A One Mann’s Movies review of “The Lost City” (2022).
After the bruhaha of the Oscars, back to more middle-of-the-road fare with “The Lost City”: a new comedy/action caper starring Sandra Bullock. It’s an almost exact rip-off of 1984’s “Romancing the Stone” with Kathleen Turner and Michael Douglas. (It even has a knowing slogan at a book fair – “Romancing the Book”!) But, to quote the illustrious Mrs Movie Man, “there’s nothing wrong with that”.
Bob the Movie Man Rating:
Plot Summary:
Loretta Sage (Sandra Bullock) is a famous romance novellist, now reclusive after the death of her beloved archaeologist husband. But her publicist Beth (Da’Vine Joy Randolph) forces her out on the road to publicise her new book – “The Lost City of D” which forces her to reluctantly engage with both her fans and her egocentric cover model Alan (Channing Tatum).
But fervant adventurer Abigail Fairfax (Daniel Radcliffe) reads more meaning into the contents of her book and kidnaps her to help him find the fabulous treasure within the real Lost City.
Certification:
Talent:
Starring: Sandra Bullock, Channing Tatum, Daniel Radcliffe,
Da’Vine Joy Randolph, Oscar Nuñez, Patti Harrison.
Directed by: Aaron Nee and Adam Nee
Written by: Oren Uziel, Dana Fox, Adam Nee and Aaron Nee. (Based on a story by Seth Gordon).
Twitter Handle: #LostCityMovie
“The Lost City” Review:
Positives:
- There’s a natural chemistry between Sandra Bullock and Channing Tatum that’s difficult to not find appealing. In many ways, this is the same sort of comedy shtick from Bullock that we’ve seen from her with films like “Miss Congeniality” and “The Heat”. But she does it very well indeed. Channing Tatum is further cementing his box-office cred as “the one to call if Dwayne is too expensive”, delivering a charming and deprecating performance. The couple also make for a really belieavable romantic couple, given their age difference. (Tatum is 42 and Bullock is an unbelievable 57). Now – before anyone comments – I know that there are loads of examples, most of the Bonds for instance, where the age difference between the romantic leads is similar (or greater). But it’s unusual, and refreshing, that the woman here is the elder party.
- A shout-out too to Daniel Radcliffe who genuinely seems to be loving his very different role as a sociopathic billionaire with a chip on his shoulder.
- As a comedy it passes the six laugh test. Well, just about, since some of these are chuckles rather than good old belly-laughs. (Although, they might have been laughs the first time that I saw the trailer – see below). As well as the broad gags, there are some funny lines quietly inserted into the dialogue at random. (For example, the fans of the “Angela Lovemore” novels are called “Angela-Lovemore-head”‘s. And Daniel Radcliffe asserts that his name – Abigail – is gender neutral!)
- The on-location scenary (actually the Dominican Republic) is spectacular, and really nicely photographed by cinematographer Jonathan Sela.
Negatives:
- The writing, by committee, is very patchy. Some parts of the script fall flat and lifeless on the screen. In particular, the scenes with Beth (Da’Vine Joy Randolph) killed the movie stone-dead for me. Her whole character should have been nixed in the edit. (“Delete, delete, delete”, as Loretta might say). The writers seem to thing that the mere presence of a slightly overweight and loud black woman spouting Melissa McCarthy-esque type lines will be naturally funny, regardless of the lines. As for Octavia Spencer in “Thunder Force“, they were dead wrong.
- The same is true, to a lesser extent, with the character of Allison (Patti Harrison) – the social media ‘yoof’ expert. She has a few more decent lines than Beth, but comes across as a bit irritating.
- My biggest problem with the movie though is the trailer. Basically, it describes the whole movie and gives away far too many of the best bits. Even the very funny and well done Indiana Jones “Well of the Souls”-style opener was a “yawn… move along please” for me. And a cameo performance by a well-known star could have been kept as a nice surprise for the audience. (I’ve tagged them at the end of the article but deliberately not mentioned them in the main text… just in case – by some miracle – you’ve not seen the trailer… or indeed many of the film’s posters.) WHY OH WHY OH WHY do production companies do this?? It is just SO annoying and unnecessary. #teasertrailersaregood.
Monkeys?
Before you dash for the door as the credits start to roll, there is a (very funny) mid-credits monkey in this one that is worth waiting a few minutes for!
Summary Thoughts on “The Lost City”
There’s so much terrible tension and aggression around the world at the moment (even outside of the Dolby Theatre) that a bit of light romantic escapism at the movies goes a long way. And this movie delivers that in spades. It’s far from perfect, but it’s a fun way to spend an evening.
2 thought on “The Lost City (12A): Congenial Bullock and Tatum romance another stone.”
Please leave a comment: your thoughts are much appreciated!
Trailer for “The Lost City”
The trailer is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfKO9rYDmE8 .
Dear Mr. Mann
I’ve been enjoying your movie reviews since mid-covid. Keep up the good work!
In the past few months, I’ve started attending a “double feature” each weekend as the local (actually 40 miles away) 10-screen movie theaters have opened up. Alas, our neighborhood theater (10 miles away) is still closed, apparently forever.
Last weekend at 10:30 am, I saw the kid movie “Lego Batman”. The theater runs a kid movie first thing in the morning on Saturdays. Then in the afternoon, after a 45-minute walk in the mall, I saw “Lost City” with an unusually large crowd of 8 other people. (I was the only viewer at Lego Batman).
I mainly enjoyed Lost City and agreed with your review but with two disagreements. First, I just couldn’t get over the huge age difference between Tatum and Bullock. The dancing and kissing was really cringy. Eww! It would have been far better to have taken a much lighter tone with the dancing and left out the kissing. Have them walk into a romantic sunset.
Second, the mix of the relatively lighthearted bloodless “take a nap” and “ahhh disappear over the cliff” to get rid of the bad guys versus the blood spatter all over the wall and blood soaked clothes was jarring. Sure the sight of the bullet in the brain was briefly off screen, but, no. Too graphic. And now you can’t have Brad Pitt appear in the sequel, unless you have it just be a flesh wound, somehow. Which the writers totally would do, of course. But the violence was jarring and took me out of the movie.
Most of the movies these days never show up in the theaters. And I can’t find many of them on the myriad streaming platforms. I really like seeing a movie in the big dark theater. I’m one of a dying breed, alas.
Sincerely,
Anna Harbell
Montesano, Washington
Why, thanks Anna for the appreciated. That really is appreciated. And thanks for commenting too on the movies… I wish more people would comment,so please keep that up too!
I guess we will agree to differ on the age-difference. I know a lot of couples in very loving relationships HAVE this much of an age difference, and can get upset if I make too much of a thing about it. (For myself and the illustrious Mrs Movie Man we are only 3 months adrift, with me being the toy boy!).As I pointed out, others see no problem with a 50+ year old Bond romancing a 20-something year old. (But you might also be of the “Eww!” brigade on that one… if you remember Roger Moore and the teenage skating prodigy in “For Your Eyes Only” then I’ll certainly join you!).
Where I have more sympathy is in the violence, which I agree was quite jarring and less necessary. There is often a lot of gratuitous icky violence in these adventure films (“Raiders of the Lost Ark” is phenomenally gruesome), but in an action/COMEDY I agree it can be misplaced. By the way, you clearly exited the theatre at the start of the credits, since there is a very funny mid-credits scene (I forgot to mention this “monkey” so will go back and edit my post) that features BP!
Thanks again for the comments and following One Mann’s Movies.