The Lost City (2022) Poster

(2022)

User Reviews

Review this title
1,120 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
Pieces that work and pieces that don't
guskeller25 March 2022
The Lost City has pieces that work and pieces that don't. Placing pretenders into an actual adventure is good for laughs and heart, yet much of this script is generic. Unimaginative MacGuffins, flat villains, and predictable romances are individually forgivable, but together, they override the premise's charm. Furthermore, the dialogue, humor, and plot devices are subpar. The cast enhances the material (especially Pitt and Radcliffe), but some scenes are groaners. Tatum's charisma shines through and Pitt's cameo provides flavor, but that isn't enough to pull The Lost City out of mediocrity. It isn't painful, but The Lost City misses more than it hits.

Meanwhile, The Lost City's filmmaking is average. Its minor positives are the cinematography (intermittently dramatizing comedy and action), the sound (selling the combat and jungle setting), the production design (primarily real but often computerized), and the effects (employing real explosions amongst the CGI). Conversely, the editing occasionally sags (lingering on unessential jokes) and the music is distractingly trendy (forcing fun, rather than serving the narrative). Lastly, The Lost City lacks cohesion. Its humor and emotions never tonally blend, and instead take turns (which disconnects viewers). Ultimately, The Lost City has mild appeal, but functions inconsistently.

Writing: 3/10 Direction: 3/10 Cinematography: 6/10 Acting: 5/10 Editing: 4/10 Sound: 6/10 Score/Soundtrack: 4/10 Production Design: 6/10 Casting: 8/10 Effects: 6/10

Overall Score: 5.1/10.
239 out of 313 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Needs more Brad Pitt
baxterkw27 March 2022
Warning: Spoilers
The chemistry between Bullock and Pitt is beyond words even though for only a minute or two. It's so powerful that it dulls the chemistry between Channing and Bullock. It's too bad that Brad wasn't given a much larger role as he has a real knack for comedy. It was likely to keep costs down or maybe he couldn't commit to more shooting days. If budget wasn't an issue I would have written a few more Pitt scenes in and maybe less goat. They tried to milk the goat bit (sorry) and it just wasn't funny. Radcliffe was good too and again he could have used a few more scenes. Still, money well spent just to watch Brad for a few minutes as he stole the entire movie.
174 out of 230 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
silly and formulaic by design
ferguson-623 March 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Greetings again from the darkness. It's not billed as a remake of ROMANCING THE STONE (1984), and perhaps that's because it borrows from many adventure romantic-comedies over the years. Brothers and co-directors Aaron Nee and Adam Nee (BAND OF ROBBERS, 2015) have proven they can deliver exactly what is promised from a script by co-writers Oren Uziel (MORTAL COMBAT, 2021) and Dana Fox (CRUELLA, 2021). Seth Gordon receives a story credit, which is a bit ironic considering he has been quoted with, "The best stories are rooted in reality."

Oscar winner Sandra Bullock stars as grieving, reclusive and highly successful romance novelist Loretta Sage, and Channing Tatum co-stars as her long-time and extremely popular cover model, Adam (in what is obviously a 'wink and a nod' to Fabio). Loretta's love of history, and the passing of her husband, have combined to make her despise the books she writes and the publicity tours she's required to attend ... especially when being forced to wear a skintight purple/fuchsia sequined onesie. On the other hand, vapid model Adam relishes giving the audience what they want - strutting, hair waving, and bare chest.

After their most recent event goes sideways, Loretta is kidnapped by the villainous rich guy with a so-called gender-neutral name of Abigail Fairfax (Daniel Radcliffe). He's read her latest book and needs her help in locating the 'Crown of Fire' hidden somewhere on a remote island he purchased for this reason. Things have to move quickly before the volcano erupts and buries the treasure. At this point, Adam is committed to rescuing Loretta and proving that he's more than a pretty face. Loretta's stressed out literary agent Beth (Da'Vine Joy Randolph, DOLEMITE IS MY NAME, 2019) is determined to save her writer-asset, while the newly hired social media director (Patti Harrison) acts goofy (and deserved better lines).

It's regrettable, yet a sign of the times, that (2-time Oscar winner) Brad Pitt's cameo is included in the trailer. This should have been a pleasant surprise for viewers, and instead is spoiled by the clip. He has fun with his role as former Navy Seal and meditation partner with Adam, as the two work towards Loretta's rescue. The time on the island combines the adventure sequences with the slow-build of the romantic bond between Loretta and Adam, and both actors do their thing. It's mostly Mr. Radcliffe who seems a bit out of place as he goes big in his role as villain, when some subtlety might have played better. Then again, there is nothing subtle about this production, including the scenes with Beth and an oddball pilot with a goat-fetish played by Oscar Nunez ("The Office").

Sandra Bullock and Channing Tatum can play these characters in their sleep, and to their credit, they both seem engaged and willing to put forth the necessary effort. Tatum especially embraces the duality of a preening cover boy and the sensitive type out to prove he has substance. It's an easy film to criticize, but why would you? It's meant to be harmless fun and bring joy to movie lovers. It's totally fine to make a silly formulaic movie when your objective is to make a silly formulaic movie.

Opening in theaters on March 25, 2022.
236 out of 316 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Good fun.
Sleepin_Dragon26 April 2022
I wasn't expecting to enjoy this, but on the whole, I did, some bits of it were pretty silly, but there were some nice moments, and a few bits that had me in stitches. Some of the sweeter, romance moments were maybe a little corny, but that's what was expected I guess.

Nice special effects, it looks great, I loved the locations used. You can argue it had a somewhat old fashioned, maybe old school vibe about it, but sometimes you just need a bit of silliness in your life.

Nicely acted, they all did a good job, Daniel Radcliffe was good fun, always enjoy his work.

It really does make the most of Channing Tatum's looks, and it does work, he is ridiculously handsome, and there are several tongue in cheek moments, he seems like a good sport.

7/10.
199 out of 277 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Enjoyable and amusing
FeastMode25 March 2022
The first half of this movie is really funny. I was laughing more than most in the theater. There are so many well-written jokes and situational humor with about an 80% hit rate, including a few hilarious moments. The characters are fleshed out enough for me to care. The story is formulaic and relatively weak compared to the other aspects, but that's easily forgiven when it's making me laugh.

In the second half, the laughs slow down drastically. It gets a lot more serious with attempts at character arcs and story moments that aren't bad but are things we've seen a thousand times. I didn't hate watching it, but without as much comedy it's a much weaker movie.

The first half is easily seven stars. The second half is a weak six. I wouldn't mind watching this again but I wouldn't go out of my way to do so. (1 viewing, opening Thursday night 3/24/2022)
151 out of 217 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A Solid, Throwback Comedy
kjproulx25 March 2022
Mainstream comedies that actually make it to theatres are slim to none these days. I remember a time when there was possibly a big comedy coming out every one or two months, with at least half of them being good, but in today's climate, humour is just tough to get right. I was very happy to see that Paramount would be taking a chance and releasing a big comedy in The Lost City this year, but I truly didn't know to what to expect from it. After seeing it in theatres, I'm happy to say that I had a good time with it. It's not great, but it felt like a throwback comedy, just with a modern twist.

To put it simply, The Lost City follows Loretta (Sandra Bullock) as she's on a book tour with her cover model Alan (Channing Tatum) to promote the release of "The Lost City of D," but they are swept up in a kidnapping and find themselves on a real adventure in the jungle. Abigail Fairfax (Daniel Radcliffe) is the reason Loretta was kidnapped in the first place, as he sees many similarities in her book to that of a real lost city. Being the privileged twerp that he is makes for a fun villainous storyline, even if it's pretty lame at times. Radcliffe aside (whom I still enjoyed), this film puts all of its weight on Tatum and Bullock to deliver the goods.

This premise is clever enough to work as a film, but it all comes down to who you cast and if they can make the material work. I never thought I needed to see this duo together, but I'm very happy they worked so well. On top of that, I have to admit that the best moments in the film feature Brad Pitt's character Jack Trainer. He isn't in the film much, but every second he was on screen had me laughing. Where I found the film to be slightly uneven though, was in the fact that I wasn't sure if it wanted to be funny or dramatic at times.

I'm all for heartfelt storylines as well as comedy, but I would argue that the majority of the humour is in the first half, while the second half gets a little more sentimental. These both worked in the movie, but the way the film begins gives absolutely no foreshadowing as to what the film will become by the end. I found that odd, but again, the cast sold all of the dialogue for me. From a few hilarious moments to some fun adventure/action throughout, as I said, I had a good time with this one.

In the end, The Lost City is exactly what I think moviegoers need right now. Nothing too serious or weighed down by heavy drama. This is a good old-fashioned, silly comedy/romance that I feel works for what it is. It's not going to be the type of comedy that a lot of people are going to watch over and over again, at least I don't think, but the heart of the film is in the right place and it never takes anything too seriously. Now playing in theatres, I'd give a recommendation to The Lost City.
204 out of 299 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Simple, fun, hilarious....
PerryAtTheMovies24 March 2022
7.0/10

I actually enjoyed this film way more than I expected. It perfectly fits into its categories of action, adventure, comedy, and romance.

The story was very enjoyable. It started off kind of wonky and felt like I was in for a bad time, but once the "prologue" passed and the main portion of the movie started it got much better.

The chemistry between Sandra Bullock and Channing Tatum worked surprisingly well, and only got better as the film progressed. I did enjoy Daniel Radcliffe as the antagonist. More of a bratty rich boy than an evil "I want to murder everyone" kind of bad guy.

By the end I felt that the big part of the film was that the romance was definitely geared towards the women while the action parts were geared towards the men. The comedy could've gone either way, and some may find certain parts funnier than others, both scenes and what's actually funny.

I also enjoyed the score. The way certain soundtracks were worked into the scenes noticeably helped enhance them (as soundtracks should).

Overall, I think this film is perfect for a movie date night. It's funny, it's romantic, it has a pretty good action/adventure story and it's not as cheesy as most romcoms tend to be.

I hope my review helps you make a choice on this film. Until next time.... Enjoy the show!
181 out of 273 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
A Mess of a Weak Plot and Little Chemistry
danew1312 May 2022
From the early reviews I thought this was the film to see...but seeing it i'm amazed at those reviews.

In short, this was a weak and humorless version of Romancing the Stone. Without any chemistry between the actors...except for the possible chemistry in Sandra Bullocks face.

One minute they're in a city, then in the jungle, they're being shot at,then sleeping, the they're walking miles and miles...you don't know what the hell is going on.
230 out of 359 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Cute and funny enough
Calicodreamin25 March 2022
A cute and funny enough rom com, a few more of the jokes were stale than I would have liked, but overall it accomplished its goal. A few laughs, a few "awhs", and a whole lotta "omg is Channing Tatum hot"'d.
104 out of 172 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Brad Pitt was hilarious
Homer_Ate211 May 2022
The writing let this film down. It was a little funny but burnt out too quickly. There was no chemistry between the two characters which made whatever romantic connection they were supposed to have towards the end not believable. Overall it was alright, gave us some thing to watch.
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Better than the user rating on Imdb right now
Roman-pc1 October 2022
Bonkers that this film is rated only 6.1 on Imdb right now--it's better than that. Proof that folks who rate movies on here are sometimes guilty of the same crime that professional critics frequently make--looking the gift horse in the mouth. As you can see folks, this is not an art-house film--it's pure entertainment, and it delivers on that count.

My wife and I saw this in the theater--the Brad Pitt cameo alone is worth the price of admission and both Channing Tatum and Sandra Bullock have lots of funny lines and pure situational/physical comedy too. What's not to like? A cast that's easy on the eyes and talented to boot, a fairly decent script and a love story with enough heft but still airy and entertaining.
145 out of 193 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An enjoyable knockoff of Indiana Jones et al. Romantic and goofy.
JohnDeSando26 March 2022
Yes, The Lost City is a sometime dimwitted, formulaic romantic adventure like Romancing the Stone and Indiana Jones with not much creativity that I could tell. No, it is not totally boring because it offers a relaxing antidote to COVID anxieties plaguing us for two years. The cutthroat island shenanigans, with reclusive romance novelist Loretta (Sandra Bullock) and her cover model Alan (Channing Tatum) are kidnapped looking for buried treasure.

What makes this romance mildly enjoyable is the charm of its stars, Sandy/Loretta just a bit too old but looking fab, and Channing, buff and self-deprecating enough to generate a spark with Loretta. Daniel Radcliff as baddie Abagail Fairfax seems out of place, but then that may be the point.

At our AMC-like theater there were a few other audience members far enough from us that we could cut up and converse, much like renting the theater for ourselves. Some solid scenes of repartee reminiscent of screwball comedies added to the pleasure of the island scenery and robust chases along with our not-always witty declamations.

I would recommend you staying home and enjoying the house invasion Windfall on Netflix except that we enjoyed being out and seeing what Hollywood could do when it barely tries. And when Brad Pitt does a cameo with surprising dexterity, your retro romance Lost City is fully updated, and even semi-glamorous if you ask me. And you didn't.
62 out of 103 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Really Fun
jk8jj2912 November 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Cute rom com that was better than I expected. Channing Tatum is not the lead I usually go for but the chemistry between him and Sandra was surprising. Honestly my main motivation for watching was Daniel Radcliff and he did not disappoint. What a fun character. Of course the story was silly, but i laughed out loud multiple times.

What else to make this review longer...leaches, yuck. Naked back side...yay! Slow dancing...nice. Blood...ewe. Stuffy high brow reviews...boo. People who enjoy getting away from it all for a few hours without over analyzing...woohoo! Give it a try if this attitude resonates with you.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
One of Bullock's and Tatum's worst movies
jmc476928 March 2022
Warning: Spoilers
I've seen a lot of enjoyable Sandra Bullock movies and quite a few enjoyable Channing Tatum movies. They are both appealing popcorn movie stars. But this movie was like every stupid, unfunny, cringey, annoying scene that they've ever been in, all rolled into one movie. The screenplay was embarrassingly bad, and it brought out all of Bullock's and Tatum's worst tendencies. Daniel Radcliffe was a bland villain, and Da'Vine Joy Randolph's scenes were practically unwatchable. Brad Pitt's character was about the only good thing in the movie. I actually laughed when he was onscreen. But when he got literally blasted out of the picture early on, it drained all of the life out of him and the movie.
256 out of 418 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
there is a scene in the movie
A_Different_Drummer12 May 2022
... it goes by quickly so it's easy to miss, where Bullock steps out of character for a moment, takes the entire movie, cast, and crew, straps them to her back, and then carries them all to the finale. In other words, for Bullock fans only. The rest of the movie is a jumble of bad writing and bad directing.
13 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Great duo and fun adventure but forgettable plot and thin amount of humor makes it decent.
cruise0127 March 2022
3 out of 5 stars.

Sandra Bullock and Channing Tatum were great with there on screen chemistry and worked great with providing humor. Taking them on a adventure to searching for the lost city before the bad guys go after the search. The cast is good. The concept is fun. The film does have some humor and entertainment. The plot is forgettable. And the film does have a small amount of humor that cant carry the movie.
30 out of 55 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Disappointing - stick wit the trailer
jellyrhubarb21 May 2022
Well darn it. I really wanted to like this movie! The cast is really likable and the trailer made me think it'd be a fun, smart romp. The trailer had all the best parts it turns out. All the filler in between a few funny bits was boring.

I'm glad I didn't see it in a movie theatre as I had planned. I ended up not even finishing the movie. Why bother with uninspired writing. Ho hum. Dumb.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A fun popcorn movie
dtander-127 March 2022
I wouldn't pay a premium price to see this, but it's funny and fun. Some great laughs, Gotta say, Sandra Bulloch's behind looks pretty fine for a woman in her fifties. Channing Tatum is a good foil for Bulloch's brainy character, although his character's evolution doesn't seem very consistent throughout the movie. Dan Radcliffe makes a convincing villain and Brad Pitt is a very amusing supporting character without stealing the movie. It just goes to show that good actors and a decent plot and writing can make even lightweight fare quite satisfying, for an afternoon matinee, at least. There's a sequel suggested...I'd definitely consider seeing that one.
10 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Mediocre at best...
garethwooduk25 April 2022
Great line up, but this film tries to hard to be funny with cringy and unforgettable action scenes... Felt like a total gimmick and clone of Romance in the Stone & Jewel in the Nile that both captured romance, action & humour so very well!

I think Sandra Bullock should stick to drama movies! This movie was painfully boring.
165 out of 265 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
VIEWS ON FILM review of The Lost City
burlesonjesse524 March 2022
Warning: Spoilers
2022's The Lost City is just plain fun. Escapists and popcorn munchers are welcome. It's one of those action-adventure vehicles where the protagonists supply the sarcastic quips in the face of swashbuckling danger. "Jungles eat people like us". Need I say more.

Directed with jungly cinematography by those Nee brothers (Aaron and Adam), "City" is like the goofy cousin of a certain '84 Robert Zemeckis flick and any Indiana Jones endeavor. It's a riff but a good riff that's not to be taken as serious. There's supposed hidden treasure, chases, snakes featured, and for added effect, leeches too.

The Lost City stars Sandra Bullock as a novelist who gets kidnapped when one of her stories reveals the location of fortune in an ancient burgh (sound familiar?). The role of writer Loretta Sage is perfect for a bumbling, physical comic like Bullock. It's like her agent said, "oh yeah, this is a no-brainer".

"City" also has Brad Pitt in it as a Navy Seal (Jack Trainer) sent to rescue Sage from the already rich baddies. When he exits, well it's almost a buzzkill. Piggybacking on his intimidating persona via Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, Pitt just reminds us again that he's a legend. His bone-crunching action sequences in "City" give the film a shot in the arm that doesn't quite sustain for the rest of the running time (1 hour-plus). Sure "City" is motion full tilt but finishes with less cowbell.

In thinking back, "City's" look could almost pass as boost animation. The dialogue is improvised, the characters are dispassionate (yet funny), and because of the breezy tone (intertwined with PG-13 violence), The Lost City is a true to type, moviegoer's movie. It's basically one of the reasons we hit the cineplex on a Friday at 7-ish. Call it "Advancing" the Stone.
22 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Worst movie I've seen, ever
abduluddin7 May 2022
1st time I've ever walked out of a cinema. What were the actors thinking signing up to this movie?

The only good performance was from Brad Pitt - he must be regretting this now.
36 out of 52 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Way funnier than i thought it was going to be
jobitaphillips23 March 2022
I saw a screening of this and thought hey it's probably gonna be another cheesy action comedy but hey free. I didn't have high expectations but I have to say this movie was HILARIOUS! Good action. Really good comedy and even though it's 2 hours long it was good pacing. Definitely worth a watch!
72 out of 112 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Funny and enjoyable
weidner90310 April 2022
I enjoyed this movie. It wasn't top drawer, but it was fun and funny. Since I originally liked Romancing the Stone a lot and this was so similar of course I liked it.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Uggggggggghhhhhhh
KOOLAIDBRO12 May 2022
This was rough. I guess I put my expectations too high from the previews. The part with Brad Pitt was fine the rest a typical Sandra Bullock overreacting to mild inconveniences and complete stupidity. Shoutout to the marketing team for making this look like something I would enjoy when I knew better, but thought maybe? Just maybe? Well I knew better. This is terrible.
280 out of 468 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A fun and entertaining one time watch
Top_Dawg_Critic2 June 2022
Novice writers and directors brother duo the Nee's did an impressive job with this full length feature film, especially considering their previous works were mainly shorts. The 112 runtime was used up well, although a little faster pacing and/or some scenes trimmed down would've shown better. Casting and performances were excellent, especially Channing Tatum who was the main source of laughs. The story is not revolutionary, but did have some refreshing changes to the genre. It's a fun and entertaining one time watch, especially if you're a fan of any of the lead cast.
19 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

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


Recently Viewed