good back-story, and good acting

brilliant actors, brilliant editing

The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

Blistering performances.

I had read the story of Robinson Crusoe before I saw the movie at our 5th run neighborhood theater and found the movie to be a pretty straightforward recreation of the book. It was impressive. I was interested in the story. If there were allegories, I didn't recognize them. Bunuel? Never heard of him. Robinson Crusoe was another on the list of color films, like Disney's Treasure Island and Great Locomotive Chase, The Searchers, Shane, The Command, Sign of the Pagan, Fort Ti, that were much more alluring than the usual B&W fare and better remembered.Now, in the 21st century I watched it again and it lived up exactly to my expectations. Still no allegories, but isn't that a refreshing change? I probably overrate it at 9 because of the nostalgia factor. It would be an ideal movie to take a pre-teen grandson to.

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.

No matter who does Robinson Crusoe or what interpretation they put upon it, the story of a man cast away for 28+ years on an island with only the company of a reformed cannibal for company, one indispensable component has to be there. The actor playing Crusoe by any name has to be an interesting and talented one capable of holding the audience's interest for a couple of hours. He has very little help in doing so.Dan O'Herlihy who was a fine character actor and never had any great pretense for anything else stars in this adaption of Daniel DeFoe's classic novel from the 18th century. O'Herlihy earned himself a Best Actor Oscar nomination though he had a great career, never got that kind of acclaim for anything he did. I recall him saying that he was happy just to be nominated, he never expected a victory. As a story Robinson Crusoe exists on two levels. First there is the struggle just for physical survival where he can expect no help. DeFoe narrates in the novel and on screen O'Herlihy has good instincts in that direction in making shelter for himself and in gathering food.The second level is the introspective one. The character of Crusoe is a typical English Puritan of the 17th century with very fixed ideas about morality. But you spend almost 30 years without the company of anyone to reinforce those ideas you do a lot of self analysis. Especially after he saves the man he later names Friday who is a cannibal about to be eaten by another tribe of them. Friday is played by Mexican film star Jaime Fernandez and the scenes between O'Herlihy and Fernandez are warm, affectionate, and touching.Nice color cinematography also distinguishes this version of Robinson Crusoe. Though it is O'Herlihy and Fernandez who make it worthwhile viewing.

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.