Congo (1995) ⭐ 5.3 | Action, Adventure, Mystery (original) (raw)
1h 49m
When an expedition to the African Congo ends in disaster, a new team is assembled to find out what went wrong.When an expedition to the African Congo ends in disaster, a new team is assembled to find out what went wrong.When an expedition to the African Congo ends in disaster, a new team is assembled to find out what went wrong.
More like this
OK, this movie is best watched on a rainy day or when you're pretty bored. The fake looking gorillas were obviously not very well-made, whereas the 1993 film Jurassic Park had familiarized audiences with CG dinosaurs. In fact, CGI was originally planned for the grays, but the technology had not yet been developed to the point where realistic hair could be created. While smooth skinned dinosaurs were possible, hairy apes would have looked inappropriately cartooned. Therefore, animatronics, masks and puppetry had to be utilized. So that was kind of a damper on the special effects as well as Tim Curry's bad acting. The movie could have been a lot better, but it was viewable. If you got over the gorilla puppets and Tim Curry's accent, you have a pretty decent movie. I thought the story was good. It's not Jurassic Park, but it's Michael Crichton. Congo wasn't very realistic, but neither was Jurassic Park. It was like that show "Legends of the Hidden Temple" with intelligent gorillas and science. There was action and a plot. So I could sit and watch it. I'll give it (barely) 6 stars.
- Allmanjoy15
- Jun 21, 2007
- Permalink
Suggest an edit or add missing content
What was the official certification given to Congo (1995) in Japan?