Lack of good storyline.

A waste of 90 minutes of my life

Entertaining from beginning to end, it maintains the spirit of the franchise while establishing it's own seal with a fun cast

The movie really just wants to entertain people.

John Travolta effortlessly made the leap from TV Sweathog to teenage heartthrob with this popular ABC movie-of-the-week, executive produced by Aaron Spelling and Leonard Goldberg, about a boy born without immunities who is taken out of the hospital after his first four years to live at home in a germ-free zone. The adults of the piece (Robert Reed and Emmy-winner Diana Hyland as Travolta's parents, Ralph Bellamy as his doctor) are good, but audiences in 1976 were mostly interested in Travolta's presence. He doesn't give a multi-layered performance--he's overeager when trying for simple charm, and he's least convincing in situations where he's meant to be hurt--but, for a newcomer, he certainly displays enormous self-confidence and charisma. Girl-next-door Glynnis O'Connor rolls her eyes and grins like she's never talked to a boy before (which may be the fault of director Randal Kleiser), although the two match up well in the puppy love department. The film's final moments--aimed directly at budding romantics--is a bit much, yet overall it's well-made and memorable, a touchstone movie for kids in the '70s.

When this movie was made, John Travolta was at the height of his popularity as the tough guy sex symbol "sweathog" Vinnie Barbarino from the TV series "Welcome Back, Kotter." Obviously, he had plans to become a major star and to do that he would have to demonstrate some range of ability; he would have to show that he had the capacity to take on a very different role and make it work. Certainly he managed to do that as "Tod Lubitch - "The Boy In The Plastic Bubble." This is an obviously made for TV movie in both budget and quality. In fact, I think I remember watching it when it first aired. Still, it's a pretty good movie with an interesting subject. In spite of what it claims, I don't believe it's really "based on a true story" except in the sense that there are people who live with this problem. There was no Tod Lubitch, though. The character is (at best) a composite of people who live with the condition and an imagining of what their life must be like. According to the movie, Tod is born with an immune deficiency - in fact, with no active immune system - so that he has to be constantly kept in a sterile environment, able to interact with people only through the plastic walls that constantly surround him. Travolta, who takes over the role after brief accounts of Tod's life as an infant and as a 4 year old, does a good job of showing Tod's growing frustration with the limitation he has to live with and of his desire to be free of it, as well as of his growing feelings for his neighbour Gina, with whom he falls in love. Tod experiences a growing independence, up to and including attending high school in a sort of space suit and graduating. When Gina makes her decision to go to art school in New York City, Tod is left with a decision - to stay in his safe but sterile (in every way) environment, or to take the risk of walking out into the world. In the end, he enters the world, and the last scene is of Tod and Gina riding off on a horse together (a bit too romantic a scene, perhaps) so that Tod's ultimate fate is left unknown to the viewer. Instead, we're left with a strange combination of hopefulness but also anxiety - a somewhat unsatisfying ending, I thought.The supporting cast was good, but this was Travolta's movie. There were some plot problems created by the scene in which Tod runs out of air in his suit and has to run back to his "bubble" in the classroom before he suffocates. He just runs right into the bubble. Wouldn't his suit have been contaminated? And after he goes in, a classmate - who lost a $10 bet to him - slips the $10 bill right into the bubble. Again, wouldn't it be contaminated? Plot oversights aside, it's a pretty well done and interesting story. 7/10

They live next to a lake (Every guy who ever watched the movie remembers Gina in her bikini). It's a sailboat. You can see it turning around. Given the production value, it was probably someone who lived near the location, and they made no attempt to dissuade them, because it would look more natural.I agree with the assessment that notes if they didn't leave it open ended, you wouldn't remember it.Given our culture's obsession with gaining answers, and that the actors are both still alive, I'm sure someone has pitched a sequel to John and Glynnis about reprising their roles, with them deeply involved in their immunodeficiency research foundation. Or, if you prefer ironic plot twists, he's fine, and she now has HIV from a transfusion...

I'm not sure it is possible to make a bad movie that has Robert Reed, Buzz Aldrin, and P.J. Soles in it. I think Boy In The Plastic Bubble proves that often only brilliant cinema can result from such sublime casting. The main story is that John Travolta can't handle germs, but there is a subplot in which Ralph Bellamy doesn't age at all in 18 years. Robert Reed shows the same versatility he displayed in "The Brady Bunch" by sporting two hair styles. Travolta shows his ability to pout is not to be underestimated and that it was a key ingredient in his acting arsenal that launched him into super stardom. I wish there were more characters named "Tod" in movies.