You won't be disappointed!

Great Film overall

A brilliant film that helped define a genre

A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.

"The Island of Lost Souls" is the first version of this H. G. Wells story. It was not a good movie, but it did have great atmosphere. And Bela Lugosi. This version is much better. It's a much slicker rendition of the story. The creatures are much better constructed and the overall effectiveness of the film is quite good. The plot of this has to do with a scientist who is transforming animals into human-like creatures. They are constructed in a place called The House of Pain. Vivisection is performed and while these things are human-like, the maintain vestiges of their animal selves. The do have speech but for the most part they are either enslaved or abused. It is a reasonable telling of Wells story.

Hollywood's second of three attempts to bring The Island of Doctor Moreau to life (after 1932's Island of Lost Souls and before 1996's Island of Dr. Moreau), The Island of Dr. Moreau '77 is not without merit, even when compared to the sensational 1932 version. For the first part of the film, it features solid production values- Michael York (Logan's Run) is certainly a better actor than Richard Arlen, and the Sayer of the Law is less goofy looking, though Bela Lugosi was certainly the better actor. The scenes with York and the girl (a cat like in the other versions?) have a sensual feel. And Moreau is presented, as always, as an amoral scientist, whose dispassion becomes horrific.Where this film version falls short, however, is the lack of the creepy atmosphere that Island of Lost Souls fosters- the shadows, the ghoulish figures, the dark jungle, the cult-like rituals. While in the original Moreau creates his manimals by vivisection and in 1996 he meddles with DNA, here we have some dubious serum that alters cells. Moreau says it opens up a world of possibilities in preventing deformities, which might be true, but creating an island of freaks out of animals doesn't really further that objective. When Moreau begins transforming York into an animal, the film goes downhill fast. The rebellion of the manimals, and the dark commentary on human nature, takes a backseat. Even if you're not impressed by this, check out Island of Lost Souls; it is still the best version.

This is a pretty good, if not great, second official film version of the enduring H.G. Wells novel. Michael York stars as shipwreck survivor Andrew Braddock, whose boat washes up on the isolated Pacific island inhabited by the diabolical Dr. Moreau (Burt Lancaster). Braddock finds out what kinds of things that Moreau is up to, namely taking animals and turning them into partly human freaks. Realizing he's stuck on the island unless he takes matters into his own hands, Braddock struggles to survive, and falls in love with Maria (Barbara Carrera), the only female human (?) on the island.Decent direction by Don Taylor (whose other genre credits during this decade include "Escape from the Planet of the Apes" and "Damien: Omen II"), lush cinematography by Gerry Fisher ("Wolfen"), beautiful scenery, and a soaring music score by Laurence Rosenthal help in the enjoyment of this respectable adaptation. Because it's shot in full colour, it doesn't quite have the stark, nightmarish quality of the 1932 film version, but it's still fairly intense, and it is grisly at times. The excellent makeup is credited to Tom Burman, Daniel C. Striepeke, and John Chambers, the man who'd done such memorable work on the "Planet of the Apes" series.This adaptation, credited to Al Ramrus and John Herman Shaner, does manage one neat plot twist not seen in the other versions. It leads to some of the better moments in the last third as Braddock falls victim to Moreaus' machinations, and strives to retain his humanity (and memories).Lancaster is not as campy as Charles Laughton or outright insane as Marlon Brando; he's much more low key, and is thus the scariest of the Moreaus in this viewers' humble opinion. Also, Nigel Davenport as Montgomery is not as guilt ridden as Arthur Hohl or screwy as Val Kilmer, instead playing the role as a true mercenary who only finds some semblance of scruples late in the game. York is very good and likable as our hero; the luscious Ms. Carrera is similarly appealing. Lancasters' longtime associate Nick Cravat plays the part of the servant M'Ling. Richard Basehart is solid as the verbose Sayer of the Law.Good action scenes lead to a rousing, exciting finale. Overall, this is a sci-fi / horror feature worthy of viewing by genre fans.Seven out of 10.

There's three principal reasons why this HG Wells' inspired horror adventure works, firstly the distinguished cast led by A-graders Michael York (as the shipwrecked engineer) and Burt Lancaster, as the reclusive title character whose gene experiments on the local animal population is resulting in terrible mutations trapped amid instincts that lay somewhere between man and animal, a precariously distorted eco-system.Nigel Davenport plays the boozy mercenary protecting the island establishment from its own macabre experiments, while Richard Basehart is a transformed animal, human enough to be the law sayer and peace-keeper of the mutated island population. Then there's the ravishing Barbara Carrera as a naive orphan brought to the island as a child by Moreau, besotted by the chivalrous York, but equally mysterious like her young lynx companion. Nick Cravat and Dave Cass have minor supporting roles as manimals of various pedigree.The second reason to tune in is the set design and make-up effects in which luminaries John Chambers and Dan Striepeke were involved. Moreau's half-breed experiments are impressively brought to life by Chambers' crew, the full effect more evident on close-up, particularly on the unrecognisable Basehart.Finally, if it needs to be defended, the production of Samuel Z.Arkoff and Sandy Howard should please some, their AIP distribution lending a certain B-movie prestige, a badge that will in itself, attract a legion of fans (but equally, render others suspicious of the quality). Overall, while there were a plethora of plot-holes to be found, and the conclusion a little simplistic, the general tone and quality of the film remained highly entertaining, uncomplicated and straightforward, something the 1996 remake couldn't muster in spite of its (by relative standards) gold plated production.