I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Go in cold, and you're likely to emerge with your blood boiling. This has to be seen to be believed.

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is not a literary classic, a little slow and episodic, and Tom Sawyer and Prince and the Pauper are superior when it comes to Mark Twain. It is still a good read though and if you like Mark Twain there is little reason why you shouldn't like Huckleberry Finn. This musical version is watchable enough on its own terms but could have been better, the musical version of Tom Sawyer from a similar time frame was a better film from personal perspective. The Sherman Brothers' songs apart from Freedom and Cairo Illinois are disappointingly forgettable and some of them are either not very well placed(Royalty, though the number has some amusing moments) or pretty lifeless, most of their songs generally are timeless but Huckleberry Finn is one of their weakest overall scores. The story does lack sparkle sometimes and pacing-wise there are some dull stretches. There is some evidence of Twain's writing coming through, but with the political correctness treatment of Jim things can feel diluted, and some of the dark tone and strong language can have a tendency to be at odds with the rest of the film. Huckleberry Finn has great costumes and sets and is very handsomely filmed, especially in the ending and with the raft. There is some very funny comedy and heartfelt drama too, and the ending is very moving. J Lee Thompson directs and stages things very competently and with precision if on occasions a little too carefully. The performances are good, though the singing is not the best there is. Jeff East's Huckleberry is both spirited and sincere and even with the political correctness diluting Jim's character Paul Winfield is still very touchingly dignified. The chemistry between the two looks and feel really genuine. Harvey Korman and David Wayne were clever casting, and both are a lot of fun and they seem to be having a ball. All in all, disappointing but still watchable. 6/10 Bethany Cox

i've read all of 'Tom Sawyer'(very short book), and half of 'Huck Finn'(way too long, i was too young), so i am pretty familiar with Twain's stories.this adaptation does no justice to the book. although none of the versions have been very good. approaching this as a musical is all wrong. you could sort of get away with it with 'Tom Sawyer' because that is really just a children's book and much lighter. 'Huck Finn' is a serious novel aimed at older readers and, as i recall, was some 500 pages long (which was why i could'nt finish it). being a darker more serious story than 'Sawyer', it weathers being a musical far less.it does'nt help that a couple of the songs really stink either. the movie gets off to a decent start, and the title song 'Freedom' is actually quite good. so are the songs 'Honey Dar'lin' and the excellent 'Rose in a Bible', but pretty much all the rest are sub par. the Harvey Corman number, 'Royalty', is just plain awful. and so is Corman. it's hard to imagine Harvey Corman as giving such a horrible performance, since he is always so talented and funny, and you think he would be just right for this role, but he's not. he over acts so terribly and the song is so bad, it pretty much sinks the movie at that point, and it never recovers.i actually really love the Sherman bros. music for Disney, but outside of Disney they are pretty much a miss. did'nt like 'Chitty Chitty Bang Bang'(that song is obnoxious and Van Dyke is oddly wasted in that bomb), hated 'The Slipper and the Rose'(remember 'protocoligorically correct'? unfortunately i do.) did'nt care for 'Tom Sawyer' either. his music for 'Little Nemo' was cute, but not very memorable. when the Sherman Bros. are good, they hit it right out of the ball park, as with Disney favorites like 'Mary Poppins' and 'One and Only Family Band'. but when the Sherman Bros. miss it's like, PEE YEW, plug your nose. remember the mind bogglingly awful 'Monkey's Uncle' song? but at least 'Monkey' was so bad it was funny.but i'd take the 'Monkey' song over most of this uninspired tripe. i love musicals, usually, but here is a example of "DON'T SING!!!".the cinematography is good, the acting by Jeff East and others is good,especially the actress playing the Widow Douglas. and Paul Winfield is an excellent choice for the character of "nigger" Jim.all in all this was one big "Nonesuch". Arthur P. Jacobs should've stuck to "ape" movies.

A forgotten relic from the early '70s, when shows like "Little House on the Prairie" and "The Waltons" all reflected our yearning for a so-called simpler, less complicated era. This adaptation, while not entirely faithful to the book, captures its essential themes and spirit rather well. There are some technical problems (the lighting always seem to be half in shadow, whether it's night or day!) and its kiddie-friendly tone seems at odds during the Grangerfords/Shepherdsons sequence, wherein we see men being shot and killed right on camera--and it's handled rather lightly. Parents should also be warned that this adaptation does have some strong language--it has not been sanitized, notwithstanding its G rating.In addition, the musical format sits much more uneasily with this movie than with the superior "Tom Sawyer" (from the year before, with many of the same cast members and production staff). However, as oddly as some numbers come off, others are wonderful, such as the clever, dixie-ish "Cairo, Illinois," a duet between Huck and Jim that kicks off their great journey together. The jaunty title song and the lovely anthem "Freedom" also showcase the movie and its themes beautifully--especially during "Freedom"'s reprise, as Huck, the boy/man run away, gazes after Jim making his way downriver. Performances are generally strong--Jeff East could've been a better singer but his performance is so sincere and authentic, you hardly notice. Likewise his bond with Jim (well-portrayed by the late Paul Winfield) comes through nicely, most especially in their final, very moving scene together. Harvey Korman and David Wayne also deliver terrific turns as the King and the Duke, respectively.Cinematography is *gorgeous*--the DP took full advantage of the location shoot, with some beautiful silhouette shots. Although its prequel is far better (you simply cannot top "Tom Sawyer"'s terrific score and thoroughbred cast), Mark Twain's quintessential Great American novel is reasonably well-served here, if not transcendently.

Lovers of Huckleberry Finn might cringe at the liberties taken in this film, particularly at the end. The end that Twain wrote for the book wasn't very strong, with Tom Sawyer returning and making a muck of things. This is not the only version of Huck Finn that tries an alternate ending.As a musical, this film does not work. The numbers are awkwardly placed and spaced, and some of the actors are unsure of their singing altogether. The songs in the companion film Tom Sawyer work better because they are usually sung as a voiceover, serving as an internal dialogue.Another basic problem with this adaptation is that some of the most interesting events in the story take place offscreen. You only hear them described afterwards, which is a very weak storytelling device.But oh, the memories! I saw this film when I was in my early teens, and I immediately fell for the young actor Jeff East in the title role. It was a great movie in my opinion back then, so as a recommendation to youngsters and pre-teenage girls, I can't do better now!