Beautiful, moving film.

As Good As It Gets

It's not great by any means, but it's a pretty good movie that didn't leave me filled with regret for investing time in it.

The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

I used to be of the opinion that King Solomon's Mines (1985) was simply a shoddy Indiana Jones rip-off, but, after a recent re-watch, came to the rather generous conclusion that it was in fact a sly parody, which explained its sheer preposterousness. Likewise, Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold, director Gary Nelson's sequel, wants desperately to be a whole lot of over-the-top, tongue-in-cheek, campy fun, but fails spectacularly, the shoddy script, pitiful performances, poorly mounted action scenes, pathetic attempts at comedy, lousy special effects and overall cheapness making for a thoroughly cringe-worthy experience.Richard Chamberlain and Sharon Stone return as Allan Quatermain and Jesse Huston, who embark on an expedition to find a lost city of gold (lost, despite being clearly visible for miles around and easily seen from the sky). Accompanying them on their mission are warrior Umslopogaas (James Earl Jones, wishing he had a different agent) and devious holy man Swarma (Robert Donner, putting in an incredibly irritating performance). After a perilous journey (which sees trouble with hostile natives, deadly booby traps, and a white-knuckle canoe trip through a mountain) the group arrive at their destination, where they meet Quatermain's missing brother Robeson (Martin Rabbett), but come to blows with evil high priest Agon (Henry Silva in a really bad wig), who wants to seize control of the city.There are simply too many naff moments for me to mention, but lowlights include an attack by silly-looking rock worms, the laughable high speed boat ride (which features very unconvincing blue screen effects), a hilarious swarm of bats (of the clockwork variety), some truly groan-worthy nonsense involving the wearing of spear-proof vests, Agon speaking in his native tongue, Quatermain melting a gold lion statue by hitting it with an axe (?!!?!), and some awful stunt-work in which the wires are clearly visible.1.5 out of 10, generously rounded up to 2 for the vaguely Spielbergian mouldy corpses and occasional spot of hokey gore, and for buxom Cassandra Petersen (better known as Elvira) as wicked queen Sorais.

Why they made this sequel is anyone's guess, the first one was not exactly a huge hit or anything. By today's standards it may have warranted a direct to DVD sequel, but an actual movie release would have been out of the question. Quite frankly this movie should have been out of the question. Or at least maybe they could have worked on it a bit more before its release as it definitely has a rushed feel to it. The story has Alan Quartermane and his new wife (both of which played by the same actors) going in search of Alan's brother who had set out looking for the lost city of gold. Well they go in pursuit and go through some jungle adventures and some traps and the movie has the same fast pace as the first movie. It looks like it is going to be a cheap action movie, but one packed with enough thrills to keep one entertained, and then they make it to the city of gold and the movie just stops being entertaining. The story and everything about the movie bogs down in the city of gold as does the whole Richard Chamberline as Alan Quartermane series. Though one has to wonder how did such obviously low budget movies get their hands on some rather respectable actors and actresses. Granted, Stone is a rather newcomer at this point, but Chamberline and James Earl Jones are not.

What a mess! Almost everything about Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold is a complete and total disaster. In the movie, Quatermain puts a group together to search for his brother in the wilds of Africa. After facing several dangerous and near-death obstacles, Quatermain finds his brother living in the seemingly idyllic and Utopian Lost City of Gold. But appearances can be deceiving as the city is really under the control of a ruthless warlord intent on making the citizens his slaves to mine the gold he is taking out. Can Quatermain and his band of adventurers save these people? If I were to just make a list of everything that doesn't work in Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold, my list would go on for pages. I'll begin with the acting. To put it bluntly, it's terrible. I've never thought much of Richard Chamberlain as an actor and this movie does nothing to change that. As for Sharon Stone, I'm sure she would like to see this thing buried. I doubt she considers it a highlight on her resume. James Earl Jones is an actor you can usually count on to give a quality performance regardless of the material. Here, he just comes across as embarrassed to be associated with this drivel.Technically, the movie is train wreck. Direction, editing, and everything else you can come up with are as bad as I've seen. But the special effects take Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold to a new low. The blue screen effects are as bad as I've ever seen. The rear projection used in the 1930s is 10X more realistic than the blue haloed actors on a bad looking backgrounds seen in this movie. The puppet snakes make Kermit look like a real frog. And, wires, harnesses, and the like are readily evident. Like I said when I started, it's a mess.I haven't even gotten to the plot, but why bother? It's as poorly written as you can imagine.The only thing that keeps me from rating this movie a 1/10 are the groovy outfits worn by Cassandra Peterson. It's too bad she's only got 10 or so minutes of screen time because I dig some of those costumes.

So my husband turns on the tv this morning as we were lying in bed trying to decide when to get up (aaaaaahhhhh saturdays). This movie is on and he begins to watch it. With a sort of morbid fascination I watch it with him and am just enthralled by how utterly bad it is. I turn to my husband at periodic intervals and state "this is utterly pointless" but like watching the aftermath of a car wreck you are almost compeled to keep watching to see how bad it really can get. It became screamingly obvious to me during the final scenes when hero leaps through a glass roof and the wires holding him up are CLEARLY visible in the shot, then of course it just gets worse. The gold pouring scene, the fighting scenes.... (I mean what did they do put out an ad "really really bad extras needed for a film - most extras are pretty good, the extras in this film are to be honest pathetic). I completely lost it though when the "bad queen" does a flip and lands on the "bad guys" back, did they just throw their hands up at that point and say - "hell don't hide the wires or anything just leave the damn thing as it is" As I said to my husband as the credits rolled "I think that is possibly the worst movie I have ever seen in my life" it is worth watching for the sheer horror of watching stars like Richard Chamberline, Sharon Stone, and James Earl Jones act in what appears to be a high school production with a budget of $1.75.