Conference bookie::movies

    The movie is Congo.  It's based on a Michael Crichton book of the same
    name.  It will be in theaters this weekend, and it's PG-13.  

    
    	Didn't Stan win one of them "movie awards" [Oscar?] for T2?
    

    
    Conga? Oh, the movie about dancing gorillas.
    
    :-)
    

    The basenoter has obviously had the best of schooling. He also posesses
    an outstanding recall. I bet he's a carbon copy of his dad.
    
    Davich   :-)

    When I read the book, I remember thinking they'd never be able to turn
    it into a movie, because of Amy, the literate gorilla.  A lot of the
    special effects money went into Amy and also, I expect, the nasty gray
    gorillas.  Also, a volcanic explosion figures into the plot.

    I also read the book but I thought it was rather boring as a book
    but would be visually exciting as a movie - from what I can see
    on the previews, I was right.  Can't wait to see it.
    
    Mo
    

    
         I got the book on tape and listened to it during commutes.  Rather
    thrilling, and if done right could make quite a good movie.  I'm
    curious as to how they'll handle Amy, too.  The race between the two
    research teams speeding through the jungle would be easy to cinematize 
    and make quite dramatic.
    
                                      Greg

Is it me or does Michael Critchton write a screenplay and a book at the 
same time?  McDonalds is hyping Batman Forever and Taco Bell is hyping
Congo.  I guess just releasing a summer movie and showing trailers thousands
of times is not enough anymore.

Paul

    The book has been out for a while, hasn't it? I thought he wrote it in
    the mid to late 80s.

    Lisa

    I thought he had written it before Jurassic Park.
    
    Mo
    

RE .10 - I think the review in the Boston Globe (which wasn't terribly
flattering, by the way) said that the book was written in 1980.

-- Nina

     The Boston Herald and the Middlesex News tore it to shreds!! They said
    they were trying to mix E.T. with Jurrasic Park. I guess the cast is 
    pretty unknown. I believe the most famous actor in the movie is Ernie
    Hudson. Remember him from Ghostbusters and The Crow? Oh well, I will
    have to see for myself. 

    My husband and I saw Congo this weekend.  It was a let down for us, but
    my 14 year old son and his friends liked it.  I don't know what it was
    about the film that I didn't like.  Maybe it was the sophomoric
    dialogue, or the special effects that didn't seem so special, or the
    fact that they strayed from the book quite a bit, or all of the these.
    
    By the way, Tim Curry was also in the movie.  

     Siskel and Ebert and Medved  and Lyons (Sneak Previews) call this the
    silliest, stupidest, worst movie of the year! One of them noted that if
    you look closely you can actually see the zippers on the gorilla
    suits.
    		Jim

    
    	The Worcester Telegram didn't like it, either.
    
    	They gave it an "empty chair" rating ... similar to a 1/5.
    

    re .11

    Confirmed that it was published in 1980. I checked it in a bookstore
    this weekend. 

    One of the Boston DJs this morning had a good perspective. If it wasn't
    good enough to be made into a film then, why is it now?

    Lisa

    
    	Because "E.T." and "Jurassic Park" hadn't been made into hit
    	movies yet, perhaps?
    

    
    It made 25million over this weekend, so the negative reviews didn't
    hurt it at all
    I saw it, wasn't what I expected.
    Not a lot of suspense, or horror.
    The talking gorilla is silly, too silly for me.
    The characters I think were laughable, and I think that is how they
    intended them to be in this film. The first hour really really jumps
    around from location to location.
    
    Dave
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    It seems to be unanimous, this was a pretty awful movie, for anyone
    past puberty. Many movies require a suspension of disbelief, and if the
    material is good enough, you willingly do it. This movie was almost
    painful to watch, it was cliche after cliche, and my husband
    unknowingly quoted Siskel and Ebert, and called it the worst movie this
    year.
    
    Ironically, I thought the "good" gorillas, fake though one knows they are,
    were by far the best part of the movie.
    
    Marilyn
    
    More after the FF:
    
    
    
    Tim Curry's accent (supposedly Romanian) was laughable, every time he
    spoke I had to keep from laughing.
    
    One example of how bad this is was when they find the crashed remains
    of a 3rd expedition sent to find them (after they assume they have been
    attacked like the first expedition), Dr. Ross (don't know her real
    name) looks at the still smoking airplane parts and says in a dead-pan
    voice "What a loss of life", much the same way as you would refer to 
    finding litter on the floor.
    
    Naturally, after thousands of years of this fabled city being there,
    the week, no, the 2 DAYS they are there, is when the volcanoe decides
    to blow. This was the part that was too much for my husband. 
    
    What a waste of money, glad I only paid matinee prices.   

> It made 25million over this weekend, so the negative reviews didn't
> hurt it at all

	Maybe the reviews arrived too late :-)  Have to see what word
	of mouth does to it weekend #2.

	FWIW, CNN HN reports that $25M is the top weekend grosser since
	last fall (when Interview With The Vampire opened I believe?)

    re: .19
    
    	Too Bad, the book was pretty good. In the book, the eruption
    	was caused by Dr.Ross using a "resonant explosive" to do
    	sesmic soundings even though the Mercenary told her that
    	was a REAL BAD IDEA.
    
    
    			Roger

    well it was not that bad.. we saw it and found it to be one of those
    you can get the same effect from a v.c.r.  the only thing i liked about
    seeing it in the movies was the popcorn.... but if you like popcorn at
    home trust me   wait till it comes out on video...
    
                                                             john
    

    It seems to me that film makers are jumping on the Michael Crichton
    bandwagon.  He wrote this book BEFORE Jurassic Park and Red Sun Rising;
    AFTER both of those were made into movies, then they went back to look
    at his earlier work.  Of his older works, I think the only book now
    that they haven't made into a movie is "The Sphere", and that one was
    even worse than Congo. I'm sure that we'll see "The Sphere" as a movie
    of the week sometime in 1995-1996.
    
    Read the book, didn't care for it much at all.  Heard one reviewer say
    that the only thing he liked about the movie were the gorilla's eyes. 
    Will wait until it comes out on home video.
    
    
    

    
        Wife and I went to see this last night....When the gorilla started
    talking; We both laughed quietly and left the theatre, and then 2 other
    people followed us out. So we went in another door where a different
    movie was just starting.
       Congo really insults my intelligence.  Sucks big time.
    
    -john

    
    	The "talking" gorilla really isn't that far-fetched an idea, to
    	tell you the truth.  They just took the "telemetry suit" a step
    	further and added a voice synthesizer to replace the movements
    	of the hands/arms with sound.
    
    	Not sure if it's possible to do this or not, because I really
    	don't know any signing, nor do I know enough about telemetry to
    	know how accurately a computer can translate bodily movement to
    	sign language to voice.
    
    	The only reason I saw this was that I went to the drive-in last
    	night to see "Batman Forever" and this was also playing.  I've
    	seen alot better and I've seen alot worse.  Heck, I expected a
    	pile of dung after reading the replies in here.
    

Saw this one when it first came out.  It's probably due for video
release.  Save your $3, it isn't even worth that.


A real snoozer.

-Sb

    
    
    actually , I rather liked Congo.
    
    Chris
    :)