You won't be disappointed!

It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

Just intense enough to provide a much-needed diversion, just lightweight enough to make you forget about it soon after it’s over. It’s not exactly “good,” per se, but it does what it sets out to do in terms of putting us on edge, which makes it … successful?

I've always wanted to ride in a hot air balloon but am afraid of heights. I enjoy watching this exciting, colorful, adventure movie with an all star cast(including the monkey) over and over. It moves along at a nice pace with lots of fun, adventure and a bit of romance. It also had a bit of slapstick comedy which I don't usually care for in the movies I watch but didn't seem to mind in this one. The theme song is a very catchy tune. This movie came out the year I was born and I can't believe I've never heard of it before. As a kid growing up I was an avid watcher of some of Irwin Allen's other productions like the series Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea and Lost in Space, which I now own on DVD. I would definitely recommended it for family entertainment.

No real arguments here that Five Weeks in a Balloon is infantile, poorly directed and scripted, wasteful of its acting talents, and a general wash in terms of meaningful content. That is all very accurate, yet the film is fun and entertaining. The Jules Verne novel does come to life in stunning color, a cast of notables throughout with the likes of Billy Gilbert, Henry Daniell(both of these men woefully out of place playing Arabs - but still fun to see), beautiful Barbara Eden(not doing much more than looking lovely),Herbert Marshall in one of his last screen roles,the stunning Barbara Luna in a loincloth most of the time, madly overacting Red Buttons, every affable and witty Peter Lorre playing a pseudo-villain, Fabian being Fabian, and the two key and most fun performances to Cedric Harwicke as the leader of the expedition and Richard Hayden as a rival scientist doubting all his finding but eventually coming round. Basically Hayden is playing the same role he played in Lost World, another Irwin Allen picture, when Claude Rains played the scientific renegade out to prove the world wrong. And that is part of the main problem with this film, the script is devoid of any depth, full of flat characterizations, unfunny lines meant to be taken as humour, and animals obviously trained living in the middle of the untamed jungle forest. All are trademarks of Allen's work - just watch Lost in Space sometime. Yet, as I said, it is fun. It's almost camp in a way and never tries taking itself seriously and that helps the sell work for me at least. As soon as you sit down to watch the movie, this incredibly melodic tune sung by the Brothers Four resounds over and over again and I tell you something true - lingers on with you - days later. You know by that thematic tune that you are not about to sit down to Heart of Darkness or The Lion in Winter - you are watching something that is meant to be fun. Five Weeks in a Balloon is just that. - Flawed and Fun.

Having seen the horrendous "The Lost World" (1960) a few weeks ago, I was afraid to revisit "Five Weeks in a Balloon." I had seen both films when originally released, and had a good memory of them (including the title song of this one, which everybody seems to like.) "The Lost World" turned out to be static, with terrible performances by people like Jill St. John and Fernando Lamas, surrounded by fake jungles, caverns, dinosaurs and volcanoes. So when it was "Five Weeks in a Balloon" turn, I had my doubts. Surprisingly, it is quite enjoyable once one overlooks its Hollywood version of African cultures, people and savannas, the stock footage, the (American) propaganda, the balloon being pulled by a thread during a rain storm, or Irwin Allen's handling of action scenes. Allen directed them awkwardly, and made the proceedings look slower than what is actually happening, as the rescue scene in the mesquite or the final scene by a river. In any case, it's a colorful and good looking CinemaScope production, with an interesting cast and many outdoors scenes that make it more attractive than Allen's other movies. By his standards, this may be the film he directed best, leaving his productions "The Poseidon Adventure" or "The Towering Inferno" to more capable hands.

I remember when this film came out in 1962. It was one of the first motion pictures that used television to advertise it's scenes and cast and excitement (including it's theme song). And the film did moderately well if at all.Jules Verne had written several failed plays (boulevard farces) and a few short stories before this novel was written. Taking advantage of current interest in African exploration (the brouhaha regarding Burton and Speke and the source of the Nile - see THE MOUNTAINS OF THE MOON - as well as the discoveries of the first gorilla by French explorer Paul du Chaillu), Verne joined this to the growing interest in ballooning, and man's conquest of the air. The book was Verne's first published novel, and it turned out to be a success. Ironically, despite it's title mentioning "balloons", most people now think that Verne's ballooning novel is AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS. While that is a better written novel (and a more frequently read one) there is no scene in it of Phileas Fogg and Passepartout flying in a balloon. In fact, the first time the heroes of AROUND THE WORLD met ballooning was in the 1957 film. Mike Todd invented the sequence (with an assist by his script writers) to remind the movie audience of Verne as father of modern science fiction.For a first novel FIVE WEEKS IN A BALLOON is okay. Professor Samuel Ferguson and two companions decide to do some explorations of Africa by flying a balloon from Zanzibar (where Burton and Speke took off from) and flying westward. They succeed in crossing the continent, and their observations about Africa (it's peoples, flowers, fauna, etc.) mingle with various adventures by the balloonists. In comparison with later novels by Verne it is fairly tame - it is hard to believe he wrote A JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH (1864) only one year later. He was improving by then, but he had to start somewhere.The movie, despite many nice performances like Hardwicke as Ferguson, Red Buttons as a newspaper owner's spoiled son, Fabian, Peter Lorre (as a reformed villain), and Richard Haydn is not much better than a cute kid's film that gave employment to many character actors. It is nice to see Herbert Marshall in his last role as England's Prime Minister (Lord Palmerston?). He was not looking well, but he did give a nice brief performance - in fact it was necessary to help the pitiably weak plot of the novel. Fergusson is asked to assist the British Government in preventing a group of slavers from planting their flag on some important African territory - by planting the British flag there first. Fergusson agrees to this, and from time to time we actually see the slavers (led by Mike Mazurki) headed by land to the critical land spot. In the end they are defeated.Because of the infantile direction of the script (Lorre has lines like "Kismet, we are doomed!") the film is never above serviceable for entertaining kids. It remains in my memory only because it was the first film I saw advertised on television that I remember. But I have never run back to the television to watch it on any rerun - if it has had any rerun. For all the famed character actors in it one feels that they wasted their talents on a slightly acceptable turkey.