Ghost and the Darkness (1996)
5 word summary
Man-eating Lions Terrorize African village
The Ghost and the Darkness is very interesting movie. It's based on a true story, but really who ever knows how much of that story is true. The story of 2 lions attacking the workers of a rail road and the hunt for those lions by Patterson are both known true and not necessarily that exciting. However, how clever and seemingly hell bent on killing Patterson and the other men the lions are almost brings this movie into a Horror genre than just the adventure/thriller.
Director Stephen Hopkins did a very good job at building tension and really making this a heart pounding thriller. The problem however with the film, and what knocked down the rating for me, was the acting. Val Kilmer, who can be good, and Michael Douglas, who can be amazing, both had mediocre performances at best. Kilmer didn't seem to care about the film or his character. Douglas almost over acted but it still was poor.
With the acting aside it was a very enjoyable film. A real thrill ride. Its one of the best films I've seen about killer animals, besides Jaws of course. The fact that it's "based on a true story" brings a sense of terror not usually accompanied with similar films.
Like I said its no Jaws, but it's better than Anaconda
8/10
5 word summary
Man-eating Lions Terrorize African village
The Ghost and the Darkness is very interesting movie. It's based on a true story, but really who ever knows how much of that story is true. The story of 2 lions attacking the workers of a rail road and the hunt for those lions by Patterson are both known true and not necessarily that exciting. However, how clever and seemingly hell bent on killing Patterson and the other men the lions are almost brings this movie into a Horror genre than just the adventure/thriller.
Director Stephen Hopkins did a very good job at building tension and really making this a heart pounding thriller. The problem however with the film, and what knocked down the rating for me, was the acting. Val Kilmer, who can be good, and Michael Douglas, who can be amazing, both had mediocre performances at best. Kilmer didn't seem to care about the film or his character. Douglas almost over acted but it still was poor.
With the acting aside it was a very enjoyable film. A real thrill ride. Its one of the best films I've seen about killer animals, besides Jaws of course. The fact that it's "based on a true story" brings a sense of terror not usually accompanied with similar films.
Like I said its no Jaws, but it's better than Anaconda
8/10