Memorable, crazy movie

Load of rubbish!!

Absolutely the worst movie.

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

Copyright 3 November 1965 by Pendennis Pictures. Released through Paramount. New York opening at neighborhood cinemas: 24 November 1965. U.S. release: 10 November 1965. U.K. release: 2 January 1966. Sydney opening at the Capitol (ran one week on a double bill). 10,738 feet. 119 minutes.SYNOPSIS: When their chartered plane crash-lands in the African desert, five passengers and the pilot fight for survival.NOTES: An IDA Films DVD (PAL). The American NTSC version is an Olive Films release. COMMENT: Part of a sub-cycle of films that includes Back from Eternity and Flight of the Phoenix, this one has little to offer except for fans of desert scenery, baboons and Stuart Whitman. Oh, the story moves along okay in its fairly predictable path, but it's over-acted and heavy-handedly directed. And whilst the desert scenery certainly looks convincing enough, the characters alas do not. Susannah York, for instance, is rarely seen without make-up, not even in the hotel shower and not ever how tattered her dress becomes!. Endfield's clumsy direction with its over-emphasis on close-ups is as much to blame as the too-earnest acting of the players and the trite banalities of the pseudo-philosophical script.In a generous but misguided gesture, co-producer Stanley Baker has given the lion's share of screen time to Stuart Whitman, whilst he himself plays a supporting role. Unfortunately, in my opinion anyway, Mr. Whitman is insufficiently charismatic and personable an actor to carry off a pivotal role. He's unpleasant enough certainly, but uninteresting. In my opinion, always reliable Harry Andrews contributes the best acting despite the triple handicaps of a German accent, a small part and some indifferent dialogue.Endfield's clumsy shooting has forced the film editor to use some jarring, mismatched and inappropriate shots.All told, a somewhat dreary trek through the Kalahari.OTHER VIEWS: Color of course is essential for the largely-filmed-on- location movie. But color is used here to emphasize some rather unpleasant violence as well as the rugged beauty of the desert locales. — JHR writing as Charles Freeman."Sands of the Kalahari" tells a tight, pacey story benefiting from its actual locations and solid performances from its players, which help to overcome some inconsistencies in characterization. Director Endfield ("Zulu") is an expert in this territory. Both the film and the make- up on the players look thoroughly authentic. Whitman and Susannah York dominate the film, but Baker, Andrews, Bikel and Davenport give solidly rounded characterizations. All in all, it's an expertly made, suspenseful thriller using the old Greek unities. That old formula still works. Despite its long running time and simple, concentrated plot, "Sands of the Kalahari" holds the interest well. — JHR writing as George Addison in a report of the movie's debut on TV.

Sands of the Kalahari is directed by Cy Endfield who also adapts the screenplay from the novel of the same name written by William Mulvihill. It stars Stuart Whitman, Stanley Baker, Susannah York, Harry Andrews, Theodore Bikel and Nigel Davenport. Music is by John Dankworth and cinematography by Erwin Hillier.A raw survivalist thriller that finds a disparate group of people crash land in the deserts of Africa and promptly start to come apart as a group. Cue arguments, attempted rape, killings, animal slaughter, alpha male posturing and Adam and Eve complexes. The allegory is obvious but handled with skill by Endfield, and it all builds with great intensity towards a truly bleak, yet delightfully ambiguous finale. There's some over acting going on and the dialogue can stretch credibility at times, but yes this is a worthy entry in the survivalist hall of fame. 7/10

Running virtually parallel with "Flight of the Phoenix", "Sands of the Kalahari" rates ahead by a propeller in my opinion thanks mainly to the superb ensemble cast ably led by Stuart Whitman and Stanley Baker. The plot is uncomplicated concerning the survivors of a plane crash deep in the isolated Kalahari who must survive the ravages of the desert, its occupants, and themselves.Davenport is a particularly nasty thug, the ubiquitous 'Mr Negativity' of a crisis situation, York desperately trying to deflect unwanted attentions, and Bikel offers the calming influence as the man who might be capable of engineering an improbable escape. Not too sure whether it's Whitman or Baker's picture per se, nevertheless, neither seems overshadowed despite Baker's producer credit and regular helmsman Cy Raker Endfield in the director's seat.Searing heat and parched throats translates to the viewer, it's often tense despite the two hour run-time, and Endfield builds modest suspense out of limited material. Worth a look if you're intrigued by the "stranded" stories watching various personalities disintegrate, or galvanise, under survival stress.

Now forgotten aside from an occasional airing on daytime TV – where I was lucky enough to catch it – SANDS OF THE KALAHARI is a B-movie version of Hollywood's FLIGHT OF THE PHOENIX. Like that film, it concerns a group of plane crash survivors attempting to adapt to live in an inhospitable desert climate, but there the similarities end. SANDS OF THE KALAHARI is very much smaller scale in scope, concentrating on group dynamics over big plotting and looking at what happens when disparate personalities are forced to work together.The first half of the film is a little dull, I'll accept that. Spain stands in for Africa, and it works…I never questioned the bleakness of the surrounds for a second. But the characters are dry and dull and the film is saddled with an extremely lacklustre female lead, played by Susannah York. In the second half, the film throws us a decent twist and delivers an unexpected story which gets better and better as it goes on. By the end I had been thoroughly engrossed in and entertained by the story.Stuart Whitman is no Jimmy Stewart, but he enjoys a multi-faceted role here and commands the screen like few leading men. Stanley Baker, here reteaming with director Cy Endfield a year after ZULU, is also excellent value for money. Believe me, this film is no ZULU, but it is a nice surprise for a B-movie. Add in a couple of distinguished Brit actors (Harry Andrews, Nigel Davenport), some killer baboons and plenty of in-fighting and you have an unfairly forgotten little effort.