WARNING: The following review contains spoilers, I’m telling you now so you don’t pretend to be outraged later.
What could possess a man to wander into one of the most dangerous, disease ridden parts of the planet by choice? To be the first man to make the discovery that could change history as we know it. In The Lost City of Z is a film about British explorer Percy Fawcett played by Charlie Hunnam, who’s obsession with discovering an ancient lost city near Bolivia led to the disappearance of him and his son in 1925. The film is a compelling take on the life of Fawcett, a man whose profession became an obsession that threatens his life at home and much more.
For an adventure film, Lost City of Z is like a thrill ride that continues about 30 minutes after the ride was enjoyable. Not only is the film too long, but the slow pace only drags the story in the 2nd half. Tom Holland plays the son of Percy Fawcett, but doesn’t make an impact until the last act where the film focuses on their last journey. While the film leaves their fate up to interpretation, the real life events suggest that they were killed by a warrior tribe during their final expedition. With the exception of showing Fawcett as a fighter for equal rights, the movie plays it straight in terms of the story’s fact vs fiction. Charlie Hunnam gives a great performance, however, they could have done a lot better in terms of making him look older as the film progressed. Robert Pattison is great at rubbing the stink of Twilight off his name in one of the best roles I’ve seen him in to date. The Lost City of Z does more right than it does wrong if it could only trim the fat of filler exposition, not only would it improve the pace but it would improve the overall quality of the film.
OFFICIAL RATING: ***