Lost City Raiders (TV Movie 2008) Poster

(2008 TV Movie)

User Reviews

Review this title
29 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
Not bad...Not Great....Just Meh.
WelshFilmCraze20 December 2009
40 years in the future Global Warming has submerged most of the Earth underwater and a Father (James Brolin) and his two Sons (Ian Solmerhalder & Jamie Thomas King) salvage treasures from sunken buildings for a living when they are given an important assignment from the Vatican to uncover an historical artifact which can lower the seas moses-style - or some such nonsense. The budget as this is a Syfy Channel Production is Low (looks a lot lower than the $6.4M quoted here) and it shows rather badly at times, especially as buildings in the far distance look like paintings, but the acting isn't too bad and there is enough action to keep you interested if not glued to the screen.

A German made production Filmed entirely in South Africa and Directed by Jean De Segonzac, who has been in the Director's chair on many a TV Series and several forgettable DTV Movies.
11 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Indy Jones and the Temple of Waterworld
MartianOctocretr531 January 2010
The world is soggy. Everybody has a sinking feeling. Global warming, resulting from too much cell phone texting or something, has begun melting polar ice caps, increasing sea level, and turning cities into giant swimming pools. Fortune hunters James Brolin and two other guys playing his sons, roam around looking for artifacts and trouble. They wear wet suits and scuba equipment. One of the sons tries to get eaten by a shark about 30 seconds into the film. Brolin exits the film soon after; must not have been paid much. He delivers his few lines well, and he's buddies with a Vatican cardinal.

Rich megalomaniac Ben Cross pays off a girl who talks like Arnold Scharzeneggar; she used to date the guy who wanted to get eaten by a shark. Legend has it that there's a scepter that just may end the water problem, and so everybody goes after it, even some rogue priest. There are a few good underwater temple scenes, and some fun action, and the story line works. Although it's obviously copying Indy Jones, it at least offers some new ideas to the formula. The conflicts to get the scepter and its immense power keep you involved, and the cast make the most of what they're given. The temple scrawling of how the scepter machine works made me laugh. It looked like the schematic for one of those old transistor radios from the '50's.

Hastilly put together with limited resources, but somehow this film gets away with it. For a SyFy freebie, it's really not bad.
10 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Good Plot, Bad Brolin Acting
lottacamel22 November 2008
I don't know if James Brolin has just become too old to act or if he's always been a bad actor and I just never noticed because he is so damn good looking. His acting in this movie brought the movie down. Old age is no excuse - just look at Sean Connery, Clint Eastwood, Anthony Hopkins, etc. Brolin "reads" his lines slowly, as if slightly drunk. He moves like he is suffering from either arthritis or severe constipation. The movie itself was very good, surprising for a TV movie. The premise is a rather new one and could actually happen. A catalytic event that threatens civilization is nothing new in movies, but Lost City Raiders makes the premise very believable. Overall, I really enjoyed the movie, but not Brolin's acting.
20 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Bad story, bad acting, bad music, bad everything
lustigson10 October 2009
Warning: Spoilers
This movie comes close to being the worst I've ever seen.

First of all: the story is very thin. The writers probably weren't sure they wanted to write an action film, a science fiction movie, a real-life ecological drama, a love story, an Indiana Jones variant, or a Dan Brown-like story.

Second: the dialog and the acting is horrible, with Ian Somerhalder and Elodie Frenck as low points.

Then third: the music: most of it was probably written especially for the film, but many songs and themes sounded like they were supposed be be something else, something well-know, for instance. The bit where the Filiminov crew hauls up Richard Lionheart's tomb was the worst.

Lastly, the only silver lining with this dark cloud was that I watched the film in Blu-ray, so at least this bad movie looked OK. The opening scenes were fine, for example, although I think they were from The Day After Tomorrow.
13 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Inconsistent, unbelievable, and just bad.
imdb-565628 February 2010
I'll make this pretty short, as other reviewers have already pointed out most of this..

This movie (which is titled "The End of the World" in my country, for reasons no one knows) is among the worst I have seen.. And I've watched through all of "Pterodactyl" as well as "Santa Claus Conquers the Martians"..

The acting is dubious at its very best. Brolin takes the prize with his slow, unconvincing reads, but the others aren't doing a lot better.

The setting - a future where the world is partially submerged due to global warming - is believable, but the environment and geography is far from it (going from L.A. to Rome in a trawler, anyone?). The premise seems to shift during the film, and one key element of the story changes its method radically, to the point where it is ridiculous.

All in all, I'm glad I borrowed this movie from a friend, so I didn't spend any money on it. I'd like my hour-and-a-half back, please.. At least the other two movies, mentioned above, - though bad - are so bad they're funny.. This is just excruciating!
16 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
What were they thinking?
dommiz-125 September 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Surely, about 2 hours into pre-production they must have suddenly realised that this was an absurd concept. Perhaps that is why they could only get such bad actors? But can we blame the actors when the script and direction were so dire?

It seems that they took the most risible bits of 'Da Vinci Code', stirred in some Tomb Raider, stole a few set pieces from 'Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade', and then set the whole thing to, stay with me: Waterworld.

Best bit: when the Cardinal portentously reveals the Triptych, and we see that when Moses parted the Red Sea he was wielding the Sceptre of Osiris or some such baloney. So it follows that whomsoever finds the scepter can reverse the rising waters! But not if the real estate magnate who is going to corner the market in floating houses gets there first! Because, of course, when only 10% of the earth's landmass is left, society will be completely unchanged, and curiously, New Rome will be populated entirely by Americans and stereotypical drunken Irishmen.

My idea of Dystopia is a world in which these sorts of films get made. In the words of the mighty Kermode: all those involved should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.
9 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Finally! A Winner in the Worst Ever Category
rsternesq22 November 2008
Can't add a spoiler alert because I couldn't stick it out. Truly, I tried but this is the winner in my personal worst movie ever contest. Absolutely the worst, worst, dumbest movie ever in my humble (well, OK, not so humble) opinion. Makes Waterworld look like Shakespeare. I admit it. I can't think of anything else to say but burn the film, disable the projector, pull the plug. Kill it before it airs again. SciFi my foot. JUNKY STUPID! Yes, I'm shouting it to the rooftops. Save yourself! Send this Brolin back to the fetid arms of his beloved. YUCK! Not enough words? Well try this for an ender: WARNING! WATCHING THIS MESS WILL REDUCE YOUR IQ AND YOUR LIFE SPAN! You cannot afford the time to check out this tripe. Medieval dentistry would be preferable. YUCK. YUCK. A thousand times dreck!
63 out of 128 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Overall a good movie, very JulesVernian
RodrigAndrisan10 June 2016
The subject is exciting, I like movies with underwater adventures, it makes me thinking of those wonderful Jules Verne's novels. Especially when the action is set in 2048, on an Earth flooded by waters, which is happening for real due to the global warming and the melting of the pole's ice cap. Now, to attack the deeper things of a spiritual nature, not only submarine. I do not give a damn about religions (including Catholicism) but I liked the cardinal line: "Without faith, our hopes go to hell". James Brolin still has charisma and he's natural. Elodie Frenck and Bettina Zimmermann not only they look great but they are also convincing actresses. Ian Somerhalder and Jamie Thomas King are natural and sympathetic. Ben Cross is good enough as the villain. It has something from "Journey to the Center of the Earth" (1959) and "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" (1954). Some good action and chases with water scooters. It's like a novel that Jules Verne did not wrote or which he would write if he lived today.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Well Not that bad for TV ... But Still bad
tharun_mohan4 January 2009
I saw this on the Tele few Days ago ... Iam Somerhalder was in it from the Lost Fame.. That didn't stop me from watching it, The Theme is Old Fashioned. the Research is dump. and the whole story line is stupid. don't know why they made this. but in terms of production they did a fair deal, In terms of television standards this wasn't bad. Thecast wasn't so bad the lead was good, but not enough emotions every one seems so unrealistic with the never say die attitude as if thy were over paid for the job. the special effects were upto TV standards. The Director Jean de Segonzac have done few thrillers including CSI and law & Order and I believe he did his best to show justice and so did the cast but the Story line was Weak very weak indeed. It's not worth a watch but still try it.
13 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
We all live in a bathtub
unbrokenmetal6 January 2010
I think everybody should watch this movie, not as a serious action movie, but simply for being incredible and hilariously funny. Basically constructed as a cheaper TV imitation of familiar mega productions (Tomb Raider, Indiana Jones, Waterworld etc.), "Lost City Raiders" presents the ultimate explanation for the climate catastrophe: we all live in a gigantic bathtub, and every few thousand years, someone needs to pull the plug to lower the water level. Moses did it once, and our heroes just need to find his scepter to repeat the trick. Mind you, this is not a parody, it's intended to be convincing and scientific. When I read the summary on the back of the DVD cover, I desperately wanted to see the movie because I found it hard to believe until I saw it with my own eyes. How does one sell a story like this to a producer? It sounds like a lunatic Troma project, but actually is an international co-production, quite big by TV standards. Apart from the crazy outline, the script is pretty well constructed though: Bettina Zimmermann's character signing a deal with the wrong team, a lot about James Brolin's character only being revealed afterwards etc. - and finally, I liked the design of the cave, archaic and futuristic at the same time.
14 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
The weird stuff in the film.
reimi07031 October 2009
Warning: Spoilers
i almost wanted to vote "Your Vote" cos it was lower than 1(Awful) anyways. what i find strange is that the film starts off with a storyteller. who later turns out to be the dad of the "main guys" and that's fair enough, till about 30 min in the film where he dies.. and that just kept me wondering "who will tell the story now?" which soon led to other questions like "why am i watching" and "why is it so much focus on Christianity?" and if u are thinking of watching this film, just letting u know you'll enjoy it just as much as sitting in a bathtub hitting yourself in the head with the bible. so in the end its a nice way to waste money if that's what gives you your ticks, otherwise don't bother.
6 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
not bad at all
nose_smasher14 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Saw this little movie two days ago, on cable and in Full HD. Call me crazy, but I liked it. The plot is so common for B-movies: some guys are searching and competing for an ancient artifact. Half of them are the "good guys", the other half are led by a ruthless super-rich man who wants the artifact only for him, ...to rule the whole world, of course. The action is set in the near future, when the level of the planetary ocean raised dramatically. The coast zones ,and not only, are now submerged. The New-Vatican wants the artifact (a scepter from Middle-Ages)hoping, based on old Biblical legends, to lower the level of waters. The bad guy, who lost millions per day with his submerged real estate wants exactly the opposite: to raise the level even more, because he now develops floating communities. He want the whole world to become dependent of his projects, then to lower the level to regain land and sell more, once again, to those who wants to live on solid ground.

As you see, it's a simple plot, used oh so many times before, from Indiana Jones to super-cheap and easy-to-forget other B-movies. Well, in my opinion, this one is able to stay in the upper first half. You won't find Oscar-winning acting here, just enough action to keep you entertained.

The CGI is surprisingly good for a TV movie.The scenes with the half submerged Dresden and Rome are done great. An underwater explosion and, later, CGI flowing water are rendered very realistic. However, the submerged structures are more poorly done.

"Lost City Raiders" is a family-friendly movie, so you can watch it with your kids. Not a lot of talk, talk, talk, the plot is simple to follow, some lines are funny, the acting can be found sometimes a little bit silly, but nothing unbearable. It's 20% comedy, 40% action, 40% adventure. Recommended.
9 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
"Set a course for Geneva"
johnhsmith-000564 May 2019
At one point in the movie, the villain is on his boat in the Mediterranean and commands: "set a course for Geneva". That would be impossible.

That's just an illustrative example. The movie gets so many other things wrong about Bible prophecies, about the Vatican, about how grenades work, about many things. The only saving grace is James Brolin, but unfortunately he's not in the film very long.

Still, it's a fun ride done with some energy. There are worse says to spend an evening.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Very much a regular made-for-TV sci-fi-movie
degeneraatti1 September 2014
This movie was, unfortunately, just what I expected it to be. The script was something school-aged boys turn in as their English homework. As such, it was dull and not engaging. If all the supposedly intelligent dialog and extended verbal exposition was traded with b-grade schlock it would've been an improvement, entertainment-wise, that is.

Same goes for the acting. Returning to my previous comparison to memories from my days in the school world, the overtly theatrical acting usually witnessed in high school plays would've really brought up the now-sluggish speed of the movie.

I don't think I need to comment on the quality of the special effects and other things that come along with obvious budget constraints. To sum it up, if you have something else to do than watch this, go do it instead. But then again, the lack of cynicism apparent throughout DID make this a notch better viewing experience than your average Steven Seagal -film.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Less than inspiring
neil-47623 July 2012
Warning: Spoilers
In the near future, after much of civilisation has flooded (!), rival gangs of aquatic archaeologists scavenge for a mystic artefact which will point the way to Moses' plughole in order to drain off the excess.

Preposterous and enormously derivative piffle, without an original thought in its copycat little head. It is bright and colourful and in focus, but there is little to recommend it beyond that. One wonders what Ben Cross and, to a lesser extent, James Brolin, were doing in it. One doesn't wonder that about anyone else in the cast - after all, a bloke has to eat.

A duff script joins the ridiculous plot (it is so uniquely ridiculous - Moses' plughole, indeed - that it is amazing how much of the movie is ripped off from other movies), but both are trumped by the special effects - half sunk (photos of) buildings in the background which are there as long as there is nothing else in shot: as soon as real-life dock buildings and cranes appear from another angle, nothing half-sunk is added. One is left to wonder who built not-sunk docks to serve a sunken city.

If you have nothing better to do, this might just pass a couple of hours. But you do have something better to do, take my word for it.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
This movie is ridiculous
adamdrowley16 July 2011
What a waste of time. Bad acting bad everything. The slow motion rubbish is insulting. If the rating could go negative it certainly would have.

I feel I have a duty to take the movie back to the video rental store and pay the people behind the counter to burn all their copies of it.

I just wasted 90 minutes of my life.

Not to mention the $8.

It seems unbelievable that so many people can be involved in the making of a movie and not say anything like along the lines of " Hey this is really embarrassing someone should sack the writer, director and producer before the public get to see it"

Adam
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
worst movie so far for me...
kelleri1 October 2010
Will keep that review brief as watching that movie was already a much to big waste of time.

Bad:

-acting: well maybe that was really "mission impossible", the dialogs and script being what they are. But I must say, I felt the all movie long that what the actors do here is a kind of professional suicide.

-CGI: just not even decent, I could do better given some hours to learn to use the appropriate programs.

-Scenario: well well well, do not use your brain cells on this one, it just doesn't make ANY sense. Nothing is surprising, ever, character motivations are just plain ridiculous,"science" is the worst pseudo science gibberish I have ever heard in my all life! If only it would be to be taken as a parody, but ...no...they are kind of serious about this mess! (Do not even start me on the diving sequences, already the first minutes are a total unrealistic, idiotic, nonsense that even a 5y old would find suspiciously ridiculous)

-I could go on, but it just isn't worth it. (special mention to the settings, some are worst I have ever seen)

Good:

-You can skip this movie and, see, your life just got practically 90min longer....

Conclusion:

-Only watch this movie if you want to redefine your representation of what "pathetic" means. (for some reason that adjective just kept coming to my mind every second watching this "movie") Otherwise, believe me, no pleasure, no thrills, nothing, not even 2d degree fun is to be expected...

PS: this movie didn't get a 1 for the sole reason that it isn't shot with the family's camcorder, so IQ is indeed technically decent as long as no CGI is involved. Aaah, and there are few moments where boobs are the eye catcher, so that brings us to a generous 2. (special warning for "most" guys, hey I like boobs too, but believe me, no way that these few moments are worth watching the rest of this, just believe me on that one...)
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Gives global warming an extreme makeover.
scottwallvashon13 November 2010
Warning: Spoilers
This movie starts with the presumption that global warming is not a myth. Then it gets worse. I'm surprised legitimate environmentalist fanatics allowed something like this to be made. It reduces the credibility of their already shrinking mythology to an absolutely silly fantasy.

How did they get James Brolin to make a movie like this? Didn't he save anything from his Markus Welby days?

It suddenly occurred to me what a silly name Markus Welby is: "Mark us well." Unbelievable!

Well, maybe James was just trying to reach some potential new environmentalist fanatics. Where better to look than people who might like an absolute hack of a science fiction movie borrowing from elements of such giants as Waterworld?

"The Rising". Catchy name. Maybe environmentalists should adopt that name instead of global warming. That would be much more dramatic. Did it ever occur to anyone that global warming is a remake of the story of Noah?

Well yes. I guess it did. The writers of this movie. That must be it. Give global warming a fresh new look. Retell it in the language of the Old Testament. That should sell some inconvenient books!
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Not SyFy's worst, but still really bad
TheLittleSongbird29 June 2012
Before I say what was bad about Lost City Raiders, which was a lot, I don't think it is SyFy's worst. Titanic II, War of the Worlds 2, AVH:Alien vs Hunter, Battle of Los Angeles, Quantum Apocalypse, 2010: Moby Dick, Super Tanker and Dinocroc vs. Supergator were worse. And I did think the settings were nice. However for redeeming qualities, that is it. There have been worse special effects elsewhere, but they still look artificial, while the editing is hackneyed. The music was overbearing and seemed out of place with the film's mood, and SyFy have still yet to prove that they actually do any kind of research in regard to their films' science and geography in my eyes. But the worst offenders were the script, story, characters and acting. The script is actually not that much different from the quality of most SyFy movies, which is usually cheesy and aimless, but it is still enough to make you cringe and wonder whether the actors are ever going to have anything worthwhile to say. The story is thin in structure, never exciting or suspenseful and never does know what it wants to be. Constantly it switches from one theme to another, often in uncomfortably rapid shifts, and it just doesn't work. The characters are very stereotypical and underdeveloped, with not much done to make us care for them. And the acting is not worth mentioning, some like Ian Somerhalder overdo it horribly. So all in all, I can name worse but Lost City Raiders was a really bad movie, cheesy, dull, sometimes cheap and never knows what it wants to do. 2/10 Bethany Cox
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Global warming has melted the ice caps and the sea level has risen covering much of the earth with water, and it keeps rising.
MACCAroxsoxOFF3 August 2010
I thought it was an adequate movie. Not the best, but certainly not the worst. I had a good time watching and I think I would even watch it again. I love that it has to with global warming as I think everyone should be more aware of it. The sea level rising and land disappearing because of it are very real possibilities although how far into the future I do not know. I thought the actors were great also! It's worth a look. I always say don't listen to anyone else's opinion, even a professional critic. The Critics put down Wild Wild West and I had people who would not see it with me just because of that. I saw it anyway, and I loved it, it had it all. Action, comedy, creepy villains, crazy contraptions. Same goes with this movie, don't let someone else decide whether you see it. See it for yourself and make your own decision. :D

P.S. I can appreciate the bathtub analogy someone was giving up there tho. It's an interesting way to look at it, although it would have never crossed my mind to compare it like that.
8 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Awesomely Bad....
jamase835 April 2011
This movie was awesomely bad. Bad by normal standards, but better than most sci-fi crap. It had horrible effects, the actors would often over act and the plot was kind of ridiculous but I LOVED it. Surprisingly the worst acting for me came from James Brolin. The movie is compared to Water World and Raiders of the Lost Ark. Water World I can see, Raiders of the Lost ark a little bit, with a splash of Angels and Demons. I didn't really feel like I wasted my time. It's bad, but a good bad. Great for people who enjoy cheesy movies. Ian Somerhalder is nice to look at, and at the end I found myself hoping for a sequel. I own the DVD and I would watch it again.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Bad piping
imdb-296515 May 2017
Sadly, nobody ever saw the Rising Seas Shoreline Maps from National Geographic (On which IMDb doesn't let me link) Or the calculation on how much the ocean level can rise until there just is not enough water on the planet. Hint: It's 80 metres. That would kill Rome, but not its hills, and certainly not Dresden (at 114 metres), which still would be 1000 kilometres away from any ocean.

But then, this is not about science and the possible. It's Indiana Jones meets Waterworld, and very bad piping. Since if you don't use Moses sceptre to drain the oceans (to where?) every few thousand years, the oceans will just keep rising. Probably fits right into the narrative of climate-change deniers.

In any case, I did not find the acting too bad, neither the dialogue. It's just the plot that is so incredibly unbelievable. Apart from that, the most annoying thing was the outro music.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
WTF?
rodrigoreyes8 April 2020
James Brolin is a decent actor but he could not save this script. I watched the first 10 minutes and could not torture myself any further. The script is corny, the direction is sophomoric and the plot is ridiculous "Cardinal, me saving the scepter is the only hope we have". Someone was smoking crack when they green lit this pic.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Lost City Raiders (2008)
stargrazzer10818 July 2020
Warning: Spoilers
The sort of film that drives the Climate Cult into Virtue Signalling Frenzy but full of non-scientific bias for a likely natural cycle, humans may contribute 3% replenishment of CO2 back to the atmosphere but models are notorious for running too hot. But as a fantasy much like a Jules Verne/Octopussy it filled some of the evening. 'Sea level' rise due to prior ice age rebound not mentioned, however land subsidence is ten times such absolute levels. The religious Vatican elements also gave the feel of the Angels & Demons feel. Fight scene wasn't needed glamourising a pub brawl that is rarely without severe casualty. The search & fight for an artifact septre of sorbik that could some how help save everything was a main feature of this film. The purification of Earth & a rapture was a mentioned! Not to spoil the cute end they reduce the sea levels; but still rising ,mentioned!
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
OK TIMEWASTER
larryanderson7 January 2022
I saw the trailer for this on YouTube and thought it looked pretty good. The story about "rising sea levels due to melting icebergs" petered out after 15 mins. The rest of the movie is just bad other than some great looking gals with fabulous legs. Ok to watch when there is nothing else.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed