If you can set aside the scientific implausibilities (or impossibilities) that abound in this movie, you can appreciate it from a number of angles. I first saw it many years ago and just watched it again - and still found it touching and relevant. Timothy Hutton starred as Sheppard - part of a scientific team in the Arctic who discover something frozen in the Arctic ice, and eventually discover that it's a Neanderthal who was somehow trapped there perhaps 40000 years ago. Intending to thaw him out and cut him up and ship various parts of his body around the world for study, the team is shocked when the Iceman comes to life. Played superbly by John Lone, the Iceman is alone, afraid and bewildered by the strange surroundings in which he finds himself, and the team basically continues to see him as a science project for lack of a better way to describe it - a specimen to be studied. But Sheppard sees him as a man and tries to understand him, communicate with him and befriend him. The interaction between the two came across as authentic, and the bond between them was believable. The viewer bonds with the Iceman too - or, if you don't, there's something wrong with you. The viewer starts to see him as a person; starts to sympathize with his plight. This is definitely a movie that pulls you in successfully.It's also a movie that - while dated in many ways - does have a strange relevance to today's world. We're not likely to ever find a frozen Neanderthal and bring him back to life. Even Otzi the Iceman (who was frozen in ice only 5000 years ago is most definitely dead and not coming back.) But there are scientists who think they can bring back extinct species like mammoths, and some speculation that eventually someone might try to bring back a Neanderthal (notwithstanding that most of us aside from Africans already have Neanderthal DNA in our bodies.) Watching this movie and thinking about that possibility - I started to wonder. Should we? Even if we could? What sort of life would we give to the poor creature? Would we treat it as a human, or would we treat it as a lab rat, subjecting it to never ending experiments and tests and studies? Would we be Sheppard - or would we be everybody else? I suspect I know the answer to that.Maybe it's best to leave the Neanderthals where they are - buried deep in our own DNA. (7/10)

Greetings from Lithuania."Iceman" (1984) is a great movie. Great movie combines many great things, and "Iceman" is a great Great movie. The story is very intriguing and superbly told. Acting was very good by everyone involved specially by John Lone. He simply gets his best performance (and i saw "The Last Emperor") in this gem - it is superb role but don't judge of it's premise - this is a character trough the movie - it is a great performance. I also loved the very realistic and scientific approach in this movie - no aliens and "mambo-jumbo" stuff - if this could happened - it would have played just like that in this way. The outcome is very satisfying and realistic.Overall, "Iceman" is a great little movie on all accounts. It is highly involving - one of those rare movies that i wish it would have lasted longer. If you haven't seen it - do your self a favor and find this gem - it is great movie.

The opening credits are as boring as any I can ever remember seeing...ever. Flying the block of ice from the place of its discovery to the lab, which seemed to be taking place in real time, was....how can I say this and be reasonably nice about it....it was BORING!!The story concept is, by far, not new. The acting is, at best, horrible. There seems to be almost no continuity to the story line.The musical soundtrack...well...let's say this movie might have done better as a silent film.Please don't waste your time viewing this. Timothy Hutton is pathetic, as is Danny Glover. The, "Iceman" himself would, hopefully, today be done with CGI.This film might have a place in a course in film school where it could be used as a wonderful example of how NOT to make a movie.At least with, "Plan Nine From Outer Space" it was so bad that it was at least funny. "Iceman" offers no socially redeeming values, let alone any value as a film.

This is what I love about Movies back in the 80's and 90's, and really just older movies in general, you can see the difference. The difference is they didn't have the technology to make what they do today, which in actuality is usually too much! Therefore though, that's what people like, so that's what you get nowadays, tons of special effects with the same type of action, CGI, with little or no story. The older movies had better stories and were more clever about their action and special effects, and actually I preferred the not so fancy special effects, in my opinion, it kind of ruins a movie nowadays it seems because it's just too much CGI and too much action. So with Iceman, this is a very thought driven movie. Lot's of crazy ideas/concepts being thrown out there. I'm not sure how John Lone didn't get nominated for any kind of awards here(I mean he's even academy award nomination worthy here as his portrayal as the Neandrathal Man).It's truly a brilliant performance by Lone, and probably one of the best portrayals I've ever watched in a film of an actor playing a Neandrathal Man. Iceman is really worth a look just for John Lone's performance, it's a brilliant performance to watch. John Lone is an excellent actor, you won't even be able to believe that this is the same guy/actor from The Last Emperor.