The Mighty Jungle

Before I start this review, I must make one point. When I review a film, I make sure I see the entire thing no matter how foul it is. If it is so bad that I walk out, I won't review it. I suffered through this so that you, the IMDb user, will have ample warning. Don't let my agony be wasted.

Where should I begin? Echoing other reviewers, I can confirm that this film's 'plot' is virtually indescribable in any specific way. As far as I can tell, a guide in the Amazon loses the group he is responsible for only to be hired to locate them again. Somehow this involves an American naturalist in the Congo. Virtually the entire film is dominated by a ceaseless narrative. Veteran actor Marshall Thompson is little more than an image on the screen. Any dialogue he and the other actors had was virtually eradicated by the drone of the narrator's voice. Characterizing this film as dull, confusing, incoherent, and pointless is a

grotesque understatement. The extensive use of stock footage makes this more of a travelogue than the exciting jungle adventure I thought I had rented. Is this the worst movie ever made? Well, if it isn't it is certainly a compelling candidate for the dishonor. Please, please, please save yourself the loss of money and your precious time. Avoid at all costs!

In a side-note, this film absolutely deserves to be on the bottom 100 list.

However, for it to qualify, it must receive at least 625 votes. One can only hope that this film is never seen by that many IMDb users.

I wish to god it was just a hallucination because then I wouldn't have to wake up to night sweats thinking about how horrible this movie was. This would have been a great movie if it werent for the pointless plot, the unreal amounts of stock footage, the incessant plodding of the narrator (yes! a narrator!), the lies on the back of the box, the acting and basically the entire production value. As of this review, this movie isnt on the worst 100 list, but it should be... it should be.

So if you're reading this ... go get the mighty jungle!! Did I mention that it's actually funny at some points? Not really 'haha, that guy said something funny' funny, but more like 'I have to laugh to relieve the pressure that's mounting on the inside of my head' funny. So rent and enjoy!!!

1 out of 10.

This film wasn't too bad for being very outdated, but I also thought I would see good action, there's not exactly action or violence, either way, the film has a good 60s vibe to it, almost like a horror vibe. But not scary at all or graphic...a bit dull and confusing.

Horrid. Epically bad. What can make a bad movie worse? An endless droning of a narrator whose voice could cure insomnia. The movie is supposed to be set in the Amazon, so the guy looking for him starts in the Congo river basin in Africa? It makes no sense. Elephants trumpeting, but there aren't elephants in the Amazon rain forest... This isn't a movie, it's more of a combined documentary and commercial to stay off hallucinogenic drugs. But, it has the opposite effect. It makes you want to take drugs to dull the pain of this movie. I shut it off after around 40 seemingly endless minutes, and would warn you- avoid this trash.

Did anyone watch "Daktari" as a kid? Well this is pretty much a precursor to those adventures, only this time it is the Amazonian jungle that our intrepid explorers find themselves pretending to be in whilst the archive is interspersed with their adventure. They are on the hunt for some ancient Aztec treasure but along they way "Connors" (Marshall Thompson) finds himself and his team at the mercy of the beasts and the blow-pipe wielding natives who have seen the script and the storyboard and want nothing to do with what's about to happen. It's that former aspect that really grates the most. Not because the acting is especially bad, it's really just mediocre more than bad, but because Lou Krugman's narration is intrusive to the point that is virtually obliterates all the dialogue and ensures that any attempt at characterisation is thrown under the Land Rover. It had three directors: perhaps each did a different day? Or perhaps one said "quiet"; the second "action" and then the third begging "cut"? In any case, they didn't focus much on providing us with much of a story and the use of the actuality is so bleedin' obvious as to leave the thing in a sort of cinematic docu-limbo. The "Tarzan" and "Bomba" films made decades earlier showed that even with the most basic of kit and budgets it was possible to do more in five minutes than this does in an overlong ninety minutes. Avoid, sorry. Mighty it isn't.