probably the best way to dismantle the veracity of an adventure book is to strictly stick to its mood and content. no extra irony can replace the self-detonating load of irony that any such book carries with itself.
Serviceable but generic telling of the Defoe classic that is a surprising entry in the filmography of Luis Bunuel. There are some Bunuel touches here and there but nothing to make this stand out against films of the time period. Pickings must have been pretty slim that year to have Dan O'Herilhy nominated for an Oscar for this one!
An old style adventure that feels a bit old-fashioned today.(I loved to watch such films on Sunday afternoons on TV when I was a kid...) I feel there is rarely a glimpse of Buñuel's skills in it. But at least the dream sequence is good and even somewhat surrealistic.
Proof that Bunuel can make a completely straightforward film if he wants to. One of the greatest masters of cinema, Bunuel's Crusoe is the best treatment of this story ever. Umm..I didn't see the Tom Hanks version, but I don't need to.
In many ways a very commercial film. Reading Buñuel talking about the film adds another layer, so that's recommended. There are several moments where the film allows him as a filmmaker to shine through, and for that it's worth it. Interesting exploration of man vs wild, outside of society. However, Crusoe's racist and colonialist mindset, the source material is at fault for this but it's nonetheless uncomfortable.
The first half was enjoyable enough, but this film wore out its welcome by the end of it. Some decent acting and some unintentionally silly moments. Probably the worst Buñuel film I've seen thus far, which is saying something considering this isn't at all a bad film, it's just not good either.