Tells a fascinating and unsettling true story, and does so well, without pretending to have all the answers.

I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

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

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

Really wish it was as good as the book. Good actors though.

Moon river, Lucy Liu and diamonds're forever. I still remember the punch line one of the main characters in this movie when he said that The Hidden Temple of King Solomon had never existed, so he had to buy diamonds in Tiffany like everybody else. Tim Curry, vampire Clown from Steven King's most popular book is so scary even without make up like in movie It (1990th ). In this movie he plays Romanian explorer who thinks that The Hidden Temple is full of diamonds which protect killer monkeys.

"Congo," based on Michael Crichton's novel, was a fair hit in the summer of 1995. I didn't get to see it at the time, but I've seen it twice since 2009 and enjoyed it greatly.THE STORY: Laura Linney, Dylan Walsh, Tim Curry and Ernie Hudson star in an unlikely expedition into deepest, darkest Africa where they discover King Solomon's secret diamond mine and the killer gorillas bred to guard it. Along for the ride is a female gorilla who's been trained to use sign language which activates a speech synthesizer.The film plays out like a less-goofy Indiana Jones flick or "Jurassic Park" without dinosaurs or kids and with a better cast.Laura Linney is a believable female protagonist; She's good-looking but not smokin' hot (e.g. Megan Fox). Dylan Walsh is a likable addition to the cast as the primologist. To the story's credit Linney never has a hot spring scene and there is no real love story in the mix. Not that I would have minded either; it's just refreshing that the film avoids such clichés, maybe because the rest of the story is full of well-worn material. For instance, Tim Curry as the diamond-obsessed creep and the volcano-erupting, temple-colapsing climax.The best castmember is Ernie Hudson as Monro Kelly, who takes the reigns of the expedition and refers to himself as "a great white hunter who happens to be black" (hee, hee). I don't remember seeing Hudson in any other film or TV show but he's stellar here. He effortlessly commands the safari and responds to the string of dangerous encounters with a confident, bemused detachment.The stellar filming locations include Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Costa Rico and the Los Angeles County Botanic Garden.With the exception of "Raiders of the Lost Ark," which is in a league of its own, "Congo" is on par or better than the other Indiana Jones flicks. I actually like it better. Although the hackneyed ending will make you roll your eyes (as well as thrill you), "Congo" fits the bill if you're in the mood for a modern jungle action flick. Just keep in mind it's not "Apocalypse Now" and was never meant to be.The film runs 109 minutes.GRADE: B

It doesn't deserve any special attention, obviously not for any redeeming qualities but nor is it particularly bad either. Don't take me wrong, it does miss the mark almost entirely, although the budget can be clearly seen throughout from the star-studded cast to the various and elaborate set designs. The special effects are OK too; what this movie lacks is any kind of imagination or shred of originality to lift it up from it's generic trappings that most mediocre movies fall victim to. A movie about killer apes, it's gotta be at least kind of cool, right? There is maybe about fifteen minutes of screen time that even involves said killer apes, let alone shows them, and it is (of course) wedged somewhere in to the latter portion of the third act. There is a friendly gorilla who is a consistent character throughout the movie. Amy, the "talking gorilla", is about the only thing (besides Tim Curry) that won me over, but after about the first hour, it actually begins to feel like a movie about people with a gorilla character, not a movie about gorillas. You know the kind of bad movie in which after a long while, you notice it's just been different scenes of the characters talking to each other the whole time, well after it should have started to deliver? Yeah, if you've seen a lot of movies, you know what I mean. Congo could have easily had about twenty minutes shaved off, being stuffed full of useless and distracting development. My review (if accepted, after I write this) will likely be wedged somewhere in the back, never to be read by anyone else who grew up with the name Congo in the back of their mind and are curious about that 90s blockbuster about killer apes, and will be put behind the apparently favored "it's fun to watch" reviews, but let at least one person tell you; it's silly, it's convoluted and pointless, it's disappointing. It just kind of insults your intelligence and for the time period that it came out, it could have been at least a little better.