A megalomaniac C.E.O. sends his son into the dangerous African Congo on a quest for a source of diamonds large enough and pure enough to function as powerful laser communications transmitters (or is it laser weapons?). When contact is lost with his son and the team, his sometime daughter- in-law is sent after them. She is a former CIA operative and, accompanied by gee-whiz gadgetry and a few eccentric characters (including a mercenary, a researcher with a talking gorilla, and a a nutty Indiana-Jones-type looking for King Solomon's Mines), sets out to rescue her former fiancé. What they all discover is that often what we most want turns out to be the source of our downfall. In Congo, Charles Travis is testing a communication system by laser with his former fiancée Dr. Karen Ross for the TraviCom network. Charles is the son of the millionaire R.B. Travis, who owns the TraviCom and is Karen's employer. Charles and his friend Jeffrey find the ruins of a lost city but are somehow killed. Meanwhile their camp is completely destroyed and then the camera is shut down by a creature. Travis discloses to Karen that his son was actually trying to find a rare blue diamond in Congo and sends her to look for him. Meanwhile, Dr. Peter Elliot and his assistant Richard are testing communication with the gorilla Amy and they decide to take her back to Congo since the animal seems to miss her birthplace. However they have funding issue but the Romanian philanthropist Herkermer Homolka offers to financially assist them. In the airport, Karen provides more money and joins the expedition. In the politically unstable Africa, they meet the experienced guide Captain Munro Kelly that bribes Captain Wanta to let them go. Further, he discloses that Homolka's real intention is to find the Lost City of Zinj. Then they embark in a plane in the beginning of a dangerous adventure in Congo. My Take: A sometimes trite old-fashioned adventure that stays true to its form. <br/><br/>CONGO goes back to the old tradition of adventure movies, refurbishing it with new technology, gadgets and pumping it up with special effects (created by the ILM crew that brought us JURASSIC PARK). At the same time, CONGO brings along the genre's cheesiness, and it quite shows. The gorillas are pretty unconvincing at some parts, which you know are simply guys in gorilla suits acting it out (since, at the time CG has not yet perfected the creation of fur). The screenplay is often filled with mediocre dialog.<br/><br/>The film is based on Michael Chricton's other bestselling novel and, although I haven't read the book, I'm pretty sure Chricton can't devise such a lousy story. Still, what the heck, I liked this movie. It's fun and very funny. The film takes itself a bit seriously in places it shouldn't, but I liked its nods at old adventure movies. Bring in Johnny Weissmüller and the Tarzan yell! The movie has a gorilla expert (Dylan Walsh) joining an expedition to the dark region of the Congo to return his beloved pet/test subject, a gorilla named Amy. The expedition is also accompanied by Dr. Karen Ross (Laura Linney), who works for a company called Travicom, ordered by her boss (Joe Don Baker) to investigate what has become of the first expedition sent there (as well as another objective). Also along for the trip is a Romanian "philantrophist" Herkermer Homolka (Tim Curry, in a Romanian accent). Their "Great White Hunter", who happens to be black, is the daring Monroe Kelly (Ernie Hudson from GHOSTBUSTERS).<br/><br/>CONGO is filled with cheesiness. Clichés are there, as are some bits of silliness that is very convincing that this isn't a Chricton creation (as a film that is). But that's just part of the fun. CONGO is a lot of fun if you are willing to suspend your disbelief for two hours (at least). The special effects are pretty good, but the film is still high on adventure. Directed by Frank Marshall, the energy is quite high, and the action scenes are pretty good.<br/><br/>CONGO is quite silly, but that's its heart on the right place. <br/><br/>Rating: ***1/2 out of 5. Wait. Was Nicolas Cage not available for this? Was Tim Curry a last minute replacement?<br/><br/>I remember seeing Congo in its initial run in summer 1995 and not liking it much. Fast forward almost 20 years, and yeah, it's still bad.<br/><br/>Now, was it the worst movie? Hell, the worst Michal Crichton adaptation? Nope. But it was neither memorable, well plotted, fun, exciting or worth a second viewing.<br/><br/>In fact, I would have never, ever, given this a second viewing after 19 years had the gang at the How Did This Get Made studios not added this to their list of movies I needed to see before I listened to their fantastic take on this movie.<br/><br/>I see where this movie, plot, script and idea was headed. And it could've gotten there, to a great, mysterious and fun place. Nope. It decided to go into 50 different directions and never focus on one main objective for use to care.<br/><br/>OK, allow me to spend 15 seconds on a movie's synopsis, I've only seen twice, the most recent of two decades within the last month: Someone wants to find gold, someone wants to find fortune, someone wants to find Bruce Campbell and something wants to find home.<br/><br/>What made this 2nd and last viewing enjoyable was: I truly love the performers: Bruce Campbell, Laura Linney and Ernie Hudson. While this movie was terrible, they still made it fun.<br/><br/>No, don't see this. Unless you want to watch it like I did in order to listen to the How Did This Get Made podcast. There's no real reason. It's so all-over-the-place, it's not worth it.<br/><br/>* * * Final thoughts: Yeah, just watch and read Jurassic Park. That's all Michael Crichton is huge for. God rest his soul, but his other movies, with the exception of Disclosure eh. One thing is certain: It's a bomb trying to be a hit, and at that it'll never succeed.
Gerwiunce replied
353 weeks ago