Copyright 3 November 1965 by Pendennis Pictures. Released through Paramount. New York opening at neighborhood cinemas: 24 November 1965. U.S. release: 10 November 1965. U.K. release: 2 January 1966. Sydney opening at the Capitol (ran one week on a double bill). 10,738 feet. 119 minutes.SYNOPSIS: When their chartered plane crash-lands in the African desert, five passengers and the pilot fight for survival.NOTES: An IDA Films DVD (PAL). The American NTSC version is an Olive Films release. COMMENT: Part of a sub-cycle of films that includes Back from Eternity and Flight of the Phoenix, this one has little to offer except for fans of desert scenery, baboons and Stuart Whitman. Oh, the story moves along okay in its fairly predictable path, but it's over-acted and heavy-handedly directed. And whilst the desert scenery certainly looks convincing enough, the characters alas do not. Susannah York, for instance, is rarely seen without make-up, not even in the hotel shower and not ever how tattered her dress becomes!. Endfield's clumsy direction with its over-emphasis on close-ups is as much to blame as the too-earnest acting of the players and the trite banalities of the pseudo-philosophical script.In a generous but misguided gesture, co-producer Stanley Baker has given the lion's share of screen time to Stuart Whitman, whilst he himself plays a supporting role. Unfortunately, in my opinion anyway, Mr. Whitman is insufficiently charismatic and personable an actor to carry off a pivotal role. He's unpleasant enough certainly, but uninteresting. In my opinion, always reliable Harry Andrews contributes the best acting despite the triple handicaps of a German accent, a small part and some indifferent dialogue.Endfield's clumsy shooting has forced the film editor to use some jarring, mismatched and inappropriate shots.All told, a somewhat dreary trek through the Kalahari.OTHER VIEWS: Color of course is essential for the largely-filmed-on- location movie. But color is used here to emphasize some rather unpleasant violence as well as the rugged beauty of the desert locales. — JHR writing as Charles Freeman."Sands of the Kalahari" tells a tight, pacey story benefiting from its actual locations and solid performances from its players, which help to overcome some inconsistencies in characterization. Director Endfield ("Zulu") is an expert in this territory. Both the film and the make- up on the players look thoroughly authentic. Whitman and Susannah York dominate the film, but Baker, Andrews, Bikel and Davenport give solidly rounded characterizations. All in all, it's an expertly made, suspenseful thriller using the old Greek unities. That old formula still works. Despite its long running time and simple, concentrated plot, "Sands of the Kalahari" holds the interest well. — JHR writing as George Addison in a report of the movie's debut on TV.

I recently re-read the original book and the only character altered was Jefferson Smith who became the Doctor in the movie. Could this alteration be because Smith in the book is black? I can only assume that is the case because in the early 60s giving a black a prominent role was not done. Producers wouldn't think of doing that now.

Sands of the Kalahari is directed by Cy Endfield who also adapts the screenplay from the novel of the same name written by William Mulvihill. It stars Stuart Whitman, Stanley Baker, Susannah York, Harry Andrews, Theodore Bikel and Nigel Davenport. Music is by John Dankworth and cinematography by Erwin Hillier.A raw survivalist thriller that finds a disparate group of people crash land in the deserts of Africa and promptly start to come apart as a group. Cue arguments, attempted rape, killings, animal slaughter, alpha male posturing and Adam and Eve complexes. The allegory is obvious but handled with skill by Endfield, and it all builds with great intensity towards a truly bleak, yet delightfully ambiguous finale. There's some over acting going on and the dialogue can stretch credibility at times, but yes this is a worthy entry in the survivalist hall of fame. 7/10

And the donkey, the antelope, the zebra, not to mention the scorpion. It's all the locust's fault for getting in the way of the plane that leaves a group of people stranded in the African wilderness. Typically, the men go wild, killing more of God's creatures than they can either eat or wear. While that aspect of the story makes you angry, it also makes you think. Unfortunately, the promise of an entertaining message film quickly turns into a predictable rip-off of "And Then There Were None" where members of the group start to disappear as two of the men begin to fight predictably over the only woman. Colorful photography cannot overcome the tedious and unlikable characters. Some funny moments, particularly the cute donkey, but continuous animal cruelty gets to be too much. As "Planet of the Baboons", the over-all effect of the film is quite a let-down.