Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold (1986) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
36 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Henry Silva in a ceremonial robe and an over-sized Gene Simmons wig? What's not to love about this movie!
Aussie Stud17 August 2002
Richard Chamberlain and Sharon Stone reprise their roles as Alan Quatermain and Jesse Huston in "KING SOLOMON'S MINES".

This time around, the quest is on to seek out a 'Utopian' society that has only been talked about, but never seen, hidden within a 'lost city of gold'. The 'lost city' is in fact just a small white-stucco duplex with three floors and a 'staircase' that is supposed to resemble that of a Mayan or Aztec temple and the 'gold' is nothing more than a big vat of brown water and tormented slaves dragging around pallets of gold Styrofoam blocks.

The good 'inhabitants' of this city are mainly fair-haired white folk with a handful of Africans wearing white robes, held under the tyranny of Henry Silva who is absolutely hilarious portraying a gold-infatuated crackpot who goes by the name of 'Agon' while donning ridiculous ceremonial robes and laughable KISS wigs.

Most hilarious are Cassandra Peterson (a.k.a. Elvira) as Silva's evil hench-woman and Aileen Marson who spends what little time she has on-screen wearing outfits and hair-styles suitable for an episode of 'DYNASTY'.

Chamberlain and Stone both know how ridiculous the script is, but make the most out of it with their antics and C-Grade acting methods. It is Silva who actually makes this movie work. His appearance alone is hysterical, the 'chariot' scene has to be seen to be believed. Most embarrassing is Robert Donner as 'Swarma', a sleazy filthy Indian fakir whose accent is more laughable than Will Ferrell's in "AUSTIN POWERS" as Mustafa.

A surprising and miscast addition to the series is James Earl Jones as legendary African warrior Umslopogaas (think of Grace Jones in "CONAN THE DESTROYER" as Zula). He has one good scene where he 'destroys' a sacrificial table with his axe, and that is about it.

Some other hilarious scenes to look out for would include Chamberlain blowing up a stone bench with a stick of dynamite and Silva being 'covered' in gold. Actually, it looks like he gets a bowl of gold porridge dumped on his head, and the next scene he is a gold statue (LMAO!).

Yes, "THE LOST CITY OF GOLD" is a turkey, but it IS darn hilarious! While there are no scenes of John Rhys-Davies spouting hilarious dialog such as, "I shall crush your eye like a grape", we do have Silva delivering new lines such as "Alle-gleeeee-aaaaah!". Cirque De Soleil, take a note!

I don't know why I like this movie so much. I saw it when I was a kid in the 80's and I laughed till it hurt, and I just watched it again this afternoon and got the same reaction. Trust me, there aren't too many movies out there that can still make me do that.

While this movie is not as good as "KING SOLOMON'S MINES", I still enjoyed it all the same. If it weren't for its dismal performance at the box office, I am sure a third 'adventure' would have been created to complete this trilogy, a C-Grade homage to Indiana Jones.

So to all you serious movie buffs out there - this movie is silly and makes no excuses for its actions. Just kick back and enjoy the hilarity, because I can guarantee you that this movie WILL make you laugh!

My Rating - 6 out of 10
39 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Plan Quatermain From Outer City of Gold
Austin_Powers-129 August 2007
Some films are made so bad that they are funny. "Allan Quatermain And the Lost City Of Gold" falls under that category; this is far beyond the most awful film I have in my collection. The script I'm sure disappeared on the first day of shooting, the acting is even worse and the special effects look if it had a budget of a couple of pounds. This is all elements which becomes the force of the film. You're not laughing because it's fun, but because it's bad. Maybe that's why I can still be entertained by it.

"Allan Quatermain And the Lost City Of Gold" is the adventure genre's "Plan 9 From Outer Space" (though the special effects are slightly better), and I can still enjoy watching this delightly dreadful disaster of an adventure film.
9 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Hey! I liked it!...kinda
artzau21 June 2001
"...makes Plan 9 from Outer Space look like Citizen Kane...(?)" C'mon. A bit of hyperbole now and then is OK but this comment is a bit overdone. Hey, I liked this movie. Dumb? Yep. Lousy script. Yep again. I would guess that H. Rider Haggard would be rolling in his grave at the considerably less than good job they did on this one. Is it dog? Likely. I think that not only James Earl Jones did it for the paycheck. I think Richard Chamberlain, Sharon Stone and Henry Silva did it for the paycheck too. But, then Chamberlain made the Towering Inferno, which was not only bad but boring, in which he played a bad guy. But, seriously folks, getting back to this amusing remake of King Solomon's Mines, you can't take this film seriously. Too bad, though. Being one who loves costume dramas, the script does leave some talented people with little to do but try and keep a straight face while stumbling through the action. Check it out for yourself.
19 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Awful, but can still be enjoyed.
cosmos8021 February 2002
This film is in truth a terrible movie, there is hardly any credible acting, even with a average cast involved. The humor is even more awful, and the film is a carbon copy rip-off of Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. But this movie can still be enjoyed by just about anyone, even with the whole family. When I watched this, when I was little, on tape, I really didn't care how bad it was, and I enjoyed it, I still do, but now only to a certain magnitude. This movie is for anyone who loves cheap film flam movies, like godzilla, or the famous cheap kung-fu ones made during the Bruce Lee era (not saying of course Bruce Lee movies are this bad). In truth, I saw this movie before the King Solomon's mine one that precedes it, and this makes THAT movie look like a actual wonder of a movie, and if you like one star movies, give this one chance, it really isn't avoidable in appearance only in content. My rating a VERY respectable 2 out of 10.
20 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Laugh-out-loud stupid!
wishkah72 December 2001
There's bad movies, and then there's bad movies. And "Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold" fits in the B-movie criteria! Richard Chamberlin and Sharon Stone, before she was even a well-known actress play the protagonist explorers in Africa trying to look for Allan's lost brother and some treasure. Along the way the encounter savage natives and just the whole concept is just to embarrasing to explain! Even Richard Chamberlin and Sharon Stone looked embarrased to be in this movie! Guess they were just trying to earn a buck. This movie was even disliked by critics! Who could blame them?

This movie is great to watch with friends, that is if you want to do an MST3K thing while watching it. This movie should be listed in every B-movie book out there! It's so laughably stupid that it's a good movie to mock or induce vomiting whichever comes first! The title ought to be, "Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Quaaludes"!
22 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
What's not to like, comedy, adventure and Sharon Stone
ozthegreatat4233020 June 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Alright, it isn't exactly Oscar winning material, and it cashes in on the Indiana Jones kind of adventures, but this comedy adventure sequel of 1985's King Solomon's mines (filmed concurrently) has a lot going for it. There is the kind of amusement park thrill ride quality, with excellent performances by Richard Chamberlain, Sharon Stone and James Earl Jones. Also featuring Robert Donner as the greedy/cowardly "holy man" Swarma, and Henry Silva as a way over the top comic villain named Agon, an ex slave-trader turned high priest who likes turning people into gold statues for fun and profit.

A dying explorer/adventurer (there always seems to be one of these in films of this nature) bursts out of the jungle as Quartemain is preparing to leave with his fiancé for their wedding in America, to let him know about a legend of a lost city of gold, populated by a white race in the heart of Africa. Learning that his younger brother was the head of that expedition, Quartermain has to go after him. With the exception of the obvious theft of musical themes by John Williams an d James Horner that were used in the sound track of this film, it is a more than satisfactory way to kill a couple of hours.
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The great white adventurer Quatermain leads a safari in search of an explorer , Allan's brother , who disappeared while searching a lost city
ma-cortes23 July 2013
Adventures , humor and romance in the exotic African jungles starred by the legendary Allan Quatermain . This sequel from H. Rider Haggard adventure follows again Allan Quatermain played by a sympathetic Richard Chamberlain . However , the original novel took place in the 1880s or earlier, but this film moves Quatermain's adventures to the era of World War I, in an unusual case of a semi-update . This is the adventure of a lifetime starred by a fortune hunter called Allan Quatermain (one of the members of the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen) who teams up with a resourceful woman (Sharon Stone , according to her memoirs Kathleen Turner turned down the role of Jesse) to help her find his missing brother lost in the wilds of 1900s Africa while being pursued by hostile tribes and a rival sorcerer (Henry Silva) . Naturally , there are numerous , exploits , adventures , thrills during their expedition . The search for lost city leads a safari formed by a warrior (James Earl Jones) wielding a deadly ax , a coward man named Swarme (Robert Donner) and five Ascaris through treacherous terrain of the jungle fending off Massai tribes , Lions , beasts , dangerous underground caves filled with monsters and strange bugs . As Allan is leading a safari in search of legendary forbidden city and to save his missing brother . Allan Quatermain once again teams up with Jesse Huston where the discovery of a mysterious old gold piece sends Quatermain looking for his long-lost brother, missing in the wilds of Africa after seeking a lost white race . They must confront natives , animals and several dangers and risks until they find the lost city ruled by nasty Agon and defended by legions of white slaves . The brave hunter and the elegant lady confronting magic rites , roaring lions , an evil high priest , starving animals , silly bugs and monsters .

While attempting to find his brother , Allan and Jesse discover a lost African civilization in this weak rendition of an H. Rider Haggard adventure . This amusing spoof picture displays exciting action , thrills , humor with tongue-in-cheek , extraordinary adventures and outlandish cliffhanger situations abound . An ostensible follow-up to the equally shallow first part . Richard Chamberlain as Quatermain is passable , though Stewart Granger in the classic of the 50s -by Compton Bennett, Andrew Marton and with Debora Kerr- is incredibly missed . Update but lacking the style of the classic versions . Heat and ills affected the crew and main actors but Sharon Stone surprised for her resistance . Polished and colorful production design by Trevor Williams , though in low-budget , excessive matte paintings and transparency . The natives are played by a real ethnic people from Zimbabwe . Evocative as well as glowing cinematography by the Mexican Alex Phillips, being shot on location in Harare, Zimbabwe . Special mention to rousing and thrilling musical score by the great Jerry Goldsmith . To cut costs, the movie score was just a reuse of the material composed by Jerry Goldsmith for the first movie ¨King Salomon's mines¨ ; just half an hour of original music written by Michael Linn . The original film ¨King Salomon's mines¨ and its sequel, ¨Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold¨ , adapted the novel Allan Quatermain (1887), arrive in theaters the year of the 100th anniversary of the first appearance of Allan Quatermain in the novel King Solomon's Mines in 1885 , it was an impressive accomplishment that Quatermain had two films arrive in theaters for his centenary celebrations .

. Other retelling of this known story about the greatest hunter taking on the African jungle and remade several times result to be the followings : directed by Robert Stevenson , a 1937 version with Cedric Hardwicke , Roland Young , Anna Lee , in which the supreme role was performed by the singer Paul Robeson who proved his singing faculties. The best and classic version resulted to be directed by Compton Bennett, Andrew Marton with Stewart Granger , Richard Carlson , Hugo Haas and Debora Kerr . Kurt Neumann directed a rendition titled ¨Watusi¨ with George Montgomery , and David Farrar . And TV adaptation directed by Steven Boyum with Patrick Swayze and Alison Doody, among others . Furthermore , ¨King Salomon's mines¨ was filmed concurrently with its sequel, "Allan Quatermain and the City of Gold" starred by same duo along with James Earl Jones , Henry Silva and Cassandra Petersen - Elvira- as evil queen .

The motion picture was middlingly directed by Gary Nelson , though filmmaker Tobe Hooper was attached to direct early in production . Gary is an usual TV director as episodes (Disneyland) as long time television movies (Murder in Coweta County , his best film) and occasionally cinema director (Allan Quatermain in the lost city of gold) ; children films (¨Freaky Friday¨ , ¨Get Smart¨ , ¨Jimmy the kid¨) ; Western (¨Molly and Lawless John¨ and ¨Santee¨) his most known and successful film was 'The black hole' .
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
What.. am I alone in my opinion?
LindaBlocker20 July 2002
Now... I have read everyone's reviews on how terrible this movie was. May I say... why? What is so terrible about it? No... you shouldn't take it too seriously. But, what in television should be scrutinized so much you can't even enjoy it? This movie has all the qualities I admire in a movie. Action, adventure, comedy, and the hint of a myth beyond the whole thing. All in all, it is an excellent movie.
26 out of 41 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Another example of a film's trailer being better than the film itself.
vip_ebriega4 February 2007
My Take: How could such a decent cast get sucked in to this mess? A boring, so-called "adventure" with unintentional laughs.

After creating the passable, but at least good-looking, "King Solomon's Mines (1985), the guys from Cannon Group/Golan-Globus production rushed this low-budget sequel (filmed back-to-back with the original) with the same lead cast, Richard Chamberlain and Sharon Stone. The results in this sequel that's probably the least interesting adventure picture ever made. It's bad, but actually pretty funny. I can see the first film as a parody of the INDIANA JONES series, but this one just bad because... well, it's bad. Chamberlain and Stone (oh, the horror!) reprise their roles, this time even with an evident boredom. Chamberlain is as uncharismatic as ever, while Stone hams up her performance in ever way possibly. James Earl Jones is decent as an ax-wielding Umslopogaas, but his dialog is just as bad as the other actors. Robert Donner (Who's that guy? I don't know!) is funny, but even he is a disaster. Silva is bad bad (and talk about a bad hair day!). The sets are low-budget (the Lost City of Gold wasn't even that much made of gold), the action sequences are badly staged and the script is pale.

But the film is still really funny (mostly unintentional, of course)so I would recommend it to any viewer who is scrunched in a seat with nothing to watch.

But if your looking for an old-fashioned adventure romp, even like those in the same league as its predecessor KING SOLOMON'S MINES, your find yourself yawning after the first "action" scene unfolds. Ironically, the trailer for promoting this film had more action than the actual film. And the trailer's only 2 minutes! It's short, but sure is better than 99-minutes worth of boredom.

Rating: *1/2 out of 5.
14 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold!
Movie Nuttball13 August 2003
At this moment Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold is at the IMDb bottom 100: #89 and I really disagree.It has a good cast which includes Richard Chamberlain,Sharon Stone,James Earl Jones,and Henry Silva! It has very good music,and very beautiful scenery and good action.What is wrong with the movie?I really don't know what else to say except if you haven't seen it yet rent it!Its a good movie!
22 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Not too bad
rdhigg121 September 2001
Ok, so it isn't "Raiders" but is enjoyable fun if you don't take it too seriously. After all how hard is it to follow King Soloman's Mines.Definitely, worth a cheap rental.
17 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Sequel to a remake of a 1950 film
ronnie0a9 February 2007
I rate this film as about average for the genre at the time of production, although its major failures are from its adherence to the premise of the 1950 Stewart Granger version of King Solomon's Mines. King Solomon's Mines is a 20th Century modernization of the H. Rider Haggard novels set in the 19th Century. As a VERY LOW BUDGET African project, the two movies maintain the consistency of an imaginary Africa that may have seemed reasonable to a 19th Century English audience.

I especially enjoyed some of the quips that reference a not so hidden casting of Hollywood camp in serious roles. Elvira is cast as Sorais, and Richard Chamberlain as Allan Quatermain declares on meeting her, "I've seen some amazing things in my life, but never anything to compare with this!" The films are full of the cliché scenes that filled Tarzan and earlier jungle films, clichés that have since become attached to the Indiana Jones films by those unfamiliar with the earlier genre. Some of the earlier jungle films were produced under extraordinary duress, and attempts here to produce tongue in cheek replicas of the earlier works can certainly be missed by those whose only familiarity with film is through the post 70s media.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Best fantasy for kids, worse movie for adults...
Klassik20 February 2001
I remember seeing this movie when I was 10. It was the greatest movie that came on the basic channels since Indiana Jones would only play on cable and occasionally come on regular TV. It had exciting adventures and amazing concepts such as open floors, fast water tunnels, and a whole lot of gold. Watching it as an adult, you can say that it's a horrible movie. Everything looks beyond fake, and the acting is one of the worst. It's amazing how a movie that came out in 1987 can look more fake than one that came out in the 70's. Whatever the case may be, let your children or little siblings watch it, they'll like it.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
"I've seen some amazing things in my life, but never anything to compare with this." - How true.
bensonmum212 January 2006
What a mess! Almost everything about Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold is a complete and total disaster. In the movie, Quatermain puts a group together to search for his brother in the wilds of Africa. After facing several dangerous and near-death obstacles, Quatermain finds his brother living in the seemingly idyllic and Utopian Lost City of Gold. But appearances can be deceiving as the city is really under the control of a ruthless warlord intent on making the citizens his slaves to mine the gold he is taking out. Can Quatermain and his band of adventurers save these people?

If I were to just make a list of everything that doesn't work in Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold, my list would go on for pages. I'll begin with the acting. To put it bluntly, it's terrible. I've never thought much of Richard Chamberlain as an actor and this movie does nothing to change that. As for Sharon Stone, I'm sure she would like to see this thing buried. I doubt she considers it a highlight on her resume. James Earl Jones is an actor you can usually count on to give a quality performance regardless of the material. Here, he just comes across as embarrassed to be associated with this drivel.

Technically, the movie is train wreck. Direction, editing, and everything else you can come up with are as bad as I've seen. But the special effects take Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold to a new low. The blue screen effects are as bad as I've ever seen. The rear projection used in the 1930s is 10X more realistic than the blue haloed actors on a bad looking backgrounds seen in this movie. The puppet snakes make Kermit look like a real frog. And, wires, harnesses, and the like are readily evident. Like I said when I started, it's a mess.

I haven't even gotten to the plot, but why bother? It's as poorly written as you can imagine.

The only thing that keeps me from rating this movie a 1/10 are the groovy outfits worn by Cassandra Peterson. It's too bad she's only got 10 or so minutes of screen time because I dig some of those costumes.
13 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
"I've seen a lot of things in my day but . . . "
nathanryan19 December 2001
Now I know that Allan Quatermain as literary character came before Indiana Jones, but this is a shameless rip-off. As a bad movie, this one's got it all. Sock puppet monsters, awkward comedy relief, Henry Silva, curses, magic, Sharon Stone, and an axe-wielding James Earl Jones. To its credit, this movie is very, very watchable, although most of it seems to be Chamberlain and company running around rather than following any sort of story. My only question is: if the Africans and Aryans were living in harmony for hundreds of years in the Lost City of Gold, why were there no Mulattos?
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Down there among the worst 50 films ever made.
barnabyrudge23 February 2004
Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold is a sequel to the 1985 J.Lee Thompson bomb King Solomon's Mines. Richard Chamberlain and Sharon Stone are reunited for this abysmal follow-up, which somehow contrives to be even worse than the already-awful original. In fact, this movie goes beyond mere badness and earns itself a spot in the list of all-time clunkers occupied by other such embarrassments as Tarzan the Ape Man (1981), Inchon and Myra Breckenridge. I would place this in the worst 50 films of all-time, possibly even within the worst 30!

Quatermain (Chamberlain) and his sidekick Jessie (Stone) set off in search of the former's long-lost brother, who vanished while trying to locate a mythical lost city of gold deep in the Amazon. Their quest takes them through jungles, undeground tunnels, and along river rapids. Eventually they find the city, but find that its inhabitants live in fear of the cruel, tyrannical religious leaders. Quatermain leads a revolt and helps the inhabitants of the lost city to win back their freedom.

There's a real cheap 'n' tacky look to the film which reminds one of low-budget TV movies on the same theme (e.g Robbers of the Sacred Mountain). Furthermore, everyone is guilty of giving lazy performances, especially Chamberlain and Stone who merely trot out the characteristics they built in the earlier film without trying to find a way to develop their characters further. James Earl Jones looks distinctly uncomfortable as a fierce warrior, Henry Silva wanders around looking dazed and confused, and poor old Robert Donner is reduced to the most embarrassing mugging imaginable in his humorless comic relief supporting role. Every jungle quest cliché in the book is resurrected for this dismal jaunt, but the effect is simply awful. At several points, you might actually find yourself grinding your teeth with despair! Even Trader Horn (1973) is more original than this!
10 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Allan Quatermain and the sequel of embarrassment.
BA_Harrison22 January 2016
I used to be of the opinion that King Solomon's Mines (1985) was simply a shoddy Indiana Jones rip-off, but, after a recent re-watch, came to the rather generous conclusion that it was in fact a sly parody, which explained its sheer preposterousness. Likewise, Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold, director Gary Nelson's sequel, wants desperately to be a whole lot of over-the-top, tongue-in-cheek, campy fun, but fails spectacularly, the shoddy script, pitiful performances, poorly mounted action scenes, pathetic attempts at comedy, lousy special effects and overall cheapness making for a thoroughly cringe-worthy experience.

Richard Chamberlain and Sharon Stone return as Allan Quatermain and Jesse Huston, who embark on an expedition to find a lost city of gold (lost, despite being clearly visible for miles around and easily seen from the sky). Accompanying them on their mission are warrior Umslopogaas (James Earl Jones, wishing he had a different agent) and devious holy man Swarma (Robert Donner, putting in an incredibly irritating performance). After a perilous journey (which sees trouble with hostile natives, deadly booby traps, and a white-knuckle canoe trip through a mountain) the group arrive at their destination, where they meet Quatermain's missing brother Robeson (Martin Rabbett), but come to blows with evil high priest Agon (Henry Silva in a really bad wig), who wants to seize control of the city.

There are simply too many naff moments for me to mention, but lowlights include an attack by silly-looking rock worms, the laughable high speed boat ride (which features very unconvincing blue screen effects), a hilarious swarm of bats (of the clockwork variety), some truly groan-worthy nonsense involving the wearing of spear-proof vests, Agon speaking in his native tongue, Quatermain melting a gold lion statue by hitting it with an axe (?!!?!), and some awful stunt-work in which the wires are clearly visible.

1.5 out of 10, generously rounded up to 2 for the vaguely Spielbergian mouldy corpses and occasional spot of hokey gore, and for buxom Cassandra Petersen (better known as Elvira) as wicked queen Sorais.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
One of the worst, ever!
tord-117 December 2014
I've seen a lot of movies in my day, and have a few thousand on DVD, but this really stinks.

Feeble script, bad acting, and the worst special effects I've seen in a long time! Allan, the hero, of this sordid mess, uses his revolver frequently, and on the average fires 30-40 shots before he needs to reload, amazing! The natives are unbelievably stupid, and the way the heroine is depicted is beyond belief. Supposedly a well-educated archaeologist, she is also an expert of minerals, knowing exactly from where they come, within a mile, or so.

Allan, the hero is also dumb as a door-knob, but his aim is flawless. He also runs without a second thought into the woods pursuing the armed, and extremely dangerous, bad guys (who naturally are black as the night, and wear white bags over their heads). He himself is unarmed, both have no concern about what might be waiting for him in the greenhouse-looking jungle! The story is so dumb, so I will not waste time on that, but compared to this turkey my former worst ever, Mega-Piranhas, is an Oscars-winner! The film must have cost a lot, as there are hundreds of extras, and a lot of sets, although very crappy, most of them.

The lead actors are well-known, and sometimes superb, but in this movie they stink, like the rest!
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
so many problems that can't be excused
SnoopyStyle29 July 2015
After King Solomon's Mines, Allan Quatermain (Richard Chamberlain) is in Africa and he's joined by Jesse Huston (Sharon Stone). Allan rescues a friend from masked locals and he tells him that his brother is still alive. They were searching for 'Lost City of Gold' and a lost white race. The masked men return to kill the friend. Allan goes off to find his brother and cancels traveling with Jesse to America for their wedding. Jesse is angry at first and decides to join him in the dangerous quest. Umslopogaas (James Earl Jones) and Swarma (Robert Donner) also join them.

This continues the same problem in King Solomon's Mines. The racist tone is attributed to the source material and the satire that this movie is suppose to be. I reluctantly accept that explanation but it can't excuse the campy weak product. It is simply too poorly made. It's not funny for a comedy. As an adventure, this gets boring after awhile. This movie has too many questionable things.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Absolutely the WORST movie I have ever seen.
davidwdwyer3 May 2002
Richard Chamberlain was the reason I watched this movie with my wife and two sons ages 10 and 13. Not only was he a disappointment, but the entire movie was idiotic, pointless, and a monumental waste of time. We spent the entire movie wishing we were doing something else (ANYTHING ELSE) and chastising ourselves for seeing it through to the awful end in the fruitless hope it would redeem itself somewhere along the line. My wife, both sons, and myself agree that we have not seen a worse movie to this day, and that has been FIFTEEN YEARS!
7 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Oh. My. God. That was excruciating.
msdiglrgtkmbbz1 August 2004
Take every bad Africa legend and stereotype, sift carefully to remove all traces of logic, place in food/word processor, top with stupidity, mix crudely and serve with a thick garnish of corny. It wasn't that there were dumb stereotypes of Africa in this movie; it's that there were so *many* of them, strung together with a plot as rich as your average porn movie and horribly overwrought sound. The beginning was kind of cheesy but maybe could go somewhere. As I watched, it did indeed go somewhere - downhill. It just kept getting stupider. I was hoping for fun and campy, if somewhat stupid, in an Indiana Jones & Temple of Doom sort of way. Nothing big or fancy, just an entertaining action/adventure flick. But I had been hoping for something somewhat less formulaic and thick with clichés.

I have some pretty stupid goofy movies in my collection, for when I want something mindless. But this is going straight in the garbage. I don't ever want to see it again as long as I live. I picked it up for a pittance at a thrift store and clearly spent too much money. Thanks to IMDb for at least giving me the pleasure of excoriating it in public.
7 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Heaven Help Us!
Spikeopath30 May 2015
Directed by Gary Nelson, Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold re-teams Richard Chamberlain and Sharon Stone from J. Lee Thomson's 1985 version of King Solomon's Mines, with equally bad results. Based on the creations of H. Rider Haggard, the emergence of Allan Quatermain onto the screen again was a desperate attempt to grab the coat tails of one Indiana Jones' success. Given how bad King Solomon's Mines (1985) was, you would be forgiven for wondering how on earth a sequel was given the go ahead, but this is explained by the fact both films were filmed back to back. More's the pity.

Plot has Quartermain and his lady Jesse Huston off on some adventure to find Quartermain's lost brother at the fabled Lost City of Gold. Along for the ride are Umslopogaas (James Earl Jones) an axe wielding warrior, Swarma (Robert Donner) a nutty spiritual guru, and some other no mark plebians. What they find is a whole bunch of trouble via creatures and a despotic high priest (Henry Silva).

Action is badly staged, effects work poor, while acting and dialogue is woefully inept (Chamberlain cheese sandwich/Stone shrill/Silva and Donner embarrassing). The best "Z" grade movies have fans and entertain because they know what they are, unfortunately this doesn't, it genuinely thinks it's a great adventure movie. Even the musical score is insulting, credited to Michael Linn, he basically just hacks into Jerry Goldsmith's score for "Mines", and produces a piece that is just two chords away from John Barry's iconic Indiana Jones music. As for the racist undertones...

Bad film making. Period. 2/10
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Oh my.
3rdbase4 July 2002
Not even Sharon Stone's breathless performance could save this movie from itself. Apparently most of the movie's budget was spent on transporting crew and equipment to Zimbabwe for a few outside shots, then back to the LA Public Library (aka Temple of Gold) to shoot the important scenes. And, of course, the big shiny axe, wielded expertly by none other than a dentally impaired James Earl Jones.

Do we even need to get into the finer points of Elvira acting as the wicked temple queen? Save yourself the trouble, and channelsurf until you find a Tony Danza marathon - the acting will be better and you might find a plotline you can follow.
5 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Very sad
Wizard-82 June 1999
Followup to King Solomon's Mines is even more pathetic than the first movie. After the previous movie bombed, Cannon held onto this movie for about a year before releasing it. They might as well gone direct to video and cut their losses. Unbelievably lame and cheap-looking.

James Earl Jones in his autobiography said he did this movie for the paycheck, and for the chance to go to Africa. Glad it wasn't for other reasons, like liking the script!
5 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Possibly the worst movie of all time
Theoriginaltruebrit1 March 2003
So my husband turns on the tv this morning as we were lying in bed trying to decide when to get up (aaaaaahhhhh saturdays). This movie is on and he begins to watch it. With a sort of morbid fascination I watch it with him and am just enthralled by how utterly bad it is. I turn to my husband at periodic intervals and state "this is utterly pointless" but like watching the aftermath of a car wreck you are almost compeled to keep watching to see how bad it really can get. It became screamingly obvious to me during the final scenes when hero leaps through a glass roof and the wires holding him up are CLEARLY visible in the shot, then of course it just gets worse. The gold pouring scene, the fighting scenes.... (I mean what did they do put out an ad "really really bad extras needed for a film - most extras are pretty good, the extras in this film are to be honest pathetic). I completely lost it though when the "bad queen" does a flip and lands on the "bad guys" back, did they just throw their hands up at that point and say - "hell don't hide the wires or anything just leave the damn thing as it is" As I said to my husband as the credits rolled "I think that is possibly the worst movie I have ever seen in my life" it is worth watching for the sheer horror of watching stars like Richard Chamberline, Sharon Stone, and James Earl Jones act in what appears to be a high school production with a budget of $1.75.
5 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews

Recently Viewed