Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

While watching, I had to wonder what movie viewers of the era must have thought just a couple of decades removed from the first World War while the nations of Europe and Asia seemed potentially headed for a second, eventually to involve the United States as well. Faced with the potential threat of fascist dictators and Imperial designs on the world, the prospect of a magical land of peace and long life must have seemed like the answer to one's prayers. But of course, one could reasonably lament during any period of the planet's history - "Look at the world today. Is there anything more pitiful"? There were some interesting concepts explored in the movie that for it's time, almost eighty years ago, seem like they're just being discovered today. There's High Lama Chang's (H.B Warner) declaration that age is a limit we impose on ourselves, and a modest understanding that one requires little to eat in order to live a long life. That latter idea is beginning to gain some resonance with modern longevity experts who have found that lowering one's caloric intake can actively promote one's health and well being.On the flip side however, I found Chang's attitude toward the treatment of women rather dismal and embarrassing, with Robert Conway's (Ronald Colman) apparent willingness to accept it somewhat troubling. Acquiescing to a rival's desire to be with one's woman/wife was made to sound noble during their discussion, but didn't speak very highly to the principles of loyalty or integrity. I'm actually surprised the subject was broached in the manner it was.The version of the film I viewed on Turner Classics at one hundred thirty two minutes was as complete as possible, a restored print version dating back to 1973 that fell seven minutes short of it's existing soundtrack. The lost footage was replaced by freeze frames and still images that take up the slack for the dialog that ensues, and holds up reasonably well for the story's continuity.

Sayeth Captain James T. Kirk, commanding officer of the U.S.S. Enterprise.Why did I quote a science fiction captain of a TV show totally unrelated to a film from 1937? Because "Lost Horizon" deals with finding heaven on Earth, and dispensing with a lot of the egotistical walls we erect for ourselves to protect our pride."Lost Horizon" is, in essence, a story about individuals who are frustrated by the conventions of society to the breaking point as Communist Chinese forces sweep across China, setting everything alight. The main characters escape, or so they think, only to begin another adventure.This film examines the character and behavioral pitfalls that can get exaggerated and ruin our personality if we don't deal with them in some shape or form. The characters in "Lost Horizon" are the epitome of what we might call our flaws, or traits of mankind. The legendary "Shangri La" is a place where those frustrations can be dealt with in one form or another. But does paradise come with freedom? At what cost do all your dreams come? Maybe it's time to watch Captain Kirk in "This Side of Paradise"."Lost Horizon" is actually a ground breaking film in a philosophical approach to addressing frustrations of mankind. Ah, but not in the social vein that the casual reader of my review might think. For that you'll have to live some more.Well shot, this black and white film shows how medium master shots can carry the day for a film. Technically it's a very good film with few flubs. It is dated, but I think stands the test of time.I'm not a huge fan of the film, though I understand it far much better than I did as a boy when I used to see it as a kid on TV. At the time I dismissed it as a simple adventure story. Looking at it with adult eyes, I see it with a far more worldly mindset, and now understand why the film was given praises by past generations (although I've yet to make up my mind entire about it).For the younger viewer, it is a slow film. But, if you've had a lot of world experience, then you should have a gander at this film, by try not to understand it all at once and right away. Just accept it for what it is, and enjoy it.A bit slow, full of intrigue and adventure, an interesting bit of escapism that might lead you craving for your own slice of reality and nirvana all at once.In short, Captain Kirk was commenting on living in bliss in a hospital like environment where nothing can hurt you, and all your desires are met. Even though Shatner spoke those words for his character some 30+ years later, it is applicable, because this is what Shangri La, in actuality, is; a hospital.

The Appeal of the Message Hypnotizes Audiences with the Belief that They are Visiting or Witnessing a Utopia. Because Ultimately what is Shown Fails, Except on the Most Superficial Level Imaginable. What Amounts to Nothing More than some Interesting Long Process Shots, Modern Architecture, and a Deer Park. There is Hardly Anything Ethereal or Heavenly about it.The Movie Seems to Gain Artistic and Philosophical Reverence in its Journey from the Screen by way of the Eye, to the Brain and it Takes Up Residence in the Subconscious and Conscious Recollection and Reflection are Nothing Like what is Actually Up there being Projected. Because the Film is Extremely Unrealized, Disjointed, and Flat.It takes a High Road to be Sure, but the Exalted and Elevated Locale is Rather Bland, Boring, Dull and is Barely Picturesque. Not the Ideas or the Message but how it is Expressed Cinematically. If Director Frank Capra couldn't put together a Better Movie than this from a 6 Hour Initial Cut, there's Trouble in Motion Picture Paradise.It is Heady and at Times Inspirational, Moving and Interesting in a Few Spots but Overall this is Overrated and Over Praised, and that is Probably More of and Insight into the Hopes and Dreams of the Audience than the Excellence of the Film. With its Mega-Budget Seemingly Wasted because so Much More could have been Shown with Only Moderate Financing.

Last night I watched a DVD rental of the restoration of this classic movie, and was reminded of how I and the other students of San Luis Obispo High School had been privileged to watch what, in retrospect, was a pre-release test by the studio for teen-agers' reactions. This took place at the Elmo theater and probably occurred in 1936, the first half of my senior year. Which are deductions on my part resulting from the fact that in February 1937 our high school coach had ordered me to pay for my shiny new orange and black basketball uniform which the team's star had stolen from my locker, and sent me to the principal when I indignantly declined to do so. The principal ordered me to leave school and not return until I paid.In 1937 they mailed me my diploma and I was able to enroll at Cal Poly. In the meanwhile I had a number of jobs and wonderful days on the beach and evenings at the Stag pool hall and a voyage to Japan working on a Swedish oil tanker. Our high school also got to see Romeo and Juliet, which was released in 1938, and reinforces my conclusion that we were a testing location for the studios. I recall one of our high school wags, at the play's most dramatic scene, "Romeo,my Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo," calling out, "Heah ah is, Sunshine." Which brought down the house. God only knows what the studio execs made of this. Curiously, we are just about ready to publish a novel titled "Paper Doll," about a half baked psychiatrist who, along with several of his patients, lost their horizons in their struggles for dominance with a young hooker.