Watch Journey to the Far Side of the Sun For Free

Truly Dreadful Film

It's not great by any means, but it's a pretty good movie that didn't leave me filled with regret for investing time in it.

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

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

If you are under the age of 75......You did not see it when it came out.And it was never shown on TV.Why you might ask?It's boring compared to pretty much anything else available Of similar genre and cast of that time frame.Character development is non existent. Well that's not true. After about 10 minutes of the film goes by..... Every character has developed an annoying vanilla quality.I turned it off and switched to moon-raker.Jaws with his shiny steel teeth... James Bond... Space ships. That is all.

I usually enjoy these stories of duplicate universes or staged time changes. James Garner's "Thirty Six Hours" was fun. Garner plays a US officer with knowledge of the D Day landings in World War II. He's captured by the Nazis, who pose as Americans, tell him he's been suffering from amnesia, that the war was over six years ago, and -- by the way -- he knew all the details about the D Day landings, didn't he? Everything is rigged to convince Garner than it's six years later than it actually is. But small puzzling discrepancies appear, one by one, and they add up. Then the movie falls apart at the end.In the early 60s, an hour-long episode of "The Twilight Zone," called "The Parallel," sketched out the story of an astronaut who experiences a curious flash of light in mid-flight. When he returns to Earth, he finds everything just as it was, but again with some minor but inexplicable differences. The house now has a picket fence. His rank has mysteriously changed (two grades up). And both he and his loving wife and daughter sense there is something strange going on. And there is -- he's landed in a parallel universe where everything is ALMOST the same as it is on earth, but not quite.I've spent some time on these two earlier stories because both of them are so much superior to this piece of derivative junk. Essentially, "Journey to the Far Side of the Sun" is a remake of "The Parallel", but with a bigger budget a far more irrelevant sub-plots. It's weakly written. Part of the fun of the earlier stories was in watching these discrepancies, each insignificant in itself, generate a sense of disquiet.Not here. After we're done with all the technological gadgets and neon lights and buttons being pushed and arguments that seem to come out of nowhere and for no reason, there are no tiny discrepancies. Instead, there is one BIG REVEAL. Yes, everything is the same in the astronaut's other world, except that the prose is written backwards. The moment Roy Thinnes notices this, he concludes that he's not back on Earth at all but on that planet on the other side of the sun. How can he make this intuitive leap? Nobody knows. Credo quia absurdum.The ending, while tragic, is unfathomable. They fix up a craft that will take him to his orbiting space ship but the rockets don't fire (or something) and the little model of his lifting body smashes into the space center so that the movie can end with a big explosion.The director was Robert Parrish, not an untalented guy, and an award-winning editor. For a time he was part of the John Ford stock company until, like so many others, he crossed Pappy and was exiled. He may have been asleep at the switch here, though God knows there's not too much you can do with a lousy script and a bland hero.

Caught it on Viasat Finland having never seen it before. I'm a big fan of true sci-fi (or any sci-fi actually) and this is one of those rare ones that actually makes your brain work. It's got that eerie feel you only had in sci-fi made in the 60's and 70's (think of Planet of The Apes). All gloomy and serious, no laughs.The cast was unknown to me and the acting is a bit stiff (except for Patrick Wymark, who's character is pretty annoying). Characters look as if they came from the 60's, but that's not really a surprise or a bad thing at all.The plot is intriguing, a new planet on the other side of the sun. Propably not as effective today as it was back in the day, but it's still fun. There are a lot of illogicalities and the script is anything but tight, but there are some very effective scenes and the ending is something to remember.If they put a little more thought into details and had had somewhat tighter (and timeless) production, this would be up there with Planet of the Apes. Worth catching definitely.

I'm a huge space buff, and at nearly 44, I've just discovered this flick for the first time. I came at it in a roundabout way from Space 1999, then UFO. I went hunting for other Anderson creations and found this was their first live-action work. What a home run! I actually heard about this movie many years ago, but never knew what it was called, so I'm happy to have found it by accident.These Andersons were nothing short of amazing in their writing, the execution of the completely believable and realistic-looking models, the quality of acting, etc.I don't think it looks dated at all. Let me tell you... I'll take good old models over the fake-looking CGI crap of today ANY TIME! Seriously, most of the rocket scenes looked pretty real. They had it down to a science! If you choose to think of what you are looking at as real, it isn't hard to actually believe it.Also, the amount of detail in set designs, the beautiful photography, the whole look... man, I wish I could go back to that time! They knew how to make great movies in the 60's. Personally, I've lost all interest in Hollywood movies today. Anybody with a budget can do CGI. I hate it! Bring back the models! Think of all the people that style employed! Anyway, I am ranting. :-) If you like good sci-fi that's very well-done, you will do yourself a service by watching this.