Logan's Run (1976) - Action, Sci-Fi

Hohum Score



An idyllic science fiction future has one major drawback: life must end at the age of thirty.

IMDB: 6.8
Director: Michael Anderson
Stars: Michael York, Jenny Agutter
Length: 119 Minutes
PG Rating: PG
Reviews: 34 out of 274 found boring (12.4%)

One-line Reviews (164)

It is, very clearly, classic Science Fiction, and quite enjoyable to watch.

Plot-holes are not necessarily a bad thing in science fiction; we do not, for example, waste much time while watching the original "Planet of the Apes" in wondering how the apes came to take over the Earth.

Still, it's entertaining, and it is NOT a B-picture(this was a 9 million-dollar production back in 1976, a big budget for a pre-Star Wars sci-fi flick).

Rousing and evocative musical score by the maestro Jerry Goldsmith .

It's a great life to be a 'Sandman', which friends Logan 5 and Francis 7 (Michael York and Richard Jordan) enjoy to the self-indulgent hilt...

This film is obviously overshadowed by Star Wars, which was released the following year and has undeniably superior special effects, however it is defiantly worth watching as the story doesn't feel dated.

Really Enjoyable .

Afterward the audience is treated to a gorgeous vision of the empty and abandoned Washington D.

I enjoyed it.

No masterpiece, but nonetheless entertaining .

How he frosted all thise people before with this slow reactions?

Now it just seems outdated and dull.

Although I haven't seen the TV show since then, it left a better impression on me than this rather drawn-out, poorly scripted and acted film.

Still worth the watch 30 years later .

The original and engaging story is supported by magnificent cinematography, scenarios, set decoration, special effects, costumes, make-up and music score.

The practical effects and miniatures used to create this masterpiece while a little dated now still look good as well as having great set pieces makeup and costumes that create a unique and visually stunning world and environment.

I wasn't sure if the ending provided a good enough closure for me but having said all that, I found this feature version of Logan's Run quite entertaining for the most part especially whenever I heard Jerry Goldsmith's mix of orchestral and electronic scores on hand.

The sci-fi cliche festival continues apace from there, whether it is that "There Is No Renewal!

It only looks dated next to Star Wars(which I personally think was tiresome !

Enjoyable though the then-groundbreaking effects were, this alone sets the film apart.

The film is full of fascinating possibilities about how future society may evolve, wit thoughtful beliefs, values, customs and costumes on display.

All in all I highly recommend this film, just don't expect CGI or sex or needless violence or dull, dreary grim proceedings similar to what science fiction films in the 21st century has become - is it because we're in the future we all yearned for and it didn't come true?

Slow as sloth sex.

In any event, she took great pains to explain the plot to us thoroughly, and had she not done so, I really don't know if I'd have understood what the hell was going on, because this is one confusing and convoluted screenplay.

Anyway, this film was still enjoyable, for those who like sci-fi, and is well worth a rental.

Despite all this, it is entertaining--especially for kids and sci-fi freaks.

A memorable exciting film I remember as very provacative.

The story starts with the obligatory purportedly casual but necessarily exposition-packed conversation intended to inform you that you are Not In Kansas Anymore, Toto (which is thus supposed to engage you by intriguing you, but is so obviously obligatory that it doesn't), and then proceeds on to a rousing round of Can-You-Name-That-Shooting-Location-(Hey-Wait-I-Was-There-Three-Summers-Ago-On-Vacation-And-Even-Bought-These-Sneakers-At-That-Shopping-Mall).

This is most definitely a movie worth watching, and despite the 70s pre-Star Wars effects, it really has a very good story line and a pretty decently written script that is well acted.

Logan's Run was both entertaining and thought provoking.

Sadly, when Logan and Jessica finally escape to the outside, the movie gets remarkably dull and the script even worse.

It definitely has an intriguing storyline and if you come in it not expecting too much, I think you'll find it entertaining.

This is the exception and the movie is far more entertaining and coherent than the novel.

Nevertheless, LOGAN'S RUN is a surprisingly entertaining movie.

Crude, but entertaining .

The new DVD out has a very interesting voice over option explaining a lot of the production and plot adaptions necessary to produce this entertaining and still exciting film.

Then the oppressive atmosphere gives way to a whole second act that is, comparatively speaking, on the boring side, as Logan and Jessica see what life is REALLY is like outside the dome, encountering a senile old man, played to the hammy hilt by Peter Ustinov.

A bit uneven at parts and with some major explanations never addressed, LOGAN'S RUN still made for an entertaining 2 hours.

At any rate, prospective viewers should find the work amusing and entertaining.

It's a very interesting and entertaining movie.

Due to a high budget, the costumes, special effects and visuals are stunning (even nowadays).

While dated and bit corny, the film is still an entertaining story.

There's fine performances all around, such as the perfectly-cast Michael York as Logan, the very lovely Jenny Agutter as Jessica (she & York have terrific chemistry together), as well as the delightful Peter Ustinov as Old Man (who Logan & Jessica discover living alone with his cats outside the city), Richard Jordan as Logan's best friend Francis, and there's even an enjoyable appearance from Farrah Fawcett (Majors) in her sexy, 70's prime, as an attractive assistant working in a facelift shop called New You.

the movie is also more dialogue driven and is fairly slow at times.

There's also Roscoe Lee Browne as the robot Box, Michael Anderson, Jr. (the director's son) as Doc, a stunning young woman named Farrah Fawcett-Majors (she was then married to Lee Majors) as the confused Holly, and Peter Ustinov as the Old Man.

It's exciting, hunting live prey.

As much as it is enjoyable, I can fully understand why William Nolan was irked at the changes that veered away from his book.

Slow and moody.

Before "Stars Wars" enraptured audiences with its stunning special effects and created a precedent for a string of similarly effects-laden knock-offs and genre wanna-be's (mirroring what "The War of the Worlds" had done for audiences in the 50's), true science fiction films such as "Logan's Run" were giving us stories simply complimented by special effects, not about them.

The introductory sequences in the totally insulated municipality are surprisingly absorbing, almost more for the astoundingly modern sound of the score, the city seeming like one of today's standard shopping plazas, and, remarkably, the hairdos of three hundred years from now look just like those worn forty years ago.

It's just stupid, they could have written in any character but they decided to put in a boring old man.

But seeing it now, it really is a campy and dull movie.

It's plastic and clunky and more laughable than engrossing.

Sadly it's rather plodding with holes in it you could drive a truck through, a lot happens because of plot rather than logic.

And in fact, the premise of "Logan's Run" was compelling enough for it to become one of the best known science fiction dystopias ever—a world of nonstop pleasure in which, presumably in the interests of population control, everyone dies at thirty.

LOGAN'S RUN, on its own credit, is an entertaining piece of nostalgia.

Lacks substance and is very disjointed, obvious and a bit dull .

It's definitely a bit cheesy, very 70's sci-fi, but the story is good and altogether it makes for a fun, enjoyable movie.

I enjoyed it.

For me managing to stay awake the Oscar should have gone to ME.

But the costuming was marvelous, the sets fascinating (who cares its a mall?

Logic is not one of the movie's strong suits, but if you don't think about it too hard, the intriguing premise is enough to carry it.

While they are often hilariously dated, the effects present are quite fascinating, and it's a lot of fun seeing how director Michael Anderson tried to realize such a specific vision of the future.

I did find that once Logan 5(York), the sandman, and Jessica 6(Agutter)escape out of the city into an icy tunnel(..where they meet a homicidal robot following orders in it's programming to freeze and store food, humans who had made it to this point, never had escaped because they didn't have a weapon, the blaster gun Logan was equipped, to defend themselves), it lost some of it's magic..I just loved the look and feel of the city and so once we leave this fascinating place, reality returns us to a world we are accustomed to.

The movie's just BLAND.

The sets, while certainly dated (particularly in technological terms), are impressive and evocative.

Impressive big-budgeted production by Saul David enhanced immeasurably by an enjoyable cast as Michael York , Jenny Agutter , Farrah Fawcett and special mention to great Peter Ustinov .

A little slow in places (but I did keep wanting to see what would happen next), and some of the special effects look really dated (even to '77's "Star Wars"), but the story holds up well, and it's an entertaining ride overall.

It is a really fascinating premise, which makes you wish someone would remake this film with more emphasis on backstory and less on the interminable Valjean/Javert thing between Logan and Francis.

however,it does pick up and is worth watching,especially if you like movies which cause you to think.

for decades, which should come as no surprise since LOGAN'S RUN spews forth from the maw of the infamous MGM Gang, purveyors of that mendaciously racist snooze fest GONE WITH THE WIND.

My only real problems were that it moved a tad slow and could have covered more valuable ground with it's time.

In spite of it's campiness, it is worth watching--I have this film on video.

Entertaining, if Flawed, SF Adventure...

But it's all just so charming and even often thrilling that I don't mind.

The storyline is fast paced helping to keep you engaged through the entire movie.

Although Peter Ustinov adds some color and humor to the film, these scenes tend to slow things down too much.

On a scale of 1-10, I give this film a solid 8.5 (rare in a field filled with trite plots and poor acting)

But an entertaining enough film.

A little empty.

Enjoyable nostalgia trip .

Behind an intriguing idea a decent amount of unexpected laughs .

Dated And Uninspiring .

The beginning is kind of hard to follow (what's renewal?

The second half of the movie had the central couple wandering around A) real, grimy-looking factory interiors and B) what looked like a national park for way too long.

The premise is intriguing; in the 23rd century, civilization has retreated into a computer-controlled, multi-domed city, sealed off from the outside world.

I was also quite receptive to Jenny Agutter's beauty(..mainly her pretty face and sexy legs aroused me, as she was supposed to, I guess)and thought the idea of a sandman, someone blindly loyal to the code established in everyone from the moment of birth, choosing to run, partnering with a young woman questioning the system behind carousel, quite exciting and interesting.

Worth watching for the dazzling art direction, eye-catching special effects and Jerry Goldsmith's powerful music.

Its mention evokes images of cheesy sets, bad action, silly plotting, and heavy-handed yet ultimately empty social commentary.

However, that's really my only criticism, because other than that this is a pretty entertaining flick.

All I'm saying is that if you can overlook the dated aspects of this flick, there is an enjoyable tale to be told.

This is a very enjoyable movie, nonetheless.

It manages to give us a good feel of the 23th century city life, a life not unlike the one in Aldous Huxley's Brave New World - a world of conformists, a section of savages, a few questioning individuals, and a whole new system of doing everything, including an intriguing method of procuring sexual partners for a surprisingly ambisexual society.

Jenny Agutter is scenic but bland as the hapless Jessica 6, and the usually great Peter Ustinov is wasted as a doddering old man who lives outside the domes.

The acting was heinous, the editing (and I almost never notice bad editing) was jerky, the plot was idiotic and the tempo was leaden and boring.

Seen as a simply science-fiction adventure the film provides some exciting moments, although some scenes today seem unintentionally comic, especially the one with Box, the frozen-food processing robot.

Furthermore, the first 45 minutes or so are ok, but then the rest of the movie gets really slow.

It's still an entertaining flick.

Though it makes several head-scratching changes from the novel on which it's based, 'Logan's Run' still manages to be a fairly entertaining--at times even dazzling--bit of lightweight, pre 'Star Wars' dystopian science fiction.

Some of the more intersting special effects are explained as well and are quite fascinating.

Nevertheless, on the whole, "Logan's Run" is an enjoyable film if the viewer can get beyond its relatively unsophisticated special effects.

Yes you may say this film has yes a dazzling 1st Half prelude to Star Wars showing fun & high excitement in the year 2274 as I'll add to what the reviewer,Leonard Maltin had said up to a half before he said canceled out by a dreary second half.

Anyways, recommended to those who like weird ass, slow ass psychedelic crap

"As a serious science fiction film, "Logan's Run" fails spectacularly, of course, but that is precisely what makes it so enjoyable.

Stunning Sci-Fi .

Standard but entertaining 70's retro sci-fi film.

Some of the plot twists seem contrived, and the pacing is a little slow at times, but York and Agutter make it well-worth watching.

Mine was totally inane and dull; even the random and inexplicable scenes of acid porno couldn't rescue this wretched turkey.

The next day when being debriefed about the runner Logan is given an unexpected task, he is told to seek out a place called Sanctuary where it is rumoured the runners are heading for.

Still Engaging .

Michael York makes for a wonderfully compelling protagonist, while Aguetter is just fantastic as our supporting lead.

All in all, with its bold quantity of clichés, Logan's Run certainly offers huge amount of fun, and presents an intriguing idea about the future of mankind.

Its a bit longer than it needed to be as well, but overall I enjoyed it, and would love to see it reimagined/updated.

It's a sometimes goofy, oftentimes entertaining and always fascinating little relic that'll deliver some thrills and laughs...

What a waste of $4.99 Many others have described the "story" - if "story" isn't too strong a word, so I won't waste time going over the whole, sad, plot again.

I saw LOGAN'S RUN at a young age and enjoyed it; that enjoyment continues to this day, as the movie is colourful, well paced and wide reaching.

If nothing else, this film is thought provoking and so I believe 7/10 is justified, given that the film starts off by engendering a very great level of despair for society, but redeems itself later on, when the two escapees are able to experience true nature for the first time, and eventually ends triumphantly with the overthrow and downfall of the established but pointless order.

This classic Sci-fi contains suspense , thrills , action , breathtaking production design and is pretty entertaining though with some feeble stereotypes .

We sat down to watch it expecting to get bored and eventually turn it off.

Furthermore, I do believe that the Old Man sequence is longish, though the old man is enjoyable to listen to.

The old-fashioned technological gimmicks reminds us of our own views and imaginations as a kid, and it' quite amusing to see them come to life in this entertaining little film.

Logan's Run is about as entertaining as fat sex.

Logan's Run starts out as a terrific futuristic adventure and looks like it's going to earn every bit of acclaim it received, but as the film progresses, it just gets worse and worse to the point of being unwatchable.

I have seen it multiple times since and I still find it engaging.

Indeed, when the hero, a policeman who has killed many thirty-and-a-day-year-olds, decides that HE wants to live beyond his allotted time, we certainly sympathise; but more because we realise that life in this giant shopping mall is shallow and pointless, than because life in general is precious.

I ended up watching Jenny Agutter's tights which spend a lot of the film appearing and disappearing - she looks stunning throughout (if you are still allowed to say such things).

Nearly 25 years later, I had a chance to see "Logan's Run" and for what its worth, I found it to be an interesting, generally entertaining science fiction thriller that was ruined by several unintentionally funny moments.

Yet the actual plot device that jump-starts Logan's journey is itself confusing.

The miniatures are terribly shot, the costumes cheesy, and the acting hammy, but it's still somewhat entertaining kitsch for the most part.

Michael York and Jenny Agutter are the two main protagonists on the futuristic lam, encountering various obstacles and life changing discoveries, both are likable and engaging as hero and heroine respectively.

Ms. Agutter was herself quite stunning especially when she disrobed briefly and Mr. Ustinov provided some nice amusing banter as an occasionally forgettable elderly person.

The whole effort seems to be nothing more than an especially mechanical, consciously formulaic, paint-by-numbers cobbling together of by-then shopworn sci-fi movie cliches that should have seemed to the filmmakers well past their best-by date even in 1976.

The first part, when Logan is a respected Officer (a top rank Sandman) and assumes his hedonist way of living felt contrived.

Stunning SCI-FI .

Jenny Agutter was stunning in it.

Still, if you can step back from our modern technological world a bit, this film is still worth watching.

Worth watching!

Peter Ustinov steals the scenes he's in even though they slow the film to crawling speed.

This movie is the worst movie I have ever seen.

This was one of the worst movies I've ever seen.

However the acting by Michael York and Jenny Agutter as Logan and Jessica is good and the story is exciting.

The effects were as enjoyable as the contemporary Black Hole.

Not Perfect, But Entertaining .

But all in all I still found Logan's Run to be an entertaining and enjoyable trip back to the strange world of 1976.

After the wizardry of George Lucas I imagine it is pretty much impossible to get people to pay to see movies like "Logan's Run"—that is, films whose special effects may not be particularly convincing, but whose story is compelling enough to get the viewers involved anyway.

Story line is somewhat confusing and very slow in some parts.

Once they get outside, nothing happens, I mean nothing.

With computerized service and mechanisms ruling it's a land of ever on going confusing and hedonism.

Leonard Maltin dismissed this movie by writing it had a "dreary second half.

Jerry Goldsmith's score is rousing, and Jenny Agutter is very attractive (if one-note) as York's accomplice/sidekick, yet the film is just too poky and ponderous.

For obvious reasons (some nudity and violence), some scenes were edited for broadcast and in at least a few scenes, it made the movie more confusing than it needed to be.

Then I got "born again" and I saw the movie as being atheist propaganda (there is no heaven), so I threw my ankh into the Sound.

However, it stars Jenny Agutter, who is not wearing much clothes throughout her ordeal, so I kind of enjoyed it a bit anyway...

Lightweight fun but anodyne, and likely now watchable only by science fiction fans of the genre, the film deserves credit for attempting to put the future on screen but fails miserably when attaching those images to an engaging and coherent story.

Michael York as Logan, the Sandman who unexpectedly becomes a runner and Jenny Agutter as Jessica, the runner who flees with Logan, tried their best but were ruined by some very bland, laughable dialog.

Exceptionally Dated But An Enjoyable Timewaster .

But I saw it as recently as 2019 and still enjoyed it again.

In the case of "Logan's Run", the nearly 'quaint' miniature work is patently artificial, and combined with the 70s hairdos, and 'mall' environment, gives the film a 'retro' feel; fortunately, the story and performances are so terrific that the film is still very entertaining, and has achieved 'cult' status, today.

There are lots of fascinating things in it, and while any person under 30 will find it all a bit quaint, it is really deserving of more respect than most of the other people here have given it.

By the end of the film, one can be forgiven for feeling like he or she has experienced something so wonderful and compelling that few of us have ever really experienced in our hard-bitten modern day to day lives.

Nauseating And Boring As Hell .

Effects may seem dated, but story is rather fascinating and briskly told.

Despite the fact that the people were intended to be bland and mindless, one would hope that "character development" would make me at least want to like them.

We see the color, vast domed city with its sweeping malls, monorails, and intriguing fashions.