The Land That Time Forgot

I don't understand all the terrible reviews. It wasn't the greatest movie that I have ever seen, but it was entertaining enough.

"The Land That Time Forgot", 2009, a new movie. I liked the sound of the title and the fact that it only came out this year made me anxious for an epic story. I didn't know what to expect else that it would be a adventure film. But oh my, what was I disappointed. At the moment that I'm writing this I'm still watching the movie, for about 25 minutes now. After the first 5 minutes I already saw the most horrible, forced acting I'd ever see. There is no suspense, no build-up to the plot. You're just thrown in between crappy plastic dinosaurs.

This movie could've been great, it could've been the modern Jurassic Park if it weren't for a crappy script, even crappier acting and éven worse effects. And looking above my comment you'd see I'm not the only one who thinks this.

So to sum it up, we have horrible acting, effects, dialogues and script. But there are two, no three things I can be positive about in this film; 1 - The camera quality is well done This means the quality of the screens, I do not mention the camera work like composition and capturing, those are as lame and uninspiring as can be.

2 - The sound is nicely done Though the music is not very memorable, the sound effects of the dinosaurs etcetera are very well done. Really massive.. Too bad they come out of plastic children-toys dinosaurs..

3 - The movie ends sometime, and I will never-ever have to watch it again! Woohoo!

I just watched it, absolutely awful.

This movie had terrible acting, dumb situations, and just... well....

Hardly any action, 1 boring dinosaur used twice, lol, well, other than 2 dead ones and a quickie underwater one, and 1 flying pterodactyl.

C. Thomas Howell and Bottoms acting were just bad.

They should be ashamed of themselves for not putting in more dinosaurs and cool stuff. I saw more action in the 1970's TV show land of the lost.

Watch the old 1960's version, way better.

Watch this version only if free and every other channel has infomercials on.

Most Sci-Fi fans are prepared to tolerate a movies more notable deficiencies provided that the film has an interesting plot with state-of-the-art CGI. That the quality of the special effects were little better than 1975 movie means that this film has nothing to commend it whatsoever. The 1 point is for the women. They looked good even if they weren't called upon to act. What is the point in Hollywood making films like this with a budget so small that the movie appeared to have been made in one afternoon. Indeed frequent shots of the submarine showed the same seagulls unmoved! If Burroughs weren't already dead I think seeing this film might have killed him anyway. Not even Tarzan in super-CGI could have saved this turkey.

I really wanted to like this -I've enjoyed this story since I was a child, and was looking forward to a more modern telling of it. Sadly, the acting was so forced, so deplorable, that it was actually painful to sit through this. Perhaps the movie actually improved toward the end -I'll never know. I wasn't able to handle watching this sad excuse for shovelware of a movie. I didn't go into this expecting a special-effects extravaganza. I just expected competent acting. I mean REALLY, when they insist on remaking movies, shouldn't they actually try to improve the performances? Sigh. I couldn't give it anything less than a 3 because the story itself is a timeless classic -the writing didn't fail here, the acting did. Not really worth the time. Thats about all I can really say.