SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped

Softwing Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??

Lumsdal Good , But It Is Overrated By Some

Myron Clemons A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

Leofwine_draca LIVING FREE is the low budget sequel to the original African lion classic, BORN FREE. It says a lot that Bill Travers and Virginia McKenna didn't return for this follow-up, which casts Nigel Davenport and Susan Hampshire as the same characters before going on to tell the same story.And boy, is this horrendous. All of the charm and originality of the first film is missing here, leaving LIVING FREE feeling like a cheap cash-in more than anything else. The early scenes feature some excruciating re-staging of scenes from the first movie but with the new actors, while the latter half tells a straightforward story in a long and protracted way.The problem with this film lies with the actors, who just don't have the genuine love for the animals that the original cast members did. Particularly awful is Susan Hampshire, whose acting is embarrassingly awful: grating, overstated, sanctimonious when delivering her lines. Even worse, Millard Kaufman's screenplay presents Joy Adamson as a selfish, self-centred and quite obnoxious character who cares only for her own enjoyment, and I'm sure this is a disservice to the real-life Adamson.The only decent scenes in this are the scenes of the lion cubs playing and interacting with the natural world, but even these moments are spoiled by Hampshire's plummy, say-the-obvious voice-overs. Although I like this 'animal' sub-genre and especially classics like RING OF BRIGHT WATER and BORN FREE, LIVING FREE is definitely worth skipping.

Chase_Witherspoon Engaging family tale picks up where "Born Free" left off with conservationist Joy Adamson (here played by the gregarious Susan Hampshire) and her loyal husband George (Davenport replacing Bill Travers from the original) attempting to locate the mischievous trio of now orphaned lion cubs as they embark on a perilous journey through the East African savanna.The storyline is essentially subservient to the landscape, following the cubs' trials and tribulations as they scamper about in search of easy meals, practice hunting (with amusement) and narrowly avoid danger. Davenport and Hampshire don't execute the rapport of Virginia McKenna & Travers in the first picture, although given the latter were husband and wife, that could be forgiven.More a colourful faunalogue with which to showcase the rugged terrain and wild game of East Africa than a drama or human adventure, it's well-meaning and suitable for children even if doesn't emphasise the conservation message that prevailed in the original.

lochinvar-1 What a grouch some people can be! You could dislike Gone with the Wind if you set your mind to it. Pay no attention to above grouches. If you would like a touching story of a couple in Africa trying to capture and save 3 lion cubs and move them to safety in the Serengetti then you will enjoy this. Very good for children who will love the cubs. How they managed to shoot these scenes I don't know. Nigel Davenport is at least as good as Bill Travers (who was never likely to be mistaken for Laurence Olivier) and Susan Hampshire is way better than Virginia McKenna who was always an insipid blushing English lily at best.If you like modern Hollywood films then sorry, no rape, gratuitous violence, swearing, sexual perversions or murder. Just a decent movie for decent people. Ho-hum.

Smalling-2 After Elsa's death, the Adamson couple have to undertake her cubs.Flabby sequel to "Born Free", unnecessarily verbose and determined to gain all its charm from the cubs, who are not on the screen long enough to maintain interest.