Forbidden Island (1959) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
5 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
Underwater Logged
The_Dying_Flutchman11 July 2012
Jon Hall was a leading man in many adventure films and he freelanced for several American studios during his lengthy career. When he first started in the 1930's he used his birth name Charles Hall Locher, as his father was Felix Locher, a sometimes character actor in silent films. His cousin was the award winning cinematographer Conrad Hall. Jon's first film using his screen name was John Ford's "The Hurricane" with Dorothy Lamour in 1937.

He made six films with Maria Montez at Universal in the 1940's all of which were made in Technicolor and were very popular. But by 1959, he had definitely slowed down. After the TV show he did, "Ramar of the Jungle", he got into the manufacture of housings for underwater cameras. It was because of this that "Forbidden Island" came to be made.

The movie was primarily noted for its underwater photography and its music by the composer of exotic soundscapes, Martin Denny. In storyline it is actually a rather tired crime drama dealing with the usual band of miscreants trying to retrieve a priceless emerald from a sunken ship. Hall heads up the divers, who mysteriously start to die off after one of them discovers an underwater skeleton. The mayhem continues until the decidedly sunken conclusion.

This picture was his next to the last and that last one has become something of a cult item, "The Beach Girls and the Monster" which tried to cash-in on the beach blanket craze of the 1960's.

Jon Hall will always have a place, actually two places, on the Hollywood Walk of Fame; one for his movies and the other for television. His memory will not fade for those who enjoy his brand of colorful adventure.
8 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Not the best action/adventure movie around
myriamlenys12 February 2024
Warning: Spoilers
A man hires a team of professional divers in order to retrieve an object from a sunken ship. The said object turns out to be a priceless jewel. When one of the divers makes a grisly surprise discovery, mayhem ensues...

To be fair, "Forbidden Island" does have decent underwater scenes, including decent underwater stunts and fights. These underwater scenes generate the lion's share of thrills and chills. Apart from that, the movie isn't much cop, veering between bad and mediocre. The directing, acting and dialogue are weak. On top of that, the plot is littered with people who've got the thinking skills of wombats.

Question one : if you were a professional diver, would you make a personal enemy out of a man who had easy access to your equipment and gear ? Question two : if you were a professional diver, would you continue to work in an environment that became more dangerous and vicious by the minute ? Do I hear you, dear reader, shout "Hell, no !" in reply to both of these questions ? Congratulations - your IQ is about 80 points higher than that of many of the characters.

A compelling villain might have redeemed a lot, but here the villain character too has caught the stupidity flu. Moreover, he is so clearly and unequivocally up to no good from the start that he might just as well carry a placard stating "I'm the bad guy".

Viewers looking for better action and adventure might want to watch, say, "Boy on a dolphin" (with Sophia Loren) or "Les aventuriers" (with Alain Delon and Lino Ventura).
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Waste of time!
RodrigAndrisan27 February 2024
Luckily it's short, only one hour and 6 minutes! Because if you have the patience to see it, you will face some stupid characters, engaged in an equally stupid scenario. OK, let's say it's an adventure somewhere near an island somewhere in the Philippines. A few men who think with their feet, because they don't show that they have normal brains, are also manipulated by an idiot, who is also a criminal. Two of the men die very quickly and easily in this hour and 6 minutes, being victims firstly of their own stupidity and secondly due to the intrigues woven by the criminal Edward Stuart Godfrey, played unconvincingly by John Farrow. And the other characters are also played by second-hand actors, totally unrealistic and non-credible. There is also a blonde beauty, not who knows what beauty, Joanne Godfrey, played by Nan Adams. OK, to conclude, if you read the own statement of the actor Jon Hall, the interpreter of the Dave Courtney character, you get a clear impression of his professional level, valid for the entire cast: "I never liked acting. I don't like to be told what to do and what to say and how to say it. I'm grateful to it as it provided me with the money to do other things such as I'm into now, but as a profession, it's a bore." It's the first film directed by Charles B. Griffith. It would have been better not to have made this film! Zero stars!
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
nice
Kirpianuscus9 August 2016
one of films who has, at first sigh, one virtue - preserves the flavor of its time. the clichés, the entire story, the romance, the portrait of bad guy. in fact, it is little more than a film from the "50's. the underwater scenes are the basic argument. in same measure, the music. and the work of Jon Hall to give a realistic character, with traces of coherent past, with the virtues of the hero in the shell of the image of brave man. sure, it is far to be a memorable film. but it gives a nice story, not complex but decent made, with Nan Adams in a interesting role of victim - temptation and John Farrow in a role for who he does the best.exoticism, creepy details, fight scenes, the truth known only by the viewer and the tricks of bad guy. a simple recipes. and a film seductive fr its old flavor. that is all.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
(5/10stars)Also finding some routine in this.
board-528 September 2010
Adventure movie written and directed by Charles B Griffith.I'am not a true fan of this film,cause I feel like the good potential lost mostly because the characters were very used,and despite the better second half of the film,I never felt this will get that big ending like lot of similar movies of the genre,and lot of similar movies of the decade.But decent acting will satisfy the taste of classic movie lovers.Personally seen this film on television,with lot of commercial breaks,that means,if you will rather rent this film,you can have a better time.I don't know how far was this film successful as business,but probably television,and rental stores will help,but looks like they are also can not see real business in this film.
3 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed