Dorathen
Better Late Then Never
Contentar
Best movie of this year hands down!
Joanna Mccarty
Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.
unbrokenmetal
The choleric, maniacal and bearded Challenger (as Doyle described him in the book) is, by a strange choice of casting, portrayed by a polite, serious Patrick Bergin after a shave here. However, this movie still is way better than the almost simultaneously produced kiddie version for Berlusconi's TV with John Rhys-Davies. It is the darkest among the many adaptations, more reminding me "King Kong" or an Indiana Jones adventure than "Lost World", but it is moving fast and surely entertaining. My main complaint: I didn't like the mad mercenary David Nerman made out of John Roxton. The creatures were not too exactly following today's palaeontological knowledge, but hey, they're movie monsters! Special FX aren't top of the crop, but obviously they didn't have the big budget for more. Michael Sinelnikoff as Summerlee returned a year later for the TV series with the same title (otherwise, this movie is not related to that production). Not a good movie, all in all, but not too bad either.
Matthew97217
I myself have seen the movie 5 times, and I would probably buy it if I had the chance, but not because I thought it was a good movie, it would be because of the fact that there were two things I enjoyed: the unpredictability of the story, and how Malone deals with the T-Rex in the ending. But the dinosaurs were extremely inaccurate, in the fact that they gave the Apatosaurus (Brontosaurus) the tail of an Ankylosaurus, and they gave T-Rex LONG ARMS AND THREE FINGERS! But the head did look kind of cool, and I do like the brief shot of the Rex at the end of the credits. All in all, if you are even remotely interested in the movie at this point, You might try watching the movie once. There is some okay acting in the movie, and the raptors SUCK. And on a final note, the science is okay, except for the Paleontology.
Clark Holloway
Not to be confused with the 1999 TV pilot movie of the same name (a mistake made by many of the reviewers on this site). Although made by the same production company, the 1999 version has a different cast (except for Michael Sinelnikoff, playing an endearing Dr. Summerlee in both versions), takes place in South America, introduces the bikini-clad jungle girl, Veronica, and the female adventurer, Marguerite Krux, sanitizes the violence, has cheaper effects, and lacks an ending (as may be expected in a TV pilot episode). In contrast, this 1998 version is a direct-to-video release that adheres more closely to the spirit of Doyle's novel, contains adult violence and gore, packs considerably more emotional wallop, and has a dynamic climax.Other than inexplicably transposing the "lost world" discovered by Maple White from South America to Mongolia in the mid-1930s, and adding the character of Amanda (White's daughter--a character roughly parallel to the one created by Bessie Love in the 1925 silent version), this movie is a fairly faithful, albeit gritty and adult, retelling of the boys' adventure story written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in 1912. Despite the introduction of adult character motivation, explicit violence, and a perhaps justifiable alteration of the ending, the majority of the action and dialogue, including a delightful exchange between Challenger and Summerlee that's lifted almost verbatim from Doyle's novel, suggests that the screenwriters were at least somewhat familiar with their source.Patrick Bergin plays an effective, though whisker-less, Professor Challenger, Julien Casey is believable as the reporter, Ned Blaine, and Michael Sinelnikoff is well cast as Dr. Summerlee. David Nerman makes a surprisingly dastardly John Roxton, Jayne Heitmeyer is fine as a somewhat anachronistic Amanda White, and Gregoriane Minot Payeur is sympathetic as one of the local guides whose family has an unfortunately high mortality rate. The dinosaur scenes, while not quite up to the standards established by Jurassic Park, and not quite as prevalent as one might wish, are generally convincing, exciting, and gruesomely violent.This movie is available on videotape (though currently at a prohibitive cost), and has been shown on Showtime and Cinemax (the version originally aired on TNT was the 1999 TV pilot). It's the best sound version of Doyle's novel filmed to date, and well worth a look for fans of the genre.7 out of 10 stars.
slayer-3
The movie had the potential to be good. But, after about 20 minutes the viewer should give up. Granted I was not expecting great special effects, but good special effects would have been nice. The effects were BAD, they can't even be classified as special. The make-up, oh-so bad. The storyline BAD, BAD. The blond haired Diva, yea ok she looks this good after living alone for 11 years? The primitive tribes, I think they came from "Gilligan's Island". The costumes - where did the two Divas get those lace up shoes? This movie could have been good, if they never would have made it.*1/2 out of *****.
