Hitchcoc As a one time science fiction nut, I always found Ursula K. LeGuin to be one of the most challenging writers in her genre. For me, she hung over the mainstream. This is a nice film that doesn't touch the book, but it has fine performances and a reasonable plot within the constraints that are time travel. A psychiatrist takes advantage of a man whose dreams come to realization, trying to manipulate him for his own purposes. He never grasps the idea that dreams are often surreal and uncontrollable. After Forbidden Planet, I know that allowing the baser things to come to the fore can be disastrous. The problem with the whole topic always gets back to the immutability of time. Traveling forward doesn't seem to have issues; back creates, of course, the butterfly effect and makes for unpredictability. This goes to the mat and is reasonably satisfying, though it is full of holes that could easily render it incomprehensible.

Damien For those who saw it on PBS (aired 12 times, I think), there was nothing like the scene when George runs up on the roof to see the clouds clearing with the original "with a little help from my friends" playing in the background. I think this was one of a few battles the film incurred since the remastered copy has a horrible cover of the song.I bought the DVD and I'm going to edit in the original. Gave me chills.The book was not easy to find. Most of the movie was pulled from the book but the story is a bit different.Do NOT waste your time on the remake, it is terrible. You would think that with the technology available now that a better job could have been done. Too bad.

gramdal As the die-hard science fiction fans know, special effects are great, but without a great story, it won't stand the test of time.Based on Ursula K. Leguin's book, this is (I hear) a very faithful adaptation. And easily one of the very best made for t.v. movies ever.The effects are low budget, but that's not important, the story is amazing. Great science fiction takes us away from the familiar structure of life we understand, and stands reason and convention on it's head. It makes us see the things that are so close to us they are invisible. Great science fiction frames the familiar, in a new context and sheds truth on things we were unable to recognize in their mundane form.This story moved me, in the way the book Stranger in a Strange Land did. Like the first time I read 2001 (The movie is meaningless without the book).It is a story about reality, how we perceive it, how we shape it. How we are important to everyone and every thing, as our actions shape not only our own sphere of existence, but ripple outward effecting everything. This is of course told in an abstracted way, but the message is clear.If you are looking for crazy robots and sleek starships, move on.If you are looking for a thought provoking story, that will stick with you for days, or as I see with myself and others here, decades, then this is a cult classic that you simply can not miss.I would have given it a 10, but the effects are low budget, though that does not make it any less amazing.

flonesaw To those who came to this one expecting the A&E remake, don't worry. You've come to the right place. Although the A&E version has all the glitz and glamor, this 1980 PBS production has all the rest (which the A&E is sadly missing).1. It is fairly loyal to the material, Ursula K. Le Guin's novel.2. It is well acted, arguably very well acted.3. Characterization is loyal to that in the novel.4. It communicates the somewhat convoluted plot quite effectively.5. It carries the message forward. (No spoilers here.)(The A&E remake accomplishes *none* of these.)So snag this one on DVD while it's still available. Watch it. It's a little treasure. Although the glitz and glamor of the A&E remake are missing, it has everything else."Antwerp"