Congo

Paramount Pictures | Release Date: June 9, 1995

5.9	USER SCORE Mixed or average reviews based on 67 Ratings

USER RATING DISTRIBUTION

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Watch Now

Stream On

Buy on

Stream On

Expand

Review this movie

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.

Check box if your review contains spoilers

0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User score By date Most helpful

MovieLonely94Mar 22, 2011

I have read Michael Crichton's excellent books and Steven Spielberg helped him turn one of his greatest creations "Jurassic Park" into a worldwide success in 1993. So, as you can imagine, I've never heard/seen this movie before, but what I doI have read Michael Crichton's excellent books and Steven Spielberg helped him turn one of his greatest creations "Jurassic Park" into a worldwide success in 1993. So, as you can imagine, I've never heard/seen this movie before, but what I do know is it was based on a fantastic book. With a book that good, Michael Crichton sold his film rights once again to Hollywood but it turns out that they didn't get Steven Spielberg. Instead, Frank Marshall took the project.

I've heard that the critics gave negative reviews about this movie, so I think that this movie deserves a 5/10.

Because the only good things that I found entertaining about this movie was those cool laser guns, the Animaltronics, and the actors Bruce Campbell and Ernie Hudson.

The only bad things were the unexplained plot holes, the clichÃ©s, the lack and style of the plot, and the poor storytelling.

It wasn't good and it wasn't bad. It was just very mediocre for a movie adaptation of a well-known Michael Chrichton book.

For adults, they won't be impressed, but for kids, it definitely worth a watch.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

xolveSep 12, 2015

There is something weird, screwed up and interesting about this film -
it's mainly because it's the style of film that can't be made any more-
a massive blockbuster film with huge sets, but without CGI, with overtones of racism and bizarreThere is something weird, screwed up and interesting about this film -
it's mainly because it's the style of film that can't be made any more-
a massive blockbuster film with huge sets, but without CGI, with overtones of racism and bizarre stunts, including an entire species of gorilla being violently made extinct with a giant ad-hoc laser rifle - by the main characters. It's preposterous in all the right ways, although by the end you're truly wondering what exactly the point was. I guess, don't like diamonds? Or mess with Susan Sarandan? Perhaps.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

JamesIrish68Jun 7, 2020

Watchable. The CGI let it down but otherwise serviceable as TV movie 25 years on.

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

[Anonymous]Oct 7, 2006

This Crichton adaptation isn't as disastrous as the critics say, but it's ultimately a disappointment. The volcano

0 of 0 users found this helpful

DudsiH.Jan 8, 2006

I saw this movie as a kid and I remember finding it quite entertaining. So I guess it isn't as bad as the critics say it is.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

Sosmooth1982Dec 15, 2022

The movie is very boring. A talking gorilla is pretty cool. I actually was about to shut the movie off cause it was that boring. Then all of a sudden the movie took a awesome turn at the end. It went from a family friendly boring movie to aThe movie is very boring. A talking gorilla is pretty cool. I actually was about to shut the movie off cause it was that boring. Then all of a sudden the movie took a awesome turn at the end. It went from a family friendly boring movie to a horror show.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews