The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

This is ultimately a movie about the very bad things that can happen when we don't address our unease, when we just try to brush it off, whether that's to fit in or to preserve our self-image.

If the message could have been put more metaphorically, this might have worked. But doing it straight ahead in such a pedantic tone- whilst being just wrong- doesn't cut it. The fact is a gull couldn't do that; humans are one of the few species that could. Pedantic dressed up as cutesy. Lose!And as far as teaching goes, the main thing it has taught three generations is the grammatically incorrect "seagull". There's no such thing people. They're "gulls". Seagull. Right. As opposed to "landgull"?

*** SPOILER ALERT ***With all the good will in the world, I sat through Jonathan Livingston Seagull with an open mind and struggled with my better judgment not to be cynical. Yet, I failed and the cynicism found me anyway. In regards, to this film, I not only embraced my cynicism, I bathed in it.I have an open mind toward almost anything, but in this case I have to confess that there will never be an open spot in my imagination for a story about an existential seagull. Thank God they are in limited supply.Jonathan Livingston Seagull is based on the improbably popular book by Richard Bach first published 1970. I have read the book twice in my life, first as a child, then later as an adult. The kid version of me simply rejected the concept of a seagull wanting to venture into the world and discover what the world has to offer him. The adult version of me simply rejected the concept of a seagull wanting to venture into the world and discover what the world has to offer him. I'm sorry, this is just not a story that I could wrap my brain - let alone my heart - around.The movie stars no actors on screen, just 99 minutes of nature photography, mostly of seagulls either flying or sitting. It opens with about 10 or 15 minutes of water, sky, rocks, and Neil Diamond. The seagulls are characterized with human voices, provided by the likes of James Franciscus, Juliet Mills and Dorothy McGuire. The voices sound muffled and are mostly heard in a monotone. We don't see the seagulls speaking the dialogue, we only hear it. That wouldn't be so bad if their dialogue actually meant something. Most of it simply consists of inane nonsense like: "The only true law is that which sets us free." Groovy dude, hug a rainbow.The story involves the title bird, a seagull that sees the world of his flock and wonders if life might contain something other than searching for food. His purpose, the movie insists, is to break his own flying speed record. He wants to travel where seagulls don't go, and do things that seagulls don't do. This doesn't make him very popular among the seagull township who call him into a town meeting where (and I am not making this up) they pass judgment on him and cast him out for having the unmitigated gall to have the capacity for abstract thought.Even if I had the capacity to get foothold on this nonsense, I have a fundamental problem with the fact that I just can't get cuddly with a seagull. Seagulls are nasty, noisy, ungainly scavengers who poop everywhere and eat garbage. Opening scenes show a flocks of gulls on a trash pile pecking at the refuse doesn't exactly further my endearment. Apparently they aren't very nice to each other as evidenced by the fact that we get close-ups of the birds pecking at each other over a few scraps of food. Plus, the noise. Seagulls make, for me, one of the most unpleasant noises in nature. Oddly enough, I found the dialogue in this movie to be even less tolerable.Even if I could accept the concept of hearing a seagull's thoughts, I would imagine that what is in their heads might be more interesting than worrying about flying speed. Jonathan's dialogue about his flying speed makes him sound like a test pilot, a boring one. The rest of the dialogue sounds like it came off of a funeral parlor calendar. Honestly, for those reasons and many more I am perplexed by this film even at the concept level. My mind wanders over the two or three dozen fundamental questions that this film raises and never answers. Yet, I don't ponder on them too long. I have better things to do.

First off if you are reading this you will most definitely read the book of the same title.The book doesn't translate well into film due to it's short length so there is a lot of padding out of Jonathon just flying around visiting different places but the visuals on show are very good. The animatronics (rememeber they didn't have CGI back in the 70's) are first class and it really does look like live seagulls.The movie is probably about the right length though at 95 mins perhaps trimming by 10 mins would not have harmed it.As you'll know it's a feelgood story about the quest to be a better gull and the importance of tolerance and forgiveness.I was a bit disappointed that one of the KEY SPOKEN LINES in the book was omitted from the script. When the young Jonathon is asked by his mother why he doesn't eat and is all bone and feathers he replies "I don't mind being bone and feathers, Mum. I just want to know what i can do in the air and what i can't, that's all. I just want to know" Considering the key part of the book is that Jonathon forsakes the squabbles and feeding frenzy to learn how to fly properly i would say that line is a pretty important one.Still it's a decent movie which is pleasant to watch.

This movie not only well made considering the birds are the only actors you'll see with human voices and the drama of a bird born different and willing to go beyond what he was born to gives the example that if we really want to succeed in life we need to be willing to do it against just what we are apparently be able to do. It made of my father a different man and my old one was able to shape the life of many people and help them be successful and others to have a life after losing everything or touching ground after death of a relative, a son or daughter fall in drugs, etc. A worth seeing people perhaps not understood in UK as well as I don't find funny Mr Bean or Monty Phyton... I do like the Beatles, Rolling Stones and Police though. I also recommend this movie to teenagers trying to find their life's reason or their way to triumph in modern society by being different in a good way rather of becoming "punks" trying to be different. I would say that thanks to my father I'm different and because of that I'm successful in my job :-)