Opiniones de usuarios

A very well made TV adaptation of Conan Doyle's 1912 classic. The plot (of the movie as well as the book) has Professor Challenger (Bob Hoskins) leading an expedition to an isolated region of the Amazon, where it is believed prehistoric creatures have survived. Conan Doyle had based his book on the travels to the isolated Roraima region (the border zone between Brazil, Venezuela and Guyana where flat top mountains named tepuis predominate) by explorer Everard Im Thurn. This miniseries was shot in New Zealand (standing in for the Amazon), and the movie deviates from the book in only a minor questions: having a female character in the expedition (played by the fine Irish actress Elaine Cassidy), and, more controversially, a different ending. But the movie is very well made and very exciting.

Basically the Walking with Dinosaurs effects team working with BBC Drama.

I may have been full of the Christmas spirit(s) but this seemed to be the best BBC drama I've seen for a while and as far as I know quite faithful to the book. Characters more engaging than the animals (unheard of movies like this) and here's hoping Hoskins as Prof Challenger returns soon.

i just finished watching this two-parter on channel 2, Australian TV, and WOW! that was exhilarating from start to finish. the characters are introduced and fleshed out in their own time throughout part one (rather than rushing thru introductions like a lot of movies) and i really came to care for every single one of them, from the derided & laughed at Professor Challenger who first proposed the expedition (Bob Hoskins) to the arrogant world-wise hunter Lord Roxton (Tom Ward), and the ever-so-cute white-girl-growing-up-in-a-jungle-world Agnes (Elaine Cassidy).

it was interesting to see how each of the characters imposed their own set of values on each situation they encountered; from the theatre where all the other scientists poo-pooed Professor Challenger's theories and proposed expedition, to the flesh-hungry ape-men who surprised me with their compassion and ingenuity when the (t-rex?) stormed the village.

two hours and forty minutes was enough time to tell the tale, but left me wanting for much more due to the superior story-telling skill of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.

i intend on buying the DVD as soon as i can, and i fully recommend this story to anyone with a passion for prehistoric adventure overlaid with modern (well, early 20th century modern) values.

The dinosaurs are excellent, the colours are vivid, there's more of a plot than in Spielberg's "Lost World", and the movie is faithful to Conan Doyle's intent, if not all his actual characters.

It's the faithfulness to intent that bothers me, for Conan Doyle was quite explicit in his (WARNING: SPOILERS START HERE) "science triumphs over creationism" views, using his fiction to postulate the existence of the 'missing link' that was then considered crucial to evolutionary theory. The BBC, in their wisdom, make this absolutely explicit by introducing a character who is a Christian fundamentalist, and is (therefore!) deranged to the point of being dangerous. As a Christian in the UK, I'm used to seeing the religious establishment portrayed on TV & in films as out-of-touch, feeble, compromised, or all three, but it does sometimes spoil my enjoyment of the show.

And the moral at the end of the film - i.e. primitive people & animals should be left alone to develop as nature intended (which does differ from the ending of the book) - manages to be both highly appropriate (in that living free is better than being part of a freak show for the civilised world) and also the standard justification for keeping missionaries out of underdeveloped areas, because the people there are clearly happier with their animistic beliefs, herbal medicines and subsistence economy than with Christian beliefs, modern medicines and money-earning jobs. Yeah, right. (END SPOILERS)

But then, it takes a well-written movie to be thought-provoking enough to inspire me to the length of spoiler/complaint I've written above. See it and decide for yourself.

Here we have yet another remake of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's "The Lost World." By my count, this effort brings the total to seven, counting the TV movies (of which this is one) but NOT counting any of the Michael Crichton/Steven Spielberg efforts, since they have absolutely nothing to do with Doyle's story.

As with other film versions of this story, certain key elements of the story are brought into the film, some supporting characters are added and others are ignored or discarded entirely. One common bit of tampering is the addition of a woman to practically all the 19th and early 20th century adventure tales, and this one is no exception. The fact that the female character is generally useless doesn't seem to bother the producers or the scriptwriters, so who am I to criticize? The main characters, Professors Challenger and Summerlee, big-game hunter Lord John Roxton and newsman Edward Malone, each appear in some distorted form in every film version of the story.

Considering this is a TV movie, I suppose I have to cut the producers some slack. The story was OK and the FX adequate. Peter Falk was well cast, and his character, which did not exist in the book, added an interesting twist to the story. The sad story of Edward Malone and his airheaded girlfriend was left as Doyle wrote it, and will have a lot of guys nodding with sad understanding at the end of the film. Roxton's character was well drawn, but I'm not sure I like how he wound up at the end. The female character was, well, there. All things considered, this version is certainly not the worst of the lot.

The real problem I have with this version (and with most of the others as well) is with the casting and characterization of George Edward Challenger. As much as I like Bob Hoskins in other parts, he was just plain wrong for this one. Physically, he isn't up to it. Doyle's Challenger is bigger than life. George Edward Challenger is a thundering, bombastic, ego-driven buffalo of a man -- a force of nature. The second you meet this man you despise him. The problem is, of course, that Challenger is right – right about the plateau, right about the dinosaurs, right about the whole crazy tale – and it drives his peers nuts. Hoskins' humble, laid-back Challenger just doesn't cut it. For this part think John Rhys-Davies, who appeared as Challenger in 1992. Unfortunately, that effort was a major dud because on a horrible script.

The Lost World was written in 1912 and first made into a movie in 1925, five years before Doyle's death at age 71 from heart failure. Since you can't look anywhere without seeing a dinosaur these days, I suppose the producers can be forgiven for making yet another needless version of this story. If you want to find out what 'really' happened, go get the book.

A real tale of adventure. Pure Boys Own stuff, marauding dinosaurs, restless natives, all the things an excitement seeker requires, plus a lovely romantic side story or two.

The cast are excellent, just check out their reactions to the dinosaurs (that are are wonderful mixture of CGI and animatronics). The scenery (New Zealand) is beautiful and so colourful you can almost feel it and taste it.

This sort of thing is not everybody's cup of tea, but for those of us with a little imagination and the spirit of adventure it is sure to hit the mark.

Wonderful!

This is a superb TVM based on the story by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. A fine cast support the absorbing story line. The special effects are as magnificent as in ‘Walking With Beasts' - but are not overplayed - they are simply a part of the story. Brilliant, and well worth watching.

A band of scientists and adventures locate and explore a mysterious plateau in the South American jungle that is frozen in time to an era when dinosaurs roam the earth.

Based on Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's novel, this is a so-so telling of the story. Reasonably entertaining but not greatly so or particularly engaging. Plot is pretty basic and linear too.

This was easily the best version of The Lost World ever made, leaving all of the others trailing in the dust. Though the story was changed, the essence of the original story was strong throughout the movie. But they did have scenes from the book that were not shown in any of the other movies that I have seen (all but the black and white version), like when Malone climbs the tree to get a look at the layout of the plateau, and his encounter with the ape/men during it. They also had the chase scene involving Malone and the Carnivore (in this case, it was an Allosaur), though they changed the time and reason for that occurrance, and they added Agnes Clooney (Elaine Cassidy), a character that never existed in the book. The Movie had a great cast, Including Bob Hoskins and Peter Faulke, but some of the humor in the beginning was very cliche, and so was some of the cinematography, but being a made for TV movie, that is to be expected. All in all, I would have to say that this was a very decent adaptation of the novel.

I was somewhat surprised that in the middle of great battles between Indians, ape-men and dinosaurs, Elaine Cassidy managed to keep her trousers nice and clean and well-ironed. Which made her look nice I suppose. Supposedly we are in the middle of the Brazilian jungle, but in fact the film was shot in New Zealand. Certainly it has whetted my appetite for taking a holiday in that so far away little country, so appropriate for filming this kind of thing, and the Lord of The Rings, and The Piano, etc. My point is that if Maoris have to dress up like Amazonian Indians, couldn't somebody have been more careful with the supposed Amazonic language being used? Tutt, tutt...... Some interesting, even thought-provoking ideas included in the film which I cannot remember from the rather silly novel, which would have upset Victoria's Britain, no doubt. However, if you really want a good read from the inventor of Sherlock Holmes, try "The Hound of the Baskervilles". An amusing film for youngsters, all good clean healthy fun, and of course not to be taken seriously. Nice to see Peter Falk again.

At a London lecture, an eccentric professor (Bob Hoskins) encounters skepticism when he claims to have discovered a land of living prehistoric creatures. To prove his point, he heads an expedition to the Amazon region of South America. Here, the group of explorers finds ape-men, dinosaurs, prehistoric birds, and other exotic creatures.

The source novel by Arthur Conan Doyle led to the original 1925 silent film. Several remakes followed. This 2001 remake is worth watching, especially for the excellent visual and special effects, and for the cinematography. The CGI effects make the dinosaurs and birds look genuine. And the overall story is reasonably entertaining, though it does drag on for a tad too long.

The filmmakers are attentive to detail in both production design and costumes. The acting is acceptable. Dialogue is variable; uninspired at times; charming at other times. And I liked the pointed sarcasm directed at the snobbery of the academic mindset. The film's ending is unexpected and quite satisfying.

My main complaint is the film's tendency to expand into epic-dom. The plot goes on and on and on, and the cast eventually swells to what seems like thousands. I could have done without the ape-men, who seem slightly hokey, and who distract from the dinosaurs and birds.

Overall, "The Lost World" (2001) is well worth a look, especially for kids, but also for adults who enjoy exploration and high adventure.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's 1912 adventure novel, "The Lost World" has been seen regularly on the screen since it was first made into a popular, still effective silent movie with early Willis O'Brien stop-motion effects in 1925. Several other versions, inferior ones, have appeared ever since then. Television series have also come and gone. I have not read Doyle's novel, but seen many of the film versions and some episodes of a television series adapted from it. And out of them all, I have to say that 2001's version, directed by Stuart Orme, is by far the best one of them all.

Orme's "The Lost World" is a very engaging, absorbing, and above all entertaining adaptation of the novel. Perfectly cast, wonderfully-written, tense in action and mystery, and aware of how to play its running time. The film clocks at close to three hours in length, and yet it does not slow down. It is one of those rare long films that you actually want to keep on going. I myself when I finished watching it for the first time kept wishing it was another half-hour or a full hour longer, because it was such a compelling piece of art.

The movie is perfectly cast with a wide variety of European actors, appropriate considering the film at first starts off in the Old World. Instead of just casting accented Americans, the filmmakers played it off wisely and therefore, the performances are far more authentistic and convincing. Bob Hoskins was superb as the notorious scientist George Challenger, who wants to prove the existence of this Lost World where dinosaurs still live into the present day. The character of Professor Summerlee has been improved since the 1925 version, so that the character is more developed and understood as a result of a fine performance by James Fox and a well-written script by Adrian Hodges. Matthew Rhys was very good as Ed Malone and bears a close physical resemblance to Lloyd Hughes, who played Malone in the 1925 version. For some reason, I think that's crucial for the character. John Roxton is performed very well by Tom Ward and a great new addition to the cast is Agnes Cluny, who was not in the original novel. It almost seems routine to include a female character into the story. Here, the addition is portrayed by a young and talented Elaine Cassidy. Agnes still has the adventurous spirit that previous female additions have, but she doesn't turn out as annoying as some have.

The story was very, very well-written by Adrian Hodges. Every element in the film is wonderfully done. It doesn't just jump from one main point to another and skip the commonly insignificant details in between. Because, here, the insignificant details are significant. It spends the first hour developing our cast and continues to do so throughout. They aren't actors in makeup and costumes, they are real. That's the whole idea of acting. And for once, it really pays off well. Not unexpected, there is a love subplot. Only, it is very powerful and necessary to the storyline. It plays strongly without getting overworked or sappy. And above all, is a necessary addition to the development of the characters.

The special effects of the film are a real treat. The dinosaurs were done by the same people who did the graphics and props for the hit television miniseries "Walking With Dinosaurs". And you can see there is a resemblance between these two films in terms of the dinosaurs. They look, move, and sound magnificent. Some of the most convincing CGI dinosaurs I've seen in years. The blend of graphics and live-action props are smooth and well-planned to give a sense of reality. And even more so, a sense of majesty that we ourselves feel along with the characters when they first view these magnificent animals in awe, which they inevitably will as they have and will continue to do in years to come.

To summarize it all up, I have to say that 2001's version of "The Lost World" is a true masterpiece and the finest film adaptation of the popular story yet. I was amazed when I first saw it and continue to be amazed to this day. I love it even more every time I view it. I almost wish the film had been made for theaters, because it surely would have been at least a critical, if not also a commercial success for its perfect and innovating style. Audiences will be riveted and absorbed by its powerful storyline and effective action sequences. And appropriately, we are also drawn into the characters. This is a rare combination for a made-for-TV movie like this. I highly recommend it.

A sci fi show based on the novel of the same name. I sat through 1 and a half episodes on my first watch and couldn't watch through it anymore. A few weeks later I looked at it again on IMDB to read the reviews out of curiosity, that's when I found out about the intriguing change they made from the original novel, and I decided to wait until episode 3 aired to watch that one through. The ending change is a good idea, it was done to change with the current times of morality where more people now are against colonialism. The cast of characters is an interesting mix, You got a dubious professor which I'll describe as having a white beard because I can't remember his name, (turns out it's George Challenger, and he's probably my favorite one) nobody believes him when he says he has a pterosaur finger bone, it goes from there as he challenges the skeptical Summerlee to join his expedition. Then there's the young guy in his 20's who gets no slack from his mentors and has this irrelevant love interest I couldn't care less about. There's also mustache' man with his gun and hair which struck me as slightly comical that he was put in, maybe he's in the novel, I don't know. He reminds me of Dieter Stark from The Lost World (1997), but he's a good guy with a mixed bag of morality rather than a tasing-poacher villain. Their guide who is from the UK but stayed in South America for years is Agnes, her father or uncle leaves the whole group behind for his own wealth, for some reason. When they get along with the expedition, they arrive in Brazil I assume, and they hike through the rugged terrain. The natives as they are called, look as if they are modeled after American Indians of North America, put in orange, and plopped with some dinosaurs in the middle of nowhere in South America. Those people are a fictional tribe, so the way they are depicted may be acceptable or not, I don't know, they aren't demonized or anything. This show was made with BBC, so they used some of the same CG models from Walking With Beasts, and made a few original ones for the show as well. Some of the score reminds me of The Lost World: Jurassic Park and Jurassic Park 3. The best parts of The Lost World (2001) are in the Jungle, along with the ending where they come back with a 'specimen', which I'll say ambiguously as to avoid tagging this with spoilers. I talk about an ending but there are 2 other parts to the ending that come after this. It's okay but I'm never that interested to watch it again.

Yep! The producers of this film just felt that the story of a group of British explorers wandering through the jungles of South America in search of a hidden plateau riddled with prehistoric monsters had not been tackled enough or not tackled with any degree of accuracy. Despite having been made into film and television fare since 1925 numerous times, the folks at A & E wanted to remake Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's novel. They wanted to try and create a definitive version of his classic tale. They did do a pretty good job. Sure, one can see the major differences between the book and the film. There are not many, but there are some major ones(the addition of a female character). Yet,despite these changes, the film remains very faithful in spirit to the novel. The characters are central to the story not the dinosaurs. The acting is quite good with Bob Hoskins doing a fine job as Professor Challenger. Edward Fox gives a first-rate performance as Professor Summerlee, bring wit, humour, and even some pathos to his role. Peter Falk is also fine in his role, a role which brings to light the everlasting fight between religion and science to the forefront of the film. The special effects are pretty good and the story is plotted with action, suspense, and wonderful dialogue. But what I liked more than anything about this film was the fact that the producers refused to pander to the less literate and articulate members of the audience. They did not sacrifice characterization for action and special effects all the time. They did not abandon having viewers use their minds and think about the inherent problems of science and religion when they collide. For this I thank them and hope that others take their lead and remember that not all viewers are between the ages of 10 and 25. A fine adaptation and a ripping good yarn!

Usually when these TV specials happen they are either too arty for thier own good or just plain boring! This however is none of them, Using the classic Conan-Doyle story this oozes panache from start to finish. All the cast are superb in thier roles, although Bob Hoskins accent is a little strained at times. The direction is first class as well. If you get chance see it.

the lost world. ahh. what a fascinating idea. what a wonderful book by sir arthur conan doyle. and a great movie. this movie was not that great if you think only in american (big effects, lots of death and explosions but no blood or ethics, bad actors and an overdose on patriotism and heroism), it was great if you think like the rest of the world. a movie must have certain magic that captures you along with the journey, to the lost world. none of the horrible jurassic park movies ever could do that. the cast is absolutely great, especially the older cast, and the sceneries are wonderful and the character development especially nicely done. the tribe of the ape people is very fascinating although the costuming could have been better. all and all i love european movies and for a european movie this is actually quite big budget, and a decent version of the classic.

I watched this as a two-parter on A&E over the last two nights. Interestingly, the first part which is largely an exploration of the main characters is more interesting than the second part where the dinosaurs actually appear. Not that the special effects aren't convincing--they're superb. And the final scene, where the explorers return to London where Professor Challenger (Bob Hoskins) is about to reveal his prize possession, is one of the highlights of the film. But the buildup of tension is nicely done in the first part, as well as the introduction of the interesting characters.

All of the performances are first rate with two standouts--Matthew Rhys and Elaine Cassidy who supply the main love interest. These fresh-faced newcomers make their roles entirely believable. Seasoned actor James Fox is excellent as the skeptical Professor Leo Summerlee, especially when reacting to the blustery remarks and behavior of the overly enthusiastic Challenger. Peter Falk seems to have a grand time hamming it up as Rev. Kerr who is vehemently opposed to Darwin's theory of evolution and pulls a surprising stunt on the explorers.

All of this is done in a handsomely produced, tasteful manner (except for one brief scene of cannibalism which is too intense). It has the feel of a well produced British film, one that approaches the style of a Merchant Ivory production at times.

All technical aspects are fine and the costumes and settings enrich the story. Well worth watching, it maintains a good pace even though its running time is lengthy. The location photography in New Zealand is stunning.

Discount the disclaimers. This is the whole film from TV. Cast is top draw! Peter Falk, Bob Hoskins, James Fox three of the best. By far better than film The Lost World with John Rhyes Davies, although he was good. Dinosaurs are not blow ups of lizards as in Film with Claude Rains. Which was ridiculous. This has more realistic dinasaurs. Of course not as good as Jurassic Park. Nothing tops that but it is good