IMDb > Lost (1983) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb

Reviews & Ratings for
Lost More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Index 3 reviews in total 

12 out of 17 people found the following review useful:

Not bad but slow moving and bad acting....

Author: Sean Richard McCarthy ( from United States
25 September 2000

The plot for this movie had the potential to be good, but it is so slow moving and the acting is so bad, it just does not entertain enough.

A little girl cannot get along with her step father (Note: her real father is still around). She is mad at Step dad for sending away a mule she loves, runs away with her dog. General fictitious journey in the wilderness, which might be good, except the acting is SO BAD it just does not get your emotions going. It has a good music score & I can not say it is completely undesirable. The girl is cute as a button, and the meaning is well intended, but it just was not entertaining enough for me.

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 15 people found the following review useful:

Little girl wanders around - lost

Author: architect_2k from United States
6 October 2005

A young girl is lost in the desert with her dog. It's hot. It's sandy. Nobody's within a hundred miles. They are lost. The girl's character is so one-dimensional you have to wonder if anyone's noticed she's gone. Her dog is the second most important person in the movie. The dog follows her around but otherwise doesn't add much entertainment value. There's plenty of walking around "lost" and just the right amount of monologue between her and the dog discussing the whole "lost" thing. It's miserably hot. It's sandy. This might be the longest 90 minute movie ever. If your curiosity is piqued and you are determined to rent it, I'd recommend you pick a cold dark winter day so at least you'll enjoy the desert landscape.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

I think we are setting our standards too high for this film...

Author: planktonrules from Bradenton, Florida
3 November 2009

This film was directed by Al Adamson--who was probably one of the most incompetent writer/director/producers of all-time. His ability(?) is ranked right up there with the worst of them--Ed Wood, Ted Mikels, Arch Hall, Sr. and the like. These men made careers out of making super-low budget films--the sorts with budgets that were scarcely more than the cost of film developing. So, considering that my expectations were so incredibly low for this, yet another Adamson masterpiece, were tremendously low in the first place--so the film could only be better than I'd assumed, not worse!! Surprisingly, it turned out to be almost adequate--and a film that didn't 100% suck! Sure, it was dull, the script was clichéd and the characters poorly developed--but that is STILL an improvement over such horrid Adamson films as Dracula VS. FRANKENSTEIN and BRAIN OF BLOOD! Surprisingly, LOST!--unlike most of his other movies, he did not write or produce this film. And, surprisingly, the direction wasn't that bad.

The film begins with a newly blended family moving to the American West--a far cry from the city where they had lived. The new Dad seems like a nice guy but his step-daughter is having problems adjusting to her mother's marriage. This is totally understandable, but oddly the characters keep wondering why the child isn't instantly bonding with New Dad--a serious weakness in the script because any non-brain injured person would understand this situation. Unfortunately, none of the family is particularly memorable, however, and they're all rather bland folks living in a very bland land. Later in the film, the girl wanders off and gets lost. Her wondering about in the hills and her family looking for her constitutes most of the film. And, unfortunately, this makes for a rather dull plot. But at least it isn't bad--just not all that exciting.

Was the above review useful to you?

Add another review

Related Links

Ratings Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history