CheerupSilver Very Cool!!!

Baseshment I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Deanna There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

josephmonaghan-34145 Nothing bad at all about this movie at all I actually found it's quite entertaining I praise Stephen Hopkins for directing this one of my favorite directors who also directed Nightmare on Elm Street 5 the dream child Predator 2 Blown Away I found the cinematography excellent the movies very well made and fine editing indeed what gets me mad is the fact that Val Kilmer supporting actor Razzie Award nomination when I thought he really did an excellent job in the movie even Michael Douglas even though appears halfway in the movie and the fact that it's based off a true story make this movie even more wonderful movies that are based off a true stories tend to end wonderfully which also makes this movie excellent indeed which should make it a cult classic.

paiello-44319 Wow this was a great idea for a movie but what a trainwreck. When movie" reviewers talk about a bad screenplay this "movie should be near the top of the list. Acting was almost as bad and in general I usually like Val Kilmer and love Michael Douglas. The plot and the screenplay was laughably inept. The bumbling idiots couldn't just dig a pit or something and put a bleeding cow in the bottom of it. Problem solved. Oh wait the lions were so smart cause they were the "Ghost and the Darkness". About half way through the movie, Michael Douglas appears as I guess the great white hunter. Sorry Michael you were completely unconvincing. The first scene with him, he has this mostly thick southern drawl which immediately disappears for the rest of the movie. Same with Val Kilmer. He has a trace of a poorly executed English accent in the beginning of the movie which quickly disappears. There was just one unbelievable scene after another and my sig. other and I were saying, dear Lord please let it end. The lion sneaks into the camp and drags Michael Douglass off (thankfully) near the end of the movie. Val Kilmer is in the next tent and of course he doesn't hear a peep. I could go on all night. By halfway through the movie we were rooting hard for the lions. There were a few cinematography scenes worth seeing but that it. Should change the category to a disaster flick!

Leofwine_draca Here's something a bit different (not original, but different): an adventure film, set in Africa in 1896 and concerning the building of a bridge. Oh, and a pair of lions which roam around and rip people apart. Sounds like a great idea, doesn't it? Well, it is, but the execution could have been a bit better. The main problem is that the script is too concerned with the characters and not with the lions - it's over halfway through the film before the confrontation between man and beast arrives. Thus there are plenty of ponderous moments which lack the necessary thrust and sparkle of other parts of the film, and these detract from the piece as a whole.Another problem is with the casting of Val Kilmer as the hero. Now I'm pretty ambivalent when it comes to Val, but it has to be said that he gives a pretty poor performance here and lacks the necessary charisma of, say, Harrison Ford. Therefore, as a lead, he's bland, and that's not a good thing to have in a film. Thankfully we are compensated somewhat by the casting of Michael Douglas as a seasoned, over the top game hunter. The supporting cast is especially good, with a weaselly Tom Wilkinson (THE FULL MONTY) and plenty of other familiar faces.The back of the box said there were some 'gory' moments, but as a whole it's pretty tame, relying on suggestion rather than in your face blood and guts for effectiveness. There are some gruesome flashes of a torn corpse which work, but all of the other deaths are pretty similar: lion jumps on somebody and kills them off screen. The lions themselves are excellent, and Stan Winston is to thank for the creatures which grace our screens and look extremely life-like.While THE GHOST AND THE DARKNESS has some superior suspenseful moments, there are too many stupid and mishandled action bits which just don't ring true. Val Kilmer falls off a beam after being attacked by a bird, the final chase (up a tree, of all places) is pretty contrived too. The film works best when pondering the thought that the lions are not living creatures, but in fact spirits of the land, claiming vengeance for Mother Nature. These bits are unsettling and eeriest, but unfortunately everything else is generic and thinks that it's better than it really is. Okay, but not as amazing as I'd heard.

kgwrote-854-104240 There's no question that this film was inspired by Jaws which morally speaking, was pretty feeble. A great white shark is doing what it does naturally-eat to survive, and humans are taking the fish and leaving it with no choice but to eat humans who leave their natural habitat and go in the water. Asking for it. We have a shark hunter Quint, whose mates were left to die by the US military, and instead of directing his anger at them-he directs it at sharks. This film is in the same vein. You have two lions who we now know were not being maniacs but just seeking to survive. Humans come along and build an unnatural structure-a railroad--which provides them with easy access to a food source.The movie shows some semblance of morality by not making Patterson into the old fashioned big game hunter--but that is what he was. Now let's look at reality. As of 2015, great white sharks are near extinction. Lions also, are dwindling thanks to hunters and loss of habitat. There are more lions in zoos and canned hunting ranches than in the wild.Who are the real monsters? The film presents the lions as if they have the malicious maniacal spirit of humans which is just slanderous and false--not to mention morally obscene given the state of the wilds.Another oddity is that the Muslim and hindu workers are not presented equally. The hindus are anonymous-and made subject of ridicule because of their sacred cow beliefs. The muslims are presented as the sensible ones. Obviously this wouldn't have survived the script stage after 2001. If you want to see real lions and how they are not like humans, check out the 1981 film Roar--which is far more entertaining.