Robbed of his birthright, Arthur comes up the hard way in the back alleys of the city. But once he pulls the sword from the stone, he is forced to acknowledge his true legacy - whether he likes it or not.
The Lost City of Z tells the incredible true story of British explorer Percy Fawcett, who journeys into the Amazon at the dawn of the 20th century and discovers evidence of a previously unknown, advanced civilization that may have once inhabited the region. Despite being ridiculed by the scientific establishment who regard indigenous populations as "savages," the determined Fawcett - supported by his devoted wife, son and aide de camp returns time and again to his beloved jungle in an attempt to prove his case, culminating in his mysterious disappearance in 1925.
Fascinated in part by Percy Fawcett's conflicted relationships with his son and wife, Gray also embraced the saga as a way of addressing issues still bedeviling the world today. "The Lost City of Z involves politics in a way," Gray explains. "The upper crust in Britain looked down on Fawcett because his father was an alcoholic who wasted the family fortune. They all looked down on the indigenous people. And even the indigenous people warred amongst each other. There was something powerful in this sad truth about human beings, that we feel the need to put each other in separate boxes of class and race and gender." See more »
Thoughout the movie the English main character communicates to the Indigenous natives with the dialect of Spanish. Considering that the natives have not come into contact with 'the white man' before, there is no way that they could have learnt this language and therefore understand him. See more »
If we may find a city, where one was considered impossible to exist, it may well write a whole new chapter in human history.
See more »
The film takes place in the 20th century, where British explorer Percy Fawcett journeys into the Amazon to discover evidence of a previously unknown civilization.
I'm sad to say that I was disappointed by this film in almost every aspect. It seems to me that the biggest problem it has is the pacing. For a two and a half hour long film, pacing is important to keep the viewers engaged and this movie just gets it completely wrong. It feels like three movies clumsily stuffed into one, and as if that wasn't enough, it adds a bunch of utterly irrelevant scenes which could have easily been cut out of the movie entirely. I, for one, was expecting to see at least some beautiful cinematography, but the movie fails to deliver even in the aesthetic aspect. I was also expecting to see a lot more of the actual journey to the Amazon, but instead we got scene after boring scene in England, where nothing of importance really happens. After about an hour and a half I was left wondering how so many critics found this movie watchable, desperately trying not to fall asleep. To make matters even worse, Charlie Hunnam delivers an awful performance and makes for an overall uninteresting lead. Surprisingly, the only performance worth watching in this film was, out of all people, Robert Pattinson. I'm certainly glad he's moving away from his Twilight years and I hope to see him in more roles like this one in the future. Overall, this was a forgettable, boring, mess of a movie.
67 of 97 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?