Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

For a Romanian, the first motif to not be real enthusiastic about this film is the bizarre Homolka. his name could be Czech but not Romanian. the second - a well known story who has not the most inspired adaptation. because "Congo" has the ordinaries sins of adventure films but not the virtues. it is eccentric, chaotic, fake and reduced at good intentions. and, unfortunatelly, this is all. not exactly a bad film. but one perfect choice only for the fans of genre. and this is the basic motif to not be satisfed - because it could be, it must be better.

Congo is a silly safari adventure. Almost King Solomon Mines meets Jurassic Park (with wild apes and gorillas instead of dinosaurs.) Based on a Michael Crichton novel, this was made when Crichton was hot property back in the 1990s.Director Frank Marshall better known as a producer for Steven Spielberg movies was not a strong enough director to make a serious adventure film opting accidentally for camp and cheese.When an expedition to discover rare diamonds in the Congo go missing. A scientist is sent in to find out what happened especially as one of the missing men was her fiancé. She joins a crew that consists of a primatologist who is taking a trained talking gorilla back to the wild and a Romanian treasure hunter trying to locate the lost city of Zinj.When they arrive they meet their expert guide but are captured by a local militia leader and have to bribe themselves out of trouble.The guide tells the group that other expeditions to find the 'Lost City of Zinj' have ended in disaster.Laura Linney and Dylan Baker are bland in the lead roles, out-acted by the talking gorilla. It is left to Tim Curry to ham it up as the Romanian Herkermer Homolka and Ernie Hudson in the great white African adventurer role, Captain Munro Kelly who happens to be black with an English accent. He steals the show.

Wait. Was Nicolas Cage not available for this? Was Tim Curry a last minute replacement?I remember seeing Congo in its initial run in summer 1995 and not liking it much. Fast forward almost 20 years, and yeah, it's still bad.Now, was it the worst movie? Hell, the worst Michal Crichton adaptation? Nope. But it was neither memorable, well plotted, fun, exciting or worth a second viewing.In fact, I would have never, ever, given this a second viewing after 19 years had the gang at the How Did This Get Made studios not added this to their list of movies I needed to see before I listened to their fantastic take on this movie.I see where this movie, plot, script and idea was headed. And it could've gotten there, to a great, mysterious and fun place. Nope. It decided to go into 50 different directions and never focus on one main objective for use to care.OK, allow me to spend 15 seconds on a movie's synopsis, I've only seen twice, the most recent of two decades within the last month: Someone wants to find gold, someone wants to find fortune, someone wants to find Bruce Campbell and something wants to find home.What made this 2nd and last viewing enjoyable was: I truly love the performers: Bruce Campbell, Laura Linney and Ernie Hudson. While this movie was terrible, they still made it fun.No, don't see this. Unless you want to watch it like I did in order to listen to the How Did This Get Made podcast. There's no real reason. It's so all-over-the-place, it's not worth it.* * * Final thoughts: Yeah, just watch and read Jurassic Park. That's all Michael Crichton is huge for. God rest his soul, but his other movies, with the exception of Disclosure…eh.

The movie Congo is hushedly giantly appealing; Congo's viewing is very attractive for some reasons. Congo has these beautiful landscapes with great 'geothermal' colors, first-class budgeted production effects, and an awesomely themed story about killer gorillas, silver, killer gorillas at that. People are profoundly interested in the great apes, curious to know their ways, how smart that they are, and if they're dangerous or not. Congo interests in that. Also, Congo's a gentle, unmalicious viewing which so helps in strengthening its gorier moments, and it's backed by a drastically popular novel, oh, and it has lava! All this, and what else, makes it very largely appealing. Ooo! Ooo! I know what else! The beautiful Laura Linney! I can't forget about her! She's, really like, perfect, for the part. This is Linney's great starring role in Congo. I think she knocked it out of the park. Laura is more infatuating in a leading role than she is in her supporting roles even. Once the team gets to the Congo, Congo starts getting better. If you're expecting some Hollywood blockbuster typical-type movie, you're not gonna get it here. Is it just me, or do gorilla suits look exactly like real gorillas?