Marooned (1969) User Reviews (105)

A little dry, but good.

[antiwolf · 7/10 · 2 April 2001]

I just rented this on VHS recently. After watching it, I remember that I had seen it many years ago. It was so long ago that I didn't remember details.

I actually liked it. The movie is rather dry, but I actually found it a refreshing change from movies that will throw in all sorts of irrelevant extras to make it an "excitement fest".

Apollo 13 did do a much better job of showing how Mission control worked in a crisis, but Marooned was made before the Apollo 13 mission took place.

Slow and deliberately paced but still well worth seeing.

[planktonrules · 7/10 · 22 July 2009]

Perhaps this movie is slow-moving like some have pointed out, though I didn't mind its deliberate pacing. In fact, I think it's a heck of a lot better than its current IMDb score would indicate.

The film is a near-future sci-fi film in which a group of three astronauts are on a lengthy mission on a space station. On their return to Earth, there is an equipment malfunction and they are stranded in space. Unfortunately, there just doesn't appear to be a way to save them in time so the folks at NASA and on board the ship realize it's just a matter of time before they run out of oxygen.

As far as the acting goes, this was not one of Gregory Peck's finest moments. His character is very, very subdued and stern--too stern. As a result, he comes off as a grouch and a non-emotive one to boot. Fortunately, the astronauts (Richard Crenna, Gene Hackman and James Franciscus) all do an exceptional job and tend to give the film a lot more feeling. In particular, Franciscus is very good and manages to overshadow his more famous co-stars.

Other than Peck, the only other negative are some of the special effects. Most look very good for 1969, but the ones in 2001 seem to be a bit better. The film did get the Oscar for Best Special Effects, however, despite a few less than stellar scenes--though most the film's special effects were very effectively done.

As for the ending, it was very tense and worth seeing. So, for people who like this sort of film, it is excellent and gives insight into the fears people had during the days of the Apollo program.

Slow moving space drama with a decent cast

[Leofwine_draca · 5/10 · 17 September 2012]

This creepingly slow space drama was mainly conceived, I'd posit, as a showcase for the acting talents of the four leads: we're treated to Hackman, Crenna and Franciscus playing the astronaut trio trapped in space, and Peck as the no-nonsense controller back on the ground whose attempts to return them to Earth make up the bulk of the running time.

Sadly, 'bulk' is right when it comes to this movie: it's way overlong, with much of the length consisting of repetitive dialogue sequences or scenes which add little to the narrative. In some cases, it actually feels quite stodgy, especially during the lengthy mid section. I was often looking at the clock and wondering how much more of this I could sit through.

Invariably, the special effects are quite dated and often look laughable in this day and age. Yet despite these detractions, the film does have a special kind of timeliness to it (considering the year it was made) which adds significance to the production. And I'll admit that things do get quite thrilling in the last half hour, when we're treated to the kind of suspense that should have been present all the way through.

The actors are the main reason to tune in these days: it's hard to fault any of them, but I think Crenna gives the best performance of the lot as a compassionate family man. Hackman is almost unrecognisable in comparison to the later tough, mannered character actor he became, and as always Franciscus seems to me to be underrated. Peck is very good too, but then that's a given.

Gut Check

[inspectors71 · 31 March 2005]

John Sturges' Marooned, based on the Martin Caidin novel, tells the story of three Apollo astronauts trapped in orbit when their main engine fails to fire, and the slow, agonizing realization that there's pretty much nothing that can be done for them.

Unless.

It's a slow movie, with Sturges taking his time (or his sweet time if you have no patience for this stuff) to build suspense and tension. Miles of film is expended detailing the boys at Mission Control and Kennedy trying to implement the "unless" I mentioned, a bold rescue mission that will arrive in the last moments of their O2, lifting off into the teeth of a hurricane, no less.

What makes the movie work are the very things that were lampooned so accurately by the boys at Mystery Science Theatre 3000, the terse acronym-filled jargon, the performances by Peck, Janssen, Crenna, Hackman, and Franciscus, and the glaringly non-CGI special effects (that looked great in 1970).

For a space-happy 11 year old, this was the ne plus ultra of movies--and the fact that the boys on the Apollo 13 had recently gotten back alive made Marooned more than a leetle beet unnerving in its topicality.

There's a moment that the movie transcends a clinical yawner, and takes on the mantle of heartbreakingly human drama. When the astronauts' wives are brought in to talk to them on small TV monitors, one after the other, and Nancy Kovack coldly tells the NASA suit "I know why we're here--we're here to say goodbye to them," you feel sucker-punched. It didn't seem real until right then.

Then the wives are warned that their husbands are "degraded," meaning they're tired, cold, and scared beyond description. Richard Crenna and Lee Grant have a touching exchange, the commander and his tough, beautiful, middle-aged wife trying to say everything to each other except goodbye. Kovack struggles with James Franciscus because her husband is the Spock of this mission, clinical and scientific. Yet he angrily assures her that they will make it. You can see him expending every bit of energy to convince her and himself that he's not a dead man orbiting.

Finally, Mariette Hartley tries to comfort Gene Hackman, who is bordering on hysteria and panic. She watches in a gut-wrenching horror as he reacts to her reading a letter the wives have written to the President. He cries and rages something like "I broke the lawn-mower, and I can't fix it and everyone is blaming me for it!" Hartley is hustled away, but she stops in dumb horror as she sees her husband on the big monitor in flight control, screaming "Don't kill me!" as Crenna and Franciscus hold him down to shoot him full of sedatives.

It's the most painful and human moment of the movie. Sturges has kept you on the edge of boredom, then wham, it's somehow all real. The movie goes from intellect to emotion in a matter of a few moments. I didn't appreciate this as an a tweenager, but God how my mouth went dry watching it a few days ago. These poor bastards are already in their titanium-shielded coffin!

The rest of the movie is predictable, but brutal in its denouement. You know that, if the men are to be saved, there's going to be some dues paid. I remember seeing Marooned at the Garland Theatre in Spokane in May, 1970. When those dues were paid, my mom was tearing up.

I thought, typical for a woman.

I was clearing my throat a lot and having trouble focusing on the screen when my family and I watched it over the weekend.

Adulthood has its upside, I guess.

Got The Future Right

[bkoganbing · 6/10 · 9 April 2008]

Astronauts Richard Crenna, Gene Hackman, and James Franciscus are on a several month mission in outer space. It's scheduled for seven months, but NASA Director Gregory Peck decides to bring them home early as they are showing signs of fatigue.

But something goes terribly wrong with the reentry rockets and the guys are stranded up there in space with about a 42 hour supply of oxygen. It's looking pretty grim because we're not sure that a rescue mission is feasible. Chief astronaut David Janssen and Gregory Peck lock horns on this issue at a staff meeting. Add to that a hurricane is developing in Caribbean that will be passing over Florida and Cape Kennedy.

But they try and Marooned is about that attempt. As a film it doesn't get too much into character development except during a sequence when the astronaut wives, Lee Grant, Nancy Kovack, and Mariette Hartley are brought in to boost morale all around. It does concentrate on the rescue mission and the special effects for which Marooned got an Academy Award in 1969.

I'm not a science buff by any means, but Marooned was projected several years into the future, the long missions that Crenna, Hackman, and Franciscus were on were years away. But Marooned seemed to get the future right.

It's a dated film now, but still exciting and suspenseful.

Good solid space film

[vincentlynch-moonoi · 7/10 · 9 June 2014]

I don't like "space" movies. Almost ever. But I liked this one. I was tempted to Google the film ahead of time, but resisted the temptation...and I'm glad I did. I didn't know where this was going. Would the marooned astronauts be saved? It seemed like they must. But would that be realistic. Maybe some would survive. But who? As the film progresses, those are the questions you will find yourself asking. Suffice it to say that I found the ending to be a reasonable balance between "realistic" and "feel good".

Considering that we had landed on the moon only a few months before this was released, it was an interesting risk that the filmmakers took. And for its time, the special effects here were really quite good.

But the real strength of the film here is the script and the acting.

Was Gregory Peck ever anything less than brilliant. In a sense, this must have been a difficult film for him. He is mostly almost a "talking head" here, with most of his dialog being between him on land and an astronaut in space; not the typical back and forth dialog. And, in parts of the film he played the bearer of bad news...but he parlayed even that into a good, solid performance.

Of the 3 astronauts, James Franciscus put in the best performance, followed by David Janssen, followed by Richard Crenna. Gene Hackman was not very impressive here, although admittedly he had a relatively thankless role. The 3 wives of the astronauts -- Lee Grant, Nancy Kovack, and Mariette Hartley are all but irrelevant to the story; they're there because they needed to be there...nothing more.

A very good, solid film. If I were to criticize anything it would be that the film could have been edited more tightly and not have gone over 120 minutes (it is 134 minutes).

Looks gorgeous but it's like a dull fictional documentary

[whatch-17931 · 5/10 · 24 February 2021]

A "fictional documentary" seems to have been what they intended and indeed what they got. It's pretty boring though, even if you're from this era. It also looks so realistic that when they try to be dramatic, it often comes across as extremely fake, despite having excellent actors.

The movie also seems nearly pointless after the Apollo 13 film, which dealt with a very dramatic and very real situation. And, curiously, this was released after the first two actual manned moon landings.

The film is strikingly gorgeous, however, with a luxurious level of detail that's constantly visible. It may well be worth watching just to appreciate that. The fx are mostly fantastic, although some important bits near the end unfortunately look really bad.

It just occurred to me, the movie is almost, and ironically, like a very good looking movie star that acts stiff as a board.

Though, the Earth looks very strange, very green and gray, and this is rather distracting because there's a LOT of it. I presume they simply didn't have enough real quality photos of the Earth from orbit to know what it really looks like, and 2001: A Space Odyssey also has an odd looking Earth. I think it's way worse here, though. In 2001, it just looks too washed out, like maybe way too much cloud cover. Also, 2001 took place in the then 30 year future, perhaps depicting an expected different Earth atmosphere.

Stanley Kubrick famously tried to buy insurance for 2001 in case aliens were discovered before its release, ruining the films impact. Seems like this production should have tried something similar. It's really curious why they thought this would work in the middle of the real thing, which was dramatic as life gets. 2001 had a vastly broader story, with (probable) alien life and realistic space travel as merely a mundane backdrop.

As other reviewers have noted, this movie is all but forgotten for these reasons. I'm old enough and like sci-fi enough, I should have seen this decades ago, and yet never even heard of it until it showed up as a Prime recommendation.

The film is just mind numbingly slow and boring. Yes, that's "realistic". When astronauts and NASA are doing a mission, they are not bored because they are doing a job with the astronauts in a high risk environment. But for most viewers, watching endless footage of a mission is like watching paint dry, and that's how this movie is for very long sequences. Did we really need to see them launch?

You could make a twelve hour movie of a 747 flying across the Pacific, with all the details, but would you want to watch that? That's "realistic" too.

Marooned

[Scarecrow-88 · 6/10 · 27 February 2016]

Three astronauts (Richard Crenna (in charge and tries to hold a steady resolve despite what his three man crew is up against), Gene Hackman (who spends an exorbitant amount of time holding onto his sanity), and James Franciscus (seemingly always held together, calm, and confident despite the obstacles before them)) are stranded in orbit around the earth after a mechanical failure to their retros leaves them stranded in space awaiting a hopeful rescue mission before their oxygen runs out. It will be up to an experimental craft (piloted by David Janssen who is vocally outspoken and assertive in his desire to save the astronauts which earns the ire of his superior, played by Gregory Peck) and a Russian cosmonaut in a capsule if the astronauts will have any chance of surviving. Peck, as the NASA man in charge of the space mission, encounters a number of ensuing crises he will need to avert in order to be successful in rescuing the three men trying to remain calm and docile so they conserve what little oxygen still available to them.

I think Apollo 13 (1995) will come to mind when viewers watch Marooned (1969) as the plots are similar in ways. Astronauts "trapped in space" while NASA scientists and the "think tank" try and come up with a plan of action to save them is a ready-made plot which should be, you'd think, an easy sell for an audience. I have to say that I'm one of the majority critical of the laborious pace and clinical approach to the rescue mission; this film, as directed by Sturges, never quite finds that gear which engages and capitalizes completely on the suspense plot that might have, in different hands, been a home run. Still, the special effects and NASA assistance bringing an authenticity to the material (and presentation) are incentives to see the film. I think there's a good 100 minute movie dying to break out of the 130 minute running time. I think the cast is uniformly good…no breakouts, but I think the actors properly convey the frustrations, fear, and anxiety that come with the difficult situation that presents itself. Crenna's fate as he leaves the shuttle to make a "repair to the engine" (a share of dialogue between him and Peck imply more to this than what is presented on its face), Hackman's mental breakdown while talking to his wife, Franciscus' laid-back, all-smiles, psychologically sound astronaut who seems to take matters a bit more sufficiently despite the peril that remains an antagonist, the three wives (Lee Grant, Nancy Kovack, and Mariette Hartley) trying to keep their composure during what is a horrific ordeal, Peck and Jannsen butting heads over what to do to save the astronauts, the 42 hour rush-job to scrape together a ship capable of leaving the earth and meeting the shuttle in space, a developing hurricane which might cause the rescue mission to be halted, and the astronauts in the shuttle trying to hold it together although they have every reason to be distraught provide plenty of melodrama that help to bring a respectability to the film, keeping it from being a total disappointment. This being made during the height of the space program during the 60s gives it some gravitas, and I think the dialogue and inner workings of those involved in sending men into orbit and trying to get them back safely is handled efficiently by the direction and screenplay. I think the film's main hurtle for newcomers is the running time and pace…it just shouldn't be such a chore and bore, considering the plot.

"Get us outta here!"

[moonspinner55 · 3/10 · 3 January 2007]

Listless space-opera from Columbia Pictures (overseen by Columbia's main resident for lushly-produced soapers, M.J. Frankovich) concerns three astronauts working in space on-board the Ironman One, only to encounter immediate troubles with the engine which the folks back in Houston can't seem to rectify. The film, a December 1969 release, predated the real-life Apollo 13 scare (and won an Oscar for its effects), but it's a wheeze. The marooned astronauts start to come apart emotionally, and it's meant to be high drama when Gene Hackman finally freaks out, but all we in the audience can think is, "Didn't these men get the necessary training for this type of disaster?"... and when 'over the hill' Richard Crenna starts musing about his by-gone glory days, you can set your watch for his ultimate fate. "Marooned" is somber, laughably ominous and ultimately pneumatic. *1/2 from ****

Slow But Not Dull

[utgard14 · 7/10 · 5 January 2014]

Marooned is the story of three astronauts (Richard Crenna, Gene Hackman, James Franciscus) who are stranded in space after a mechanical problem prevents their return. It's then up to NASA, in particular Gregory Peck and David Janssen, to get a rescue mission up within 42 hours before their air runs out. Marooned is not without problems but it's a good movie. Its faults are mainly that the pace is slow and the special effects in the space walk sequences are not the best. Other than that, I don't get the griping. Despite the pace I never felt bored. Most of the performances are good. Gregory Peck is a little too rigid but everybody else is fine.

A butchered version of the movie (called Space Travelers) was featured on Mystery Science Theatre 3000. As I have seen far too often on IMDb, movies that were featured on that show have been deliberately rated low by some of the show's more unpleasant fans. So please take that into account when viewing the rating given here. I'm actually surprised it's as high as it is. It's too good of a movie to have been on that show but this isn't the first time I've seen a good movie with a terrible IMDb rating simply because it was featured on MST3K.

marooned

[disdressed12 · 4/10 · 19 March 2011]

for whatever reason,Marooned just didn't do a heck of a lot for me.i found it a b it too slow going,and too melodramatic at times.that's not to say it's a poorly made film.on the contrary,it's well done for the most part.the acting is believable from all involved.and the premise is one that should be gripping:three astronauts end up stuck in space,while their oxygen runs low.but for some reason it failed too engage me on a more than moderate level.the only thing i can think of is the dialogue,which was sometimes a bit hokey,in my opinion.still,this is just one person's opinion.but for me,Marooned is a 4/10

Flawed ... and yet it really draws you in

[kustom135 · 8/10 · 21 December 2005]

I'm giving _Maroooned_ a generous 8/10 because of its artificially low total score.

Aside from being a finely-tuned and detailed look into the American space program in its 60s and early-70s era, _Marooned_ is one of my favourite types of film: it's seemingly banal, washed-out, and emotionless upon first viewing. Once you get past that, it's a subtly-acted character study.

After watching it several times, however, the characters' traits become more apparent as the story develops. We see Gene Hackman's character, astronaut Buzz Lloyd, on a slippery slope right from the start. He daydreams on the job, tries pathetically to win favour from Mission Control ("I, uh, fixed the razor"), and then slides into blatant panic as the emergency unfolds.

When we first see her, Celia Pruett presents an exterior persona toughened by fifteen years' experience of being an astronaut's wife. When Celia, in Mission Control, realizes she may be talking to her husband for the last time, her facade slips from forced, banal confidence to seeing her husband anew after fifteen years of marriage. Actress Lee Grant brings out Celia's desperate emotion with simple, innocent gestures: a suggestive laugh, tracing her fingers on the TV image of her husband, and a whispered, forlorn promise to him.

Even the rescue launch director (actor uncredited) is all business during the countdown, quietly reading off checklists and acknowledging reports from his colleagues. Yet, at the very last second--and still businesslike--he looks at Manned Space Director Keith (Gregory Peck) with sorrow and frustration as both realize their rescue attempt is going to fail.

But, again--it's all subtlety. In reality, people often are, so the viewer has to LOOK for it. Even IMDb reviewers who favour this film seem to want flashier character traits, claiming the film to be excessively dry.

There's a common complaint from IMDb reviewers about a lot of films: "boring--entertain ME!" Sorry, that kind of complaint doesn't cut it. Gratuitous gun violence, sexuality, constant profanity, and guts/blood/guts--THAT gets boring. A film like _Marooned_ (or its nearest contemporary, _2001_), is paced deliberately for a reason. You must watch the characters closely, listen to the dialogue, and place both in the context of the story and setting. To dismiss _Marooned_ as 'boring' means you won't (or can't) see the point, and more's the pity.

I will say the film deserved MUCH better treatment, particularly the inexcusably shoddy ending, some robotic performances from bit players, and clumsy use of props. Yet, _Marooned_ is TRUE science fiction, not that Star Wars fantasy stuff. Did Luke Skywalker ever show any character development over the course of one film?

Technically Admirable.

[rmax304823 · 6/10 · 3 September 2016]

Three astronauts -- Richard Crenna, Gene Hackman, and James Franciscus -- are sent into space for five months to measure the effects of extended stay. There occurs a measurable decline in their performance and Head of Manned Space, Gregory Peck, barks out, "Bring 'em down." Easier said than done. Their retrograde, rebarbative, reentry valves and pfoofnik pins won't fire, so they're stuck in orbit and running out of oxygen. They try everything. The problem can't be fixed.

The launch of a rescue ship from Cape Canaveral is delayed because of a hurricane and it becomes clear that no matter what measures are taken, there's simply not enough oxygen for three men. With the inestimable aid of a nearby Russian space module and the seasonable arrival of the delayed rescue ship, two of them make it.

The emphasis is as much on drama as on the technical events themselves, which are mostly rendered in a lingo unintelligible to the common man. There is the obligatory scene in which the three wives are called in to say good-bye to their doomed mates in space. The weakest of the three, Gene Hackman, goes berserk, which is not Hackman's forte.

In some ways the most notable element of the plot is the help given by the Russian cosmonaut. It must be remembered that this is 1969, the height of the Cold War, when the Soviet Union was an avowed enemy. It's good to see the comradeship between space explorers regardless of nationality clearly illustrated on film. Morever, the Russian guy is not a scowling, bald, sweating aardvark. The actor is perfectly normal and smiles as he feeds air to one of the men.

The special effects are fine, although the drama inherent in such a situation isn't really effectively rendered. Not much acting is required of anyone. The musical score is apt -- one dreadful, ominous chord during scenes of danger.

It Ain't No Cinematic Masterpiece...

[sheepdater · 4/10 · 3 June 2013]

As a frequent user of the IMDb, I rarely write reviews but I feel compelled to put my 2 cents in on this one. I'm a science fiction fan, so I have seen and appreciated some very obscure works, yet I never heard of this movie. There is a big reason why... it's not good, it's not a classic, and that's why it's forgotten. First, I have to ask... why do people who rate movies like this a perfect 10 think anybody reads their reviews? You are stating this is the most superb piece of filmmaking art you have ever seen. Seriously? All you have proved is that whatever you have to say is totally worthless.

This movie is from 1969, so it's important to look at it in context. They threw together a few big stars & capitalized on the two biggest fads of the era: space & The Cold War. This could have been a classic if it were a 30 minute Twilight Zone episode. It's over 2 hour runtime borders on painful. It represents Hollywood appealing to the nation's lowest common denominator by combining a fad with star power and little else. Obviously they are masters of exploiting public stupidity since there are still people tasteless enough to keep raving about this flick 40+ years later.

Considered historically, it provides indisputable proof that the moon landing was 100% real, because not even Hollywood could fake it. It's award winning special effects make you wonder how the actors were able to keep a straight face while doing their zero G "acrobatics". Winning the Oscar has to be the Academy's version of dark humor considering the winner in its category the previous year was 2001: A Space Odyssey. The only reason this movie should be mentioned in the same breath as Kubrick's masterpiece is to point out how it's the opposite of everything that makes 2001 a work of art.

I respect the fact that many reviewers have a soft spot for this movie because they still look at it with child's eyes. I'm a little younger so my child nerd affection goes to movies like Space Camp. Yet even though I thought Space Camp was "wicked awesome" as a kid, I won't waste your time telling you it was a cinematic masterpiece. In fact Marooned can't even stand up to other Sci-fi disappointments with big potentials and poor execution, such as The Black Hole or Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Those two stinkers don't exactly set the bar very high either.

Just like Marooned is no perfect 10, it's not the very worst movie in the world either. It's got big stars and its about the space race & that can go along way. Just not a 2 hours and 14 minutes long of a way. It's a bit sub par of average in the history of Hollywood. Watch it if you wish to relive a piece of your childhood or get a slice of what America was crazy about at the time. Just do NOT expect a grand story or an amazing cinematic experience & you won't be disappointed.

Franciscus steals the film from Hackman, Peck and Jansen!

[ubercommando · 30 June 2004]

OK, the film is plodding and the over caution and dourness of Gregory Peck's Dr. Keith gets irritating, but James Franciscus, stalwart of many a tv movie and dodgy international co-production, puts in a career best performance as the scientist-astronaut struggling to keep a grip on not only his faculties, but those of his fellow astronauts. Because he can work out scientifically what's going to happen, Clayton Stone (Franciscus) has the added burden. The scenes where he's trying to convince his wife back on Earth that they're going to make it, when the evidence is telling him in his mind of the opposite, the way he struggles with trying to convey how he feels when he's more a cerebral person and the end when its down to him to rescue himself and Buzz Lloyd (Hackman) are all excellently portrayed. It's a shame that he was seldom given another role that would have as much depth.

This is the Saga of Ironman formed by three marooned astronauts in the deep outer space and the ensuing rescue attempt

[ma-cortes · 6/10 · 26 August 2020]

A tense thriller and extremely realistic space movie at the time its realization , dealing with three astronauts go in the rocket : Jim Pruett (Richard Crenna), Clayton Stone (James Franciscus) and Buzz Lloyd (Gene Hackman). Back at base, Charles Keith (Gregory Peck) wonders if after eight months in space they could perform the easiest manual tasks. It seems to be a "routine" flight , but things go very wrong, and prospects of a safe return fade . Once in space the astronauts take off their helmets they lose backup for some reason. The mission Director (George Gaynes) decides that they need to use the primary thrust, because the secondary is damaged. The communications officer hears mishaps , retro-fires don't work ; as the NASA mission has an accident in the aircraft . Then , the workers at NASA, try to figure out a way to get the astronauts home safely. Subsequent tensions within the crew and numerous technical problems threaten both the astronauts' survival and their safe return to Earth. Only 55 minutes left to rescue them. While the whole world watches and waits...especially their three wives (Lee Grant , Nancy Kovack , Mariette Hartley) . Houston, we have a problem.

A descriptive film about space mission with 3 marooned astronauts which had the misfortune to go out on release at precisely the time when the astronauts of Apollo 13 were fighting with an exactly similar emergency . Faced with real-life competition , the movie failed at box office due to its overlong runtime , slow-moving and was undeservedly buried ; however , nowadays is better deemed than when it was released . The plot is plain and simple , bearing remarkable and striking resemblance to subsequent Apollo 13 (1995) by Ron Howard , as three brave astronauts : Richard Crenna , James Franciscus , Gene Hackman , stranded 205,000 miles from Earth in a crippled spacecraft when its retro-rockets misfire , as they fight a desperate battle to survive , unable to go back to Earth , meanwhile , at Mission Control, astronaut David Janssen , flight director Gregory Peck and a heroic ground crew race against time and the odds to bring them home. The picture packs tension , intrigue , chills and the suspense builds remorselessly to a neat conclusion . This is a story of sacrifice , averted tragedy , comradeship , heroism and describes a will of creativity and effort on the technicians who ran the early space missions . The wide-screen are first-rate , as well as the special effects that are the main thing this Sci-Fi picture has going for it . Several dollars' worth of Hollywood top-drawer cast is partially wasted in this flick of three astronauts unable to return to Earth .

The motion picture was professionally directed by John Sturges, though with no much enthusiasm , and including some moments amazingly inept ; however , winning Oscar for Special Effects , FX, that are really fabulous . Sturges began his directing career at Columbia Pictures, from there he moved on to MGM where he filmed more "B" pictures, albeit on a larger budget . He established an independent production company in 1959, releasing through United Artists. From 1960-67 he worked under contract for United Artists. His first major hit was the western Dog Day at Black Rock (1955) , which he shot in just three weeks, wrapping up virtually every scene in a single take . He specialized in robust action pictures, particularly westerns. He excelled at bringing to life tautly written stories about tough characters facing difficult circumstances . Throughout his career he regularly alternated hits with misses . He has also been criticized for his lack of stylistic trademarks , though his best films remain exciting to watch . Sturges was expert on all kind of genres , but especially warlike such as : ¨Great Escape¨, ¨Ice Station Zebra¨ and ¨Eagle has landed¨ and Western such as ¨Last train of Gun Hill¨, ¨Magnificent Seven¨, ¨Backlash¨, ¨Law and Jake Webb¨, ¨Joe Kidd¨ and Chino¨, among others . Rating : 6/10 . Passable and acceptable , but a little bit boring and tiring . Well worth seeing .

Fun drama even if very hokey

[fred-houpt · 6/10 · 20 November 2006]

You have to remember several things when you watch this film. First, this was before Star Wars, which came out 8 years later. Second, this film came out a year after 2001 A Space Odeessey. The Kubrick film is so vastly superior in every possible way and most especially in the completely unique special effects he created for the film. Sturgess was not cut out of the same creative cloth in my view. Even more bizarre is that "Marooned" won the Academy Award that year for Special Effects. I know: it's hilarious to think of that now.

Given all it's shortcomings which were many, the film has lots going for it. You have great actors who give a believable performance of men under extreme stress and pressure and fear. The wives, unfortunately are reduced to eye-candy ciphers who are minuscule emotional dots on the large scale rescue effort. Gregory Peck gives a chilling performance of a director of operations who handles everything with a calculating and emotionally controlled manner. Once in a while he lets loose and seems less wooden and succumbs to outbursts of emotion. I say chilling because (this is a spoiler*********) he has to bring himself to the terrible place of suggesting a horrible idea to the three astronauts on board: one of them has to leave in order for the other two to have even a sliver of a chance of surviving on reduced oxygen. He handles this situation by suppressing all his own emotion and by just hinting at the idea without saying it out loud. It is a very uncomfortable moment and it plays out as effective high drama.

There is plenty silly with this film. The handling of weightlessness is very poor by our CGI-George Lucas-ILM standards. The space station looks way too big and almost empty which is not how they build space stations. The Apollo command module did NOT make the return trip back to earth: just a small pod that sat at the top end of the module, which had the heat shield. The fact that the hurricane sort of just crept up on them was a bit of a stretch. The fact that NASA had NO properly trained reserve astronaut to attempt the rescue was unbelievable. The fact that Peck's character over-ruled many critical and standard safety checks before launching a military rocket was unbelievable. Although the team apparently had a huge "rescue and recovery" manual, they all act as if it did not exist. That they let the marooned astronauts circle the earth without a clear and early awareness that their oxygen was going to run out was hard to believe. That the Russians were able to maneuver their space craft to intercept the astronauts was hard to believe, given that it had entered a totally different orbit on the other side of the world. That the astronauts figured that it was possible to do an EVA and try and fix the stalled engine is laughable; it is not like getting out of your car and tapping on the carburetor. But heh, that's Hollywood and it was just silly.

Other than an even longer list of hard to believe points, if you totally suspend your critical mind and enjoy the twist of tension as it mounts, this is a fun movie. Grim faces, pounded table tops, predictable emotional outbursts all aside, they did what they could with a small budget and made it worth the few dollars movies used to cost to watch.

Of course what is curious is when you actually do the comparison to what Kubrick pulled off in 2001. His technical insights were so far in advance that it took Star Wars to outdo and then even at times Lucas appeared very heavy fisted with his pyrotechnics; nowhere in the first 3 Star Wars films do you get the elegance and simplicity of the Kubrick camera innovations that were the hallmarks of the special effects. I know I'm probably in the minority here, but of the three films I've mentioned here, Kubrick's, for me, is the champion. Comparisons to the much later Apollo 13 are not fair: it's a much better film, used REAL weightlessness and a much bigger budget. Still, Marooned is fun for a rainy night when there is just garbage to watch on the television.

slower than a NASA news conference

[SnoopyStyle · 4/10 · 2 March 2019]

American astronauts Jim Pruett (Richard Crenna), Buzz Lloyd (Gene Hackman), and Clayton Stone (James Franciscus) have been living in the new space station for five months. The men are wore out. Their spacecraft malfunctions on the return trip and they are stranded in orbit. NASA Administrator Charles Keith (Gregory Peck) leads mission control in the rescue effort.

This is a slow dry thriller. It has as many thrills as a NASA news conference. Peck is playing a dry technocrat. It's more interested in a debate than the rescue effort. It has no juice and dies on the screen. It did win the Oscar for Special Visual Effects over its only competition, something called Krakatoa: East of Java. That's something. Right? Right...

Science Fact That Hasn't Dated Very Well

[Theo Robertson · 7/10 · 26 February 2014]

A seventh month manned space mission by NASA is cut short by two months because the three astronauts show signs of losing their mental and physical faculties . On their return to Earth the astronauts retro rockets on the module fail meaning their trapped in space . The hierarchy of NASA have to find a way of returning their astronauts to Earth because not only the astronauts die but will probably mean the end of the American space program

I was somewhat surprised this was broadcast on the TCM channel simply down to the fact that it wasn't a Western ! One wonders if it was shown to tie in with GRAVITY about to sweep all the technical awards at the Oscars on Sunday , if not pick up Oscar for Best Picture . Directed by John Sturges who gave us some classic American pictures of the 1960s and written by Martin Caidin who wrote the source novel that THE SIX MILLION DOLLAR MAN was based upon , MAROONED was released 18 months after 2001 was released and you have to keep this in context when watching it in 2013 . The shot lengths are rather long and self congratulatory compared to what we would get nowadays the effects are impressive for the time and one wonders if the production team might considered making the film in 3-D if it was fashionable in 1969 ?

From a dramatic point of view you can see it's obviously based upon scientific fact and not science fiction . MAROONED deserves great credit for this but again this might be a turn off for a modern day audience as mission control calmly talk to the astronauts in capsule about the dire situation who reply to mission control in equally calm tones . Anyone who wanted to travel in to space in the early years of the program was specially selected because of their psychological strength so this fact based but it does seem strange that what is being said is " Well chaps things are looking bad and if they don't work you'll slowly suffocate to death thousand of miles out in in space " to which the reply " Okay try and not let this happen mission control " as if the characters are discussing the menu in a restaurant . That said it is preferable than watching Ben Affleck and other Hollywood pretty boys throwing objects about screaming " Get me in to a damn space rocket " and other mock heroics

MAROONED is a film from another era when humanity just achieved the greatest endeavor in human history by landing men on the Moon and safely returning them back to Earth . This achievement soon became quickly forgotten but this film is a time capsule of sorts celebrating the endeavor of space travel and the dangers involved and should be watched with this in mind

You will feel marooned

[InzyWimzy · 2/10 · 4 October 2000]

This movie blows big ones. It's supposed to be this dramatic film about "Disaster in space". The only disaster was watching this snorefest. Big name actors like Gene Hackman and Gregory Peck really had no effect. Gene does his best "Shatner" acting as he goes bezerk in his tin can. Stoney looks kind of "stoney". Footage reel of actual lift-offs and space shots are shown to convey excitement. It doesn't. You really have no empathy or care whether or not anyone lives. The end has a kind of funny twist, but you will be elated with joy when you see the words "The End". And to think this film won an Oscar for effects. I think back then, you got an award for being able to tie your shoes.

For fun, watch MST3K version. Crow does a killer Peck.

So-So Space Thriller with Dated Special Effects

[mrb1980 · 6/10 · 18 January 2010]

"Marooned" is an interesting film but falls short of its potential, instead becoming yet another thriller with lots of slow stretches before some frenzied action at the end of the film.

Astronauts Pruett (Richard Crenna), Lloyd (Gene Hackman), and Stone (James Franciscus) have spent months in space aboard a cramped space station and are returning home when their spacecraft suffers a malfunction and cannot re-enter the earth's atmosphere. NASA director Keith (Gregory Peck) spends most of the film evaluating a possible rescue mission, comforting the crew's nervous wives, and trying to control the cynical press. Eventually chief astronaut Ted Dougherty (David Janssen) blasts off on a rescue mission, while the men are slowing dying of oxygen deprivation.

The final sequence is quite excruciating, as the oxygen-starved crew begins to act irrationally while both Dougherty's ship and a Soviet ship converge on the crippled spacecraft. Pruett sacrifices himself so that the others may live, leading to a somewhat muddled ending.

The astronaut actors give fairly decent performances. Crenna gives a lazy interpretation of a person somewhat weary of spaceflight, Franciscus is the young and handsome optimist, and Hackman goes rather crazy, in true unstable Ernest Borgnine style. The actresses playing their wives (Lee Grant, Mariette Hartley, and Nancy Kovack) are given little to do besides wring their hands and look worried the entire time. Gregory Peck, as Keith, understates his role so much that he appears to be unconcerned about his soon-to-be-dead crew. Janssen does a good job as the maverick chief astronaut who is determined to rescue his friends. Scott Brady plays a chattering NASA announcer.

The special effects are dated but not bad for 1969. However, "Marooned" could have been a much more exciting movie if not for the long, draggy sequences of the astronauts drifting around in space and bemoaning their fate. The movie then goes over the top at the end, with the crew going uncomfortably berserk as they run short of oxygen. It's not a bad film, it's not great—but it will take you back to the days of the early moon landings.

The thinking man's science fiction films

[mark.waltz · 5/10 · 18 February 2022]

The late 1960's and early 1970's had a few of these, with "2001: A Space Odyssey" and "Silent Running" among them, a bit more personal uand less focused on what type of effects that had been utilized in films about outer space over the previous decade. It's not a really character-driven film although a few of the characters do have their moments, particularly Gene Hackman who is one of three astronauts stranded in outer space, slowly losing oxygen which has NASA desperate to get up there to save them. David Janseen and James Franciscus are the other two, with Lee Grant, Nancy Kovack and Mariette Hartley as their wives worried back on Earth, and hoping for good news from the commanders of the mission, Gregory Peck and Richard Crenna.

While the film is very slow, that is necessary at times to show the details of this Mission, so while you are getting all that oh, you are also getting some great visuals what they see in outer space which includes Earth from a great distance, as well as a wonderful shot of the ship being sent into space being flown to where it will launch. This is a film done in great detail with excellent cinematography, special effects, music and editing, and for a patient viewer, it can be very gripping.

Perhaps the biggest tension comes from the individual reactions of each of the three astronauts, particularly Hackman as she has a breakdown that has them feel forced to sedate him so he doesn't cause any further damage. Along the way, they have to make a decision about the dissolving oxygen which could cost every one of them their lives they all remain inside. The scene where Peck has to reveal to one of the wives the date of their husband is truly tragic. I can see why this film has slipped Into obscurity because it isn't as commercial as other big space epics of the time, but that doesn't mean that it isn't worth watching. It was done on a very high budget which is very visible on screen, and unfortunately did not get the commercial success that it would have had it been more about the types of elements that viewers wanted in science fiction films about space travel.

Great for fans of science fiction; others need not apply

[philr8 · 8/10 · 27 June 2006]

I found this movie while I was searching through all the new movies on OnDemand. I usually look through the new movies about once a week, searching for some hidden gem I've never heard of. I'm not always successful, but this time I was.

I'm a pretty big sci-fi fan and especially love "speculative fiction;" meaning content about the near future that isn't necessarily out-of-this-world sci-fi. Authors like Philip K Dick and Jonathan Lethem excel in this genre, and I like Marooned fits in it very nicely.

Released in 1969, it obviously takes place at a not-much-later date - the inclusion of SKYLAB, launched in 1973, proves this. The rescue vehicle used also looks like a very crude version of the space shuttle - a futuristic test vehicle that looks grounded in reality enough to escape being campy. A few lines of dialogue also hint that a Mars expedition is something that is considered to be right around the corner.

Most complaints in the comments section refer to the pacing. All i can say is: go read a book. If 90-minute action fests are your barometer for the worth of a film, go elsewhere. There are no exploding fireballs or meteors ripping through space stations with stereotypical crazy Russians here. Instead, you get a fully realized and believable view into what might happen if some of our astronauts became stranded in space.

Personally, I was invested fully into the film and felt sad when the movie ended, the same way I feel when I finish a good book. The pacing here, if you are interested in the subject matter, is fine. For fans of science fiction, this movie is a must-see. For those of us who actually can sit through a book and enjoy it (and I don't mean "page-turners"), this movie is a great way to spend an afternoon. For everyone else, please avoid. You will only drag this movie's rating further into the mud.

Apollo - authentic in 1969

[MissClassicTV · 6/10 · 3 December 2015]

The best thing about Marooned is Lee Grant. She's really wonderful in a tiny role as the wife of the commander.

The worst thing about Marooned is that it's dated. Here's a sample line of dialogue that made me cringe: "Celia and I have been in this business 10 years. We learned that the best thing is for us girls to keep our feelings to ourselves and let the men get on with their jobs. Right, Celia?"

This is a dramatic story about three astronauts stranded in orbit. Richard Crenna, the spacecraft commander, and James Franciscus, the science systems astronaut, are very good. I especially liked Franciscus. Unfortunately, Gregory Peck is kind of stiff and stoic as the man in charge. Gene Hackman is the Apollo guidance pilot and as he gradually goes crazy, I'm not sure if I didn't like his acting or I didn't like his character. Anyway, I did not enjoy watching him.

The makers of this movie went to great lengths to be very accurate in their depiction of mission control, the Apollo capsule, costuming and such. Great production values all around. The storm looks really authentic too. It won an Oscar for best visual effects in 1970.

David Janssen plays an Air Force colonel who wants to launch a rescue mission against all odds. He's the heroic senior astronaut on the ground who wants to fly the X-RV into space to save them. It's never before been flown into space so there are some inherent dangers. When it's finally launched, it's actually a pretty thrilling sight.

It's a very quiet movie and the pacing is kind of slow. It's not bad, but overall, the movie had too much technology and perhaps too much realism - it needed a bit more storytelling and drama.

Long, slow, boring and no music score?!

[rhvaldez · 1/10 · 24 July 2004]

I'm a huge fan of space, but this movie just bores me to death.

First off, the movie feels much longer than its 130 minute length. It just feels more like three or four hours instead.

The movie actually has no music score at all. It just has a electronic hum as credits music. Uh, why? 2001, Apollo 13, even Countdown have music scores.

Some people say that this movie is realistic, but in real life, NASA flight directors and normal mission control men can't talk to the spacecraft. Only CAPCOM, who is usually an active astronaut, not the head of the astronaut core, like Ted Doughterty (who is supposed like Deke Slayton [who was inactive because of an inner-ear infection]). Overacting is probably the biggest killer in this movie. Gene Hackman is so over-the-top that it's surprising that he actually got great parts afterwards. Peck is slow, Janssen is overboard, Crenna is wasted (why kill him, kill Hackman!) and Franciscus actually too low-key for the part.