Lone survivor, doctor Robert Neville, struggles to create a cure for the plague that wiped out most of the human race while fighting The Family, a savage luddite death cult formed by the zombie-like infected to erase the past.
A post-apocalyptic tale based on a novella by Harlan Ellison. A boy communicates telepathically with his dog as they scavenge for food and sex, and they stumble into an underground society where the old society is preserved. The daughter of one of the leaders of the community seduces and lures him below, where the citizens have become unable to reproduce because of being underground so long. They use him for impregnation purposes, and then plan to be rid of him.Written by
Ed Sutton <firstname.lastname@example.org>
One of the reasons the film now enjoys cult status is because of its blackly comic last line. Ironically, Harlan Ellison hated this and actively campaigned to have it removed. See more »
During Topeka's picnic, there is a grower's label seen on one of the bananas. The fruit is grown hydroponically, not store-bought. See more »
Well, I'd certainly say she had marvelous judgment, Albert... if not particularly good taste.
See more »
According to the Blu-ray commentary, the prologue (mushroom clouds and explanatory text, the first minute and a half or so) was added for the 1982 rerelease to help explain the world of the film. See more »
Like many artifacts of the 60s & 70s, y'hadda be there...at least in order to feel a protective fondness for what is without question a very flawed movie. The miracle of this film was that it was made AT ALL. (Due in no small part to the tenor of the times it sprang from. The shackles on pop culture and genre fiction were loosening, allowing for more serious themes and treatment; of course, two years later STAR WARS would tighten the shackles again.) I'm a little amazed at the many posters bitching about cheap sets, poor fx, etc. Does everyone watch a movie EXPECTING a 50-million-dollar budget and CGI up the wazoo? If so, we're in deeper trouble than I thought. I look at A BOY AND HIS DOG with great affection as a sincere attempt to do something different, provocative and heartfelt, and although it's informed by a naive leftist worldview I don't share, there's a great deal of audacious creativity at work here that transcends many of the budgetary limitations. You'd think oddities like this would be treasured as artifacts of a more open and experimental period in movie history, rather than derided for falling short of INDEPENDENCE DAY's store-bought bombast and opticals. Go figure...
85 of 132 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this