I'm not sure what the folks in charge of making this film were thinking. It's like they thought they should make a film based on the novel aimed more at adults, but then with most punches pulled, and with horrible (and I mean horrible) CGI thrown in for good measure.You know the drill, scientist finds dinosaurs, sets out to prove it's true, yadda yadda natives, dinosaurs, lucky escape etc. Due to this film being made in the nineties, there's a strong environmental message about killing the land left by a native Al Gore.There's a bit of gore here and there, but I can't help but feel there should have a been a bit more of the red stuff and bit less of people having punch ups and travelling (so much travelling).Not the worst film ever, but nowhere near any good either.

It is impossibly bad. The acting was terrible, i feel sorry for the actors who where involved in this. The movie has no plot at all. The dialog is cringe worthy. And the special effects were obviously made on a very cheap budget. This movie is pooh. It is a transvesty. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle must be twisting in his grave. All that happens in the story is some people getting killed in a variety of gruesome ways. My friend got it for one dollar in a cheap DVD shop. But honestly i wouldn't pay five cents for this piece of garbage. Its so bad it hurts. I am personally humiliated to have watched this. God have mercy on the people who made this movie! Avoid at all cost.

When you see the title of a movie adaptation of a novel that has the novelist's name in the title, don't assume that means a faithful adaptation, cases in point Bram Stoker's Dracula, Mary Shelley's Frankenstein etc. But perhaps the best example yet of that caveat is this movie, where while Challenger (in the movie beardless) and Summerlee (in the movie elderly) are scientists, that's about the only holdover from the book. Roxton is not a lord, not even British but American, and the screenwriters got the bright idea of turning him into a villain! Other commentators have pointed out that the title place is set in 1930s Mongolia rather than 1910s South America and that the dinosaurs aren't accurate (at least they aren't monitor lizards and caimans), but what they've neglected to mention is that this is not really an adventure but a disaster movie. Why? The plot follows the latter's standard procedure of knocking off the cast one by one in various gruesome, even sadistic ways (the first victim dies in part because of his own and the others' stupidity), but you'll likely guess who survives. Finally, the movie breaks with a plot element in the ending of every other Lost World adaptation that has ever been made, though considering what's happened up to that point, it's about the only logical plot development in this turkey. Beware!

A very predictable plot that has its hero, heroine and villains. So So effects with a predictable outcome. Only 4 out of 10...