l_rawjalaurence Edward D. Wood Jr., is perhaps the best-known director of grade Z movies. Classics such as PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE (1959) have entered popular folklore as legendarily bad films, which are so terrible in terms of script, filming and performances that they are almost good. But nothing compares to THE MAN WHO SAVED THE WORLD (1982), Cetin Inanc's Yesilcam answer to STAR WARS. Shot on a shoestring budget with sequences deliberately plagiarized from Lucas' film (as well as the theme tune), the film quite simply defies all attempts at logic. The plot - if there is one - is a familiar good vs. evil affair - but the continuity simply doesn't exist. Cuneyt Arkin as the superhero is just wonderful; the way he pirouettes through the air during the fight sequences is breathtaking, almost as if his boots were turbocharged. The dialog - such as it is - gives cliché a good name. But before western audiences sit back and simply laugh derisively at the film, perhaps they should bear in mind that Yesilcam movies operated according to their own dramatic logic very different from what might be expected in Hollywood. Most of them were shot in two or three weeks at most, and depended for much of their success on the pleasures of familiarity: audiences enjoyed seeing mega-stars like Arkin play the same role over and over again, even if he wasn't very good at it. THE MAN WHO SAVED THE WORLD is a very good example of this kind of film; rather like a quota quickie in Hollywood in the 1930s, it was designed to fulfill a need rather than be accepted as "great" art. Whatever its merits or demerits, it's still a really entertaining piece to watch.

Jay-Are This world saving makes Al Adamson and Ed Wood look like choirboys in comparison! And surely this is nothing for squeamish Indiana-Jones or Star-Wars-buffs or even Flash-Gordon-fans. Instead you can expect salvos of unintended laughs, especially because of daring cheekiness concerning copyrights. Therefore "The Man who saves the world" has supposedly never been shown outside Turkey for understandable reasons. "Great" and totally weird costumes as well as unorthodox acrobatics will put you over the edge. Maximum trash galore, but lots of redundant and recurring scenes makes this a total bore after a while. Don't watch this alone or without alcohol!

micol972 You know how a movie can be so bad it's funny? Well, this movie is beyond that. It's so bad it gets bad again. Real bad.I'm assuming that the director, producer and script writer were all in elementary school when they made this movie. They make Godfrey Ho look like Martin Scorsese. The ridiculous story, the non-existing acting, the horrible costumes and special effects, the god-awful editing, the atrocious sound mixing.. They all combine to forge this true masterpiece of crap.I've seen a lot of bad movies, and some of them are still entertaining even though poorly made. The incoherence and lack of quality in every aspect of this movie just makes it an agonizing 90 odd minutes.I would give it a zero rating if I could.

okankoc like all good art, this movie cannot be counted as a national phenomena, no it transcends time and space and the petty conventions of our "faithless" and "nuclear" age. so please tolerate the Turkish commentators who make up 90% of the DKA forum. developing nations (in general) tend to be a bit emotional and sensitive when it comes to their national produce. they fear the strangers will think "these turks are dumb as hell" when they watch the movie,so they feel the need to defend themselves (xxxtremely low budget, subnormal intelligence of the director etc. which could not be helped) but no defense is necessary the movie speaks for itself if you have the ears to listen to. the best art is done unintentionally, and it is the babe not the wise who conquers the muse