Casper Jansen Some films are made so bad that they are funny. "Allan Quatermain And the Lost City Of Gold" falls under that category; this is far beyond the most awful film I have in my collection. The script I'm sure disappeared on the first day of shooting, the acting is even worse and the special effects look if it had a budget of a couple of pounds. This is all elements which becomes the force of the film. You're not laughing because it's fun, but because it's bad. Maybe that's why I can still be entertained by it."Allan Quatermain And the Lost City Of Gold" is the adventure genre's "Plan 9 From Outer Space" (though the special effects are slightly better), and I can still enjoy watching this delightly dreadful disaster of an adventure film.

ozthegreatat42330 Alright, it isn't exactly Oscar winning material, and it cashes in on the Indiana Jones kind of adventures, but this comedy adventure sequel of 1985's King Solomon's mines (filmed concurrently) has a lot going for it. There is the kind of amusement park thrill ride quality, with excellent performances by Richard Chamberlain, Sharon Stone and James Earl Jones. Also featuring Robert Donner as the greedy/cowardly "holy man" Swarma, and Henry Silva as a way over the top comic villain named Agon, an ex slave-trader turned high priest who likes turning people into gold statues for fun and profit. A dying explorer/adventurer (there always seems to be one of these in films of this nature) bursts out of the jungle as Quartemain is preparing to leave with his fiancé for their wedding in America, to let him know about a legend of a lost city of gold, populated by a white race in the heart of Africa. Learning that his younger brother was the head of that expedition, Quartermain has to go after him. With the exception of the obvious theft of musical themes by John Williams an d James Horner that were used in the sound track of this film, it is a more than satisfactory way to kill a couple of hours.

vip_ebriega My Take: How could such a decent cast get sucked in to this mess? A boring, so-called "adventure" with unintentional laughs.After creating the passable, but at least good-looking, "King Solomon's Mines (1985), the guys from Cannon Group/Golan-Globus production rushed this low-budget sequel (filmed back-to-back with the original) with the same lead cast, Richard Chamberlain and Sharon Stone. The results in this sequel that's probably the least interesting adventure picture ever made. It's bad, but actually pretty funny. I can see the first film as a parody of the INDIANA JONES series, but this one just bad because... well, it's bad. Chamberlain and Stone (oh, the horror!) reprise their roles, this time even with an evident boredom. Chamberlain is as uncharismatic as ever, while Stone hams up her performance in ever way possibly. James Earl Jones is decent as an ax-wielding Umslopogaas, but his dialog is just as bad as the other actors. Robert Donner (Who's that guy? I don't know!) is funny, but even he is a disaster. Silva is bad bad (and talk about a bad hair day!). The sets are low-budget (the Lost City of Gold wasn't even that much made of gold), the action sequences are badly staged and the script is pale.But the film is still really funny (mostly unintentional, of course)so I would recommend it to any viewer who is scrunched in a seat with nothing to watch. But if your looking for an old-fashioned adventure romp, even like those in the same league as its predecessor KING SOLOMON'S MINES, your find yourself yawning after the first "action" scene unfolds. Ironically, the trailer for promoting this film had more action than the actual film. And the trailer's only 2 minutes! It's short, but sure is better than 99-minutes worth of boredom. Rating: *1/2 out of 5.

bensonmum2 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.