I dunno, I liked it. Maybe people were disappointed because it was packaged wrong ("Real life Indiana Jones!") or people expected something else from a movie with 2 pretty boy leads. Based on the best-selling book, this is the story of Percy Fawcett, a British soldier turned explorer who is searching for the titular lost city in the jungles of the Amazon. He has a wife and family, but is constantly drawn back to the jungle, where his quest becomes obsessive (Don't they always?). Charlie Hunnam from "Sons of Anarcy" is Fawcett and while I generally find him annoying, he's quite good here. As is a hirsute Robert Pattinson as his companion. Sienna Miller is his wife, who has more of a role than women often do in these manly adventure movies. The jungle scenes are eye-popping, sometimes reminiscent of "Apocalypse Now" and "Aguirre, the Wrath of God," as is the madness that starts to overtake the men. Directed by James Foley ("The Immigrant," "We Own the Night"). "Embrace of the Serpent" is a good balance to the great white explorer by showing the native point of view.
Had high hopes for this movie.
Hey...a "lost city"! Whoa..."Z"...neat name! Uh-oh.Gotta watch those expectations! Nothing much here.
Great demonstration of how to make intriguing history boring. Don't know if I blame the film-makers entirely...
It's from the best-seller by non-fiction author David Grann, whose latest is the story of Oklahoma Native deaths about 100 years ago. Killers of the Flower Moon. Tried that. Not much there, either, so if they decide to make a movie of THAT one, I'll know to skip.
Zzzzzz! As in a snooze.
I enjoyed this movie, was a bit of a slow start but overall a good view!!!!
Primarily, it's too long and too deliberately paced: it drags: every scene seems the same: the same solemn, portentous tone; the same duration; and, with just a few exceptions, the same somber photography.
At the 1:21 mark I checked the time and almost quit; another hour to go! Sorry I didn't; nothing new in the last hour.
I think Hunnam is miscast here; he's good looking and heroic in a well-bred sort of way, but he doesn't convey the manic drive of the explorer.
The film needs more variety, more heat and wildness. It is hobbled by a preachy, patronizing, bloodless atmosphere, in that upperclass English way, doncha know? Even the Native Americans come across with a sort of Victorian decorum.
In the end, you have to ask: what is the story line? Is it "Truth to one's dream conquers physical hardships and transcends social and personal barriers, though at a severe cost"?
P.S: I enjoyed the director's commentary: he's very articulate and informative about the historical background and what he wanted to achieve in the movie.
I was intrigued by the subject because I was trafficked to Bolivia after I was abducted in the late 1950's. The movie was very well written. I found another piece of the puzzle to my past. The funding for Fawcett's last trip was an american-JD Rockefeller! I am still trying to find out who owned the mansion the children were at in the photo i retained from what seemed more like a retro concentration camp for bio-medical research. In the meeting with the National Geography Association, they referred to the Natives as Savages. They were cannibals, but there continues to be different forms of cannibalism up to this day(organ harvesting for one). They referred to the
Origin of the Species and the possibility that a culture existed long before they realized. On the first expedition, they wandered upon a rubber plantation. They contracted a native to guide them. He had lash wounds that indicated that he was a slave and mention his gratitude for being freed. The next visit, the rubber plantation did not exist. it was replaced by synthetic rubber made near the AG Farben plant at Auschwitz. There are questions about the validity of exploiting others for the sake of the advancement of 'civilization', and the intrinsic costs that have not been used in factoring the ultimate cost-the lives of many.
Good film for whole family to watch.
I think this would've been a far better film if they had actually stuck to the true story and not made up the ridiculous ending that they did. It is films like this that make me wonder what the filmmaker could've possibly been thinking. Both he and executive producer Brad Pitt should've been slapped with a wet fish to bring them to their senses.
It isn't a bad movie, but it is no where near as good as the book. The jungle scenes are "sanitized" and the character of Fawcett is far "nicer" than I think he really was (based on the book). I may have enjoyed this movie more if I had not read the book before seeing it.
I borrowed this DVD but knew nothing about, it is very popular on the hold waitlist and thought maybe it is because of the pretty boys (Charlie Hunnam and Robert Pattison are in it), but it is a very interesting story about Percy Fawcett a British explorer who went into the Amazon in the early 1900s looking for what he called the lost city of Z – an ancient metropolis established deep in the jungle which predated Europeans (Spanish Conquistadors) and was very sophisticated. He made several trips and some people claimed he was looking for the lost city of El Dorado. The movie plays him as a man interested in the jungle habitat and interested about the welfare of the native populations. His last trip was made with his eldest son and they disappear. No one is really sure what happened to them – did disease or wild animals take them? Did hostile native tribes kill them? Watch the film and see what you think – the film is entertaining if you enjoy adventure type of stories. Or read the book by David Grann. All I know is that I probably never want to explore in the jungle!
There are no ages for this title yet.
There are no summaries for this title yet.
There are no notices for this title yet.
There are no quotes for this title yet.