DeuceWild_77
"The Ghost and the Darkness" tells the real life story of Col. John Henry Patterson, a British military engineer, hired to supervise the building of a bridge as part of a railroad project in Tsavo, Kenya, financed by the millionaire Sir Robert Beaumont.
After he killed a lion that threatened the native workers, a pair of man-eaters lions, which the locals believe they're guided by supernatural forces, start to terrorize the camp, killing worker after worker, mostly during the night.
Unable to solve the problem himself after several failed attempts, Patterson asks for the help of an expertized, Charles Remington, an african white hunter, but the task won't be easy to take...Michael Douglas is a renowned producer as much as an actor and he knows how to handle a movie, like hiring the right guys for their respective jobs: the legendary Vilmos Zsigmond to photograph the beautiful landscapes and local wildlife of the Songimvelo Game Reserve in South Africa (replacing Tsavo, Kenya where the action takes place); the underrated Stephen Hopkins, a director that always had a great sense of pace and visual style and the two times Oscar winner, the screenwriter William Goldman.Unfortunately, by the time this movie went into production, Douglas was infatuated by his own ego and at the last minute he opted to play the role of a fictitious character that was written as an obscure / eerie white hunter, only in an extended cameo, which the only purpose in the film was to enhance the heroic features of the real life Col. John Henry Patterson, played here by Val Kilmer.Douglas turned a 'special guest star' kind of role in a top billing credited above the lead character and appears in the movie after the 45 minutes mark, playing an extension of his iconic adventurer Jack Colton from "Romancing the Stone" and "The Jewel of the Nile", cracking jokes, being too loud, witty & OTT hammy and seriously harming the dark tone of the movie, especially if compared with the acting of his fellow actors. In a matter of fact, a few moments after he appears in the film the viewer is left wondering when Kathleen Turner and Danny DeVito will pop up on-screen too.Val Kilmer is strangely sleepwalking through his role, some may argue it's a case of understated acting, but he acts like he's mentally somewhere else rather than in the set of this film.
Maybe he was tired from the well documented problems with director John Frankenheimer during the making of "The Island of Dr. Moreau" (released earlier in the same year) or he was depressed due to his rough divorce to former wife, Joanne Whalley, but here he's way off.
The minor parts play it fairly well in their underdeveloped roles with Tom Wilkinson stealing the show as the despicable Sir Robert Beaumont, Col. John Henry Patterson's boss.The editing is a bit disjoint, it's rumored that Douglas cut almost 1 hour of the movie to give himself more screentime, and the movie clearly suffers from it, from noticeable plot holes to inevitable loose ends, but even with all its flaws, too much for its own good, why "The Ghost and the Darkness" is so re-watchable as an entertaining flick ?The reason behind that was Stephen Hopkins' mastering of inducing some kind of dreamlike atmosphere through it; his awareness of how suspense works and the well executed staging of some scenes (like the first hunting of Remington and Patterson together), enhancing the thrilling factor in perfect combo with the stunning backgrounds of Africa, attractively & virtuously captured by Vilmos Zsigmond's camera.In short, "The Ghost and the Darkness" could have been a great movie, had Douglas' restrained himself here (both as an actor and as a producer) and Kilmer needed the right timing. Some of the missing footage added to the film maybe it could enrich the whole experience, but until some Studio release it in a Special Edition DVD, it's just a halfway movie to cinematic excellence...
sandrn
Over the years I have watched this movie a good number of times. None was as wonderful as the first the time. It was one of the most frightening movies I have seen. I have watched it many more times because the story is so fascinating. Part of it is the fact that the story is based on fact. It does not follow Colonel Patterson's book completely, but the changes make for a better screen story. The biggest change from reality is the big game hunter never existed. Some of the movie was actually filmed in Tsavo where the story took place. Most of the rest was filmed in South Africa. Beautiful scenery and background for the action. All in all it is well acted. A wonderful adventure flick.
SnoopyStyle
In 1898 London, Robert Beaumont (Tom Wilkinson) has grand plans to build railroads to connect Africa. He hires Col. John Patterson (Val Kilmer) to build a bridge across river Tsavo in 5 months. The construction is behind schedule due to lion attacks. The camp includes supervisor Angus Starling (Brian McCardie), local liaison Samuel (John Kani) and cynical Dr. David Hawthorne (Bernard Hill). The workers are from conflicting groups of Africans and Indians. Nobody gets along. Patterson kills one lion but two large males attack later. The workers called them "The Ghost" and "The Darkness". Beaumont loses confidence in Patterson and hires famed hunter Charles Remington (Michael Douglas) and his Masai warriors.I don't think it's as horrible as some critics claim it to be. There's no way Val Kilmer deserves to be nominated for the Razzie although it was for both this and 'The Island of Dr. Moreau'. I actually like the first half with the conflicting workers. It reminds me of 'Hell on Wheels' which I like a lot. Michael Douglas comes in at around 45 minutes and he seems to be an old style character. There is something about him that annoyed me. The lion hunting has its moments but sometimes it is really bad. The climax happens in a fog and loses any possible tension. There is a ridiculous scene where a lion is literally climbing a tree. The last half has too many problems.
