Nonureva Really Surprised!

filippaberry84 I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Melanie Bouvet The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

Allison Davies The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

MartinHafer This is a made for television version of "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" and more often than not, it misses the mark. Part of it is the acting (which is occasionally hammy) but the biggest problem is the script. The Mark Twain novel was only a GENERAL guide for the script and perhaps THE most important part of the novel is missing---the slave Jim escaping down river with Huck and Huck's realization that this was a man...not just some piece of property. My assumption is that the producers didn't want to irritate the racists out there who would be offended by the novel's strong anti-slavery tone...a very cowardly way to handle this. Additionally, again and again, major portions of the story are just wrong....as if they perhaps skimmed the novel or didn't like it and so they changed it liberally...and destroyed the story as well as made it very dull. As a result, I cannot recommend you see this...try to find a much more faithful version or read the book!

oscar-35 *Spoiler/plot- Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, 1955. Two con-men incorporate a young boy into the band to make conning the 'suckers' easier.*Special Stars- John Carradine, Thomas Mitchell.*Theme- Goings on in the Western US expansion could by subject for comedy antics.*Trivia/location/goofs- 'Climax' TV show drama, Black & White.*Emotion- A very enjoyable film to watch two GREAT character actors 'tear up the scenery' in this comedy plot from the old West with confidence men.*Based on- The Classic Samuel 'Mark Twain' Clemens story.

mark.waltz This is more of a sequel to "Tom Sawyer" than its own independent story. In the original "Huckleberry Finn", Huck ends up on the Mississippi without his pal Tom and with the companionship of Jim, the wise runaway slave. Here, Huck and Tom deal with the same con-artists that Huck and Jim encountered in the classic Mark Twain story, this time trying to con the Widow Douglas and Aunt Polly. Without the element of the escaped slave, this seems to have lost its original "meat", instead leaving only "gravy". Still, there's some great casting to be found here, with Thomas Mitchell unforgettable as Huck's embittered father, John Carradine spouting Shakespeare (as usual) as one of the con-men, and that wonderful character actress Elizabeth Patterson taking on the role of Aunt Polly. Fans of "General Hospital" (and various other soaps) will be surprised to see a very young Denise Alexander (years before taking on the role of Dr. Lesley Williams and becoming the loving mother to Laura Vining Webber Baldwin Spencer) as the young heroine staying with the Widow Douglas. So in spite of the changes to the story, there are some good things here, at least in the performances.

Michael_Elliott Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (1955) ** (out of 4) This made-for-TV production originally aired on the "Climax!" show and opened up its second season. Huck (Charles Taylor) and his buddy Tom Sawyer (Bobby Hyatt) become blood brothers right before Huck takes off down the Mississippi River to try and get away from his abusive father (Thomas Mitchell). Along his journey Huck comes across a wide range of characters including The Duke (John Carradine). At just 50-minutes long, this here really doesn't give the Mark Twain novel much life or energy. In fact, it's funny to see host William Lundigan ask parents to allow their kids to stay up late and watch the show because of how important the story is. Sadly, he probably should have told them to check out a different version. While this one here offers up some fine performances, the short running time just can't do the novel justice and there are also many things removed. To please the TV censors they had to completely cut out the slave Jim and add a completely different character that was never in the novel. I understand that the censors were quite hard at the time this was shown but it totally ruins the film today. What makes the film worth sitting through are the veteran actors. Mitchell made a career out of playing good guys so it was nice seeing him play such a jerk here and it was rather amazing seeing how well he pulled it off. Carradine also comes across extremely likable in his role. You can see the actor really playing it up for the camera and I think he really delivers a fine performance. The same can be said for Taylor as the young Huck. He's certainly not going to go down as one of the greatest actors to play the part but he still does a fine job. So, if you're a fan of Mitchell and Carradine then it's worth checking out but the various changes pretty much makes the film useless to most.