IMDb-BEWERTUNG
5,7/10
2432
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Ein erfahrener Flieger, aber sehr rebellische junge Möwe wird aus seinem Clan geworfen. Anstatt jedoch traurig oder einsam zu sein, beschließt er, seine neu gewonnene Freiheit zu genießen un... Alles lesenEin erfahrener Flieger, aber sehr rebellische junge Möwe wird aus seinem Clan geworfen. Anstatt jedoch traurig oder einsam zu sein, beschließt er, seine neu gewonnene Freiheit zu genießen und zu erkunden.Ein erfahrener Flieger, aber sehr rebellische junge Möwe wird aus seinem Clan geworfen. Anstatt jedoch traurig oder einsam zu sein, beschließt er, seine neu gewonnene Freiheit zu genießen und zu erkunden.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
- Für 2 Oscars nominiert
- 2 Gewinne & 6 Nominierungen insgesamt
James Franciscus
- Jonathan Livingston Seagull
- (Synchronisation)
Juliet Mills
- Marina
- (Synchronisation)
Philip Ahn
- Chang
- (Synchronisation)
David Ladd
- Fletcher Lynd Seagull
- (Synchronisation)
Kelly Harmon
- Kimmy
- (Synchronisation)
Dorothy McGuire
- Mother
- (Synchronisation)
Richard Crenna
- Father
- (Synchronisation)
Hal Holbrook
- The Elder
- (Synchronisation)
- (Nicht genannt)
Empfohlene Bewertungen
Here in England, the nearest we get to seagulls (we are an island) are ones who steal our fish and chips from our hands at the seaside, squawk and squall loudly and generally seen as a bit of a seaside urban nuisance.
We had the paperback novel in our household when I was young - I never read it but did dip into it every now and then and enjoyed the black & white photographs. So, a few decades on, the film.
I did wonder how it was going to be portrayed, how the birds would talk etc and am glad that it wasn't Disneyfied or animatronics grafted on (a bit before that development, I know). Used to some quite excellent wildlife programmes on TV these days, I was often aghast at the beauty of the imagery, that didn't try to be too close up and perfect but convey space, wonderment and awe.
Being British I did find the American voice artists not quite to my taste - somehow voices added to seagulls are different to ones added to Pixar cartoons, but I suppose that's because while Pixar is decidedly American, Jonathan Livingston Seagull is nation-less and international at the same time. Like the birds themselves; free to fly anywhere.
The story did make some sense but alas, did not grip me. Therefore I was glad that my DVD version didn't go beyond 90 mins or so, rather than the 120mins on some versions. The Neil Diamond soundtrack, alas was mono - how much better if it had been in stereo - was beautiful too, though not quite being able to pick out all the lyrics due to the not brilliant sound quality lessened its impact and enjoyment.
There are those that love and swear by their Jonathan Seagull, whatever format it's in. I'm less enamoured by the project but am glad that I watched and enjoyed this film.
We had the paperback novel in our household when I was young - I never read it but did dip into it every now and then and enjoyed the black & white photographs. So, a few decades on, the film.
I did wonder how it was going to be portrayed, how the birds would talk etc and am glad that it wasn't Disneyfied or animatronics grafted on (a bit before that development, I know). Used to some quite excellent wildlife programmes on TV these days, I was often aghast at the beauty of the imagery, that didn't try to be too close up and perfect but convey space, wonderment and awe.
Being British I did find the American voice artists not quite to my taste - somehow voices added to seagulls are different to ones added to Pixar cartoons, but I suppose that's because while Pixar is decidedly American, Jonathan Livingston Seagull is nation-less and international at the same time. Like the birds themselves; free to fly anywhere.
The story did make some sense but alas, did not grip me. Therefore I was glad that my DVD version didn't go beyond 90 mins or so, rather than the 120mins on some versions. The Neil Diamond soundtrack, alas was mono - how much better if it had been in stereo - was beautiful too, though not quite being able to pick out all the lyrics due to the not brilliant sound quality lessened its impact and enjoyment.
There are those that love and swear by their Jonathan Seagull, whatever format it's in. I'm less enamoured by the project but am glad that I watched and enjoyed this film.
Great soundtrack, great visuals, somewhat confusing and disappointing storyline.
I always thought this was Neil Diamond's best work. He sang the soundtrack, and it's filled with great songs that he did exceptionally well.
The photography is beautiful and the scenes as mellow as you can find: a seagull gracefully gliding through the air surrounded by beautiful seascapes, sunsets, billowy clouds.....just magnificent scenery.
On the negative side is the usual New Age "look within yourself" theology. This is pure Secular Humanism. I say this because some people thought this was a Christian film and it is not. It only confuses people because there are analogies that could easily apply to Jesus, to the Pharisees and to Heaven itself. It was a bunch of mixed messages but author Richard Bach, from whose book this movie is based on, leaves no doubt near the end of the movie - or the screenwriters did, if they changed his book.
Still, a peaceful, calming movie that is unique.
I always thought this was Neil Diamond's best work. He sang the soundtrack, and it's filled with great songs that he did exceptionally well.
The photography is beautiful and the scenes as mellow as you can find: a seagull gracefully gliding through the air surrounded by beautiful seascapes, sunsets, billowy clouds.....just magnificent scenery.
On the negative side is the usual New Age "look within yourself" theology. This is pure Secular Humanism. I say this because some people thought this was a Christian film and it is not. It only confuses people because there are analogies that could easily apply to Jesus, to the Pharisees and to Heaven itself. It was a bunch of mixed messages but author Richard Bach, from whose book this movie is based on, leaves no doubt near the end of the movie - or the screenwriters did, if they changed his book.
Still, a peaceful, calming movie that is unique.
OK, so it's not a masterpiece, but it has its moments. At least it's quite original, which is a quality most people don't have... The shots with the seagulls are well achieved, as well the the natural landscapes. The dialogues are a bit basic and one can sense the difficulty of selecting passages from the book (which is magnificent) to put in the movie. It tends to be a little boring towards the end, but it's a one-of. I think everyone who likes movies should see it. As for the music... I think it's suited and powerful enough. BE is a very nice piece. See the movie. (6,5 / 10)
If you examine the opening credits of the movie "Jonathan Livingston Seagull", you'll see that there is no mention of Richard Bach, who wrote the book that the movie is based on. Bach actually sued screenwriter/producer/director Hall Bartlett for (among other things) supposedly distorting his story, so Bach probably demanded his name be taken off the project. Seeing the movie, I can understand Bach's reaction. To be fair, the photography and camera-work in the movie are first rate, and the locations are well chosen as well. But despite its good look, the movie is a bore, a chore to sit through. There are long stretches of the movie when the movie comes to a standstill, with endless shots of seagulls flying around and around. The character of Jonathan is thin - we learn little about him, and he has less dialogue than you may think, despite being the central character. And all the dialogue the characters has feels random, like it's being made up as the movie is going along. The movie's "messages" feel heavy handed. As for Neil Diamond's score, while I have enjoyed a number of his songs in his past, the songs and background music here are far from his best work. Stick with the book.
I also read the book, saw the movie on the big screen, have the soundtrack and got the VHS tape, which I watched again today. So I like the movie. I'm visiting the web today looking for a dvd release. Watching the movie in post 9/11/01 days - it has a renewed interest for me, as our days here on earth are again in question with world activities growing graver. As a photographer I like big screen and small screen movies that are picturesque. So "Dances with Wolves" is another favorite. I also like movies that move me, even to tears (that doesn't bother me), which this movie does, so "Old Yeller" is another favorite and this database hit the mark on what else I might like. I play piano and trumpet in band and have an appreciation for the instrumentation this movie soundtrack offers. I am Christian and the vocal soundtrack gets you thinking of this life and the afterlife. I enjoy Neil Diamond as a vocalist. I give the movie a rating of 9 out of 10. Nothing is perfect. In closing I was hoping to see this movie re-released soon on the big screen - or at least dvd - but with the comments in this database - I don't see an executive taking an option on that.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesIn order to make seagulls act on cue and perform aerobatics, model aviation pioneer Mark Smith built radio-controlled gliders that looked like real seagulls from a few feet away. This footage was not used in the final cut of the film.
- Crazy CreditsOpening dedication: To the real Jonathan Livingston Seagull, who lives within us all.
- VerbindungenReferenced in Here's Lucy: Lucy Is a Bird-Sitter (1974)
- SoundtracksPrologue
Music by Neil Diamond
© 1973 Stonebridge Music (ASCAP) Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is Jonathan Livingston Seagull?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Sprache
- Auch bekannt als
- Jonathan Livingston Seagull
- Drehorte
- Produktionsfirma
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 1.500.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Laufzeit
- 1 Std. 39 Min.(99 min)
- Farbe
- Seitenverhältnis
- 2.35 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen