Linbeymusol Wonderful character development!

Cleveronix A different way of telling a story

Livestonth 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

Darin One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

Drago_Head_Tilt A young, naive post-nuke couple (Steven Curry with Sideshow Bob hair, and Martha's mother Shelley Plimpton) leave their commune to search for "the city" (using Wonder Woman comics as a reference). They never do find it, and she dies during childbirth at the end of this mostly dreary, low-key 16mm American Film Institure-backed effort that received an X for casual nudity when released in '71. The best part is early on with Garry Goodrow (a jobbing character actor who later co-wrote HONEY I BLEW UP THE KID) excellent as a lecherous motormouth travelling "magician" who puts on a show (great use of The Rolling Stones' Time Is On My Side). Shot in California and Oregon. The first screenplay attempt by then-hip novelist Rudy Wurlitzer, he wrote TWO-LANE BLACKTOP next. McBride had already made a couple of documentaries and David HOLZMAN'S DIARY. He made HOT TIMES (also with Curry) next.Movie reviews at: spinegrinderweb.com

sunznc Glen and Randa is raw and has a hedonistic feel to it. The film was originally released in 1970 with an X rating because of (gasp!) full frontal male nudity! Don't want people to see that male genitalia.The film has a sort of low key, low budget amateurish feel to it at times. There are a few scenes which are sort of strange and silly at the same time. If it had been played serious by all the actors it could have felt sort of sleazy but most of the time it has a slight camp feel to it.The film also has an innocence to it that makes it feel very refreshing. Glen and Randa like to frolic in the nude at times and after exposed to a traveling entertainer they decide to leave their group and travel on their own and find "metropolis", a city with people dressed all in white but find that much isn't left after the holocaust.One other element I enjoyed was that there aren't any crazy people out to kill, rape or mame. You don't have to really worry about what will happen to these two as they travel alone.There are moments that seem very dated and some of the scenes aren't shot that well. It's not a film that makes a huge impact but it does linger in your head a bit afterward mainly because of the youth of the lead characters.

m_bryce74 Science Fiction/fantasy is a genre different in certain ways from other genres. In order for its ideas to be communicated a physical world usually needs to be constructed, and in order for this to happen, big dollars need to be invested. The most high brow concepts fall in a heap when the sets start wobbling or the cheesy music starts. There are not many low budget Sci- Fi/fantasy success stories. Glen and Randa is an exception. On an absolute shoe string budget a work has been created of genuine vision. In terms of a narrative there isn't much to speak of. The story tells of two teenagers who, after being visited by a traveling merchant in a post apocalyptic world, trek across the country side in search of a city. Something they have read about in comic books but never seen. It is never alluded to what caused the breakdown in society, but people live in it's remnants, in a kind of stunned simplicity. The story is told in a long series of scenes, which tell a story, but they are really there to give impressions of a world devoid of social structure and technology. Rather than creating elaborate sets and situations, Glen and Randa explores this through examining the internal world of the two main characters. They experience the world around them with a mixture of innocence and ignorance. They have a horse but no idea that it can be ridden, They aren't able to understand what a minute is, and when Randa becomes pregnant, they have no understanding of what that means, or how to deal with it. The internal logic of the film plays out without any flaw, always a real acid test for any work in the genre. Situations are often troubling, but not illogical. And through use of whatever locations were handy, an otherworldly reality is effectively created without a dime spent on lumber. It took a while for the film to work it's magic on me, because it was such unusual story telling. Because of it's early 70's origin I figured it would have a Hippy kind of naturalist message like Gas or wild in the Streets, but it became apparent that it went much deeper than that, which, to me is why it is such a crime that this film has been so completely overlooked. My advice is if you enjoy the genre beyond Star Wars and Lord of the Rings, then take any opportunity you get to watch this film, if you can bond with its ideosyncratic style of story telling you definitely won't be disappointed.

roblins Saw this when it came out and was deeply affected by it. It is a powerful tale of a second genesis, the titular characters being Adam and Eve. I recall the first shot shows a beautiful "garden of eden" grove with a huge tree trunk in the center. The camera pans up as we hear the voices of Glen and Randa playing innocently. Thirty feet off the ground we find them -- in the wreck of a car blown into the tree's branches. Glen is behind the wheel pretending to drive. So the first image is a twisted amalgam of start and finish together that only becomes more obvious and compelling as the film unwinds. Glen comes to embody the flip-side urges of exploration and egotism that got us to the point where the movie starts -- the aftermath of the end of civilization. And it becomes clear that it will happen again. Sorry if I'm not clear enough. The film is much more eloquent in a completely organic way. there's no preaching or messaging. The picture is very funny at times and never overbearing. I'd love to see it again.