Riders to the Stars (1954)

You won't be disappointed!

Fantastic!

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

Experimental rockets are having trouble breaking Earth's atmosphere safely, due to cosmic rays and radiation. The best scientific brains in the United States decide to pick a team of men for manned missions into space. They hope to bring back meteors. Scientists want to find out what helps meteors survive space travel. Of course, we don't have to go out to look for them, since meteorites do arrive on their own. However, the goal, herein, is to study meteors before they are altered by Earth's atmosphere..."Riders to the Stars" features inaccuracy in details, but the main idea is plausible. The blast offs and ending are highlights, but there is not much action or adventure, overall...Director/co-star Richard Carlson (as Jerome "Jerry" Lockwood), producer Ivan Tors and writer Curt Siodmak would seem a team capable of more excitement. William Lundigan (as Richard Stanton) performs heroically for fatherly Herbert Marshall (as Donald Stanton). Females are not considered suitable for space travel, but it's nice to see well-positioned blonde Martha Hyer (as Jane Flynn) and beautifully-proportioned brunette Dawn Addams (as Susan Manners) decorate many dull stretches.**** Riders to the Stars (1/14/54) Richard Carlson ~ William Lundigan, Richard Carlson, Martha Hyer, Herbert Marshall

Second in Ivan Tors Productions' "Office of Scientific Investigation" (O.S.I.) trilogy, "Riders to the Stars" belongs to that sf sub-genre of straightforward space exploration epic -- no ray guns and bug-eyed monsters allowed. Which is no doubt why I found it so boring, when I caught it on the afternoon Big Show back in the 1960s.Thanks to TCM, I've had a chance to see it again, and while it's undeniably leisurely-paced in parts and suffers from a tragically inadequate effects budget, it's still a far better film than I remembered. However, much of my appreciation comes from the fact that it tickles my nostalgia nerve and has some nifty stock footage from the early days of America's space program, which at the time mostly consisted of shooting off captured V-2s out at White Sands. So viewers who don't have the fond memories of and/or historical interest in this era of the Space Age will probably find this pretty dull stuff.The writer -- Curt Siodmak -- deserves high marks for doing his research on the subject, thereby making the section of the film depicting the painstaking selection process and rigorous training of our trio of astronauts remarkably prescient at times. The science behind their dangerous mission isn't so well-thought-out, but it provides for some minor thrills as the astronauts attempt to chase down and retrieve a meteor from low Earth orbit.Worth watching, especially if you consider it as a companion film and precursor to "Gog", the third and final entry in the O.S.I. series.

I think this was a real good quality 50's era sci-fi from 1954. I don't usually go for the silly monster version of sci-fi so prevalent from the era - although I still like a few for a good laugh. But this one has more sincerity and genuineness to it. It was actually very believable.Yes, I know the special effects are a little cheesy. But I think for the time period they were pretty good. The title screen on IMDb show this as being a color film - but I kept having the impression that this was a black and white film that had been colorized (which I'm usually not a fan of). But I think it was a good decision to have this be color to appreciate the views from space, all the colored blinking lights from the science equipment (I don't think we could call these computers).I thought the footage of the mice in space was a real gem! It cracked me up with their little rubber ball.Anyways, I have always been fascinated with space travel, and I'm sure the audiences from the 50's must have been mesmerized with the premise of man going to space. I don't think the real space race with the Soviets had heated up yet (Sputnik didn't launch until 1957), but I'm sure it was on people's minds.I liked the casting, especially Herbert Marshall. He makes the perfect egghead scientist type. I love his voice, but who doesn't. I thought Richard Carlson who played Lockwood and also directed, did a great job - especially when he freaks out after Gordon explodes in space and he completely loses it. I wasn't a big fan of the female lead. She wasn't very appealing, but I guess it was important to cast someone not too attractive so as to be able to believe her in a scientist-type role.Overall, I think this was a decent picture with good foresight into the real space race for which our country was on the precipice.

The film manages to capture the wonder and awe of the space age you may have felt as a teenager in the 1950s. It comes through clearly with the superb cast in the movie (Richard Carlson is one of my favorites in this genre). And even though some people don't like the stock footage used, I enjoyed it. With the interaction of characters, and even love interest in the film, the movie takes you to another time and place. About the only the missing from this movie that usually draws me to these films was the usual flying saucer/UFO kind of connection. But even without that, I really enjoyed this movie. I would have loved to have grown up in that era. See it if you get the chance.