly. Big things were happening and this maybe seemed so lightweight it just floated out of the publics minds.

Kisskiss, Bangbang

reply

People have mentioned that Sally Kellerman is the only person in the film with song and dance experience but Bobby Van had them all beat. He was coming off a big Broadway role in "No, No Nanette" and of course had been in many MGM musicals. He is really the only performer in the film who could truly sing and dance.

reply

today i saw this movie fr the first time. and i loved it. i didnt see any flaws. had me thinking is there a shangri-la in this world today. oh yes i also thought about the critic who said why are there no blacks and other races there. good question.

reply