So much average
People are voting emotionally.
In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.
Incredibly boring, way too long, cliche, I nearly fell asleep twice. If you want to learn about the history of Percy Fawcett just go read the wikipedia page, it's more interesting than this movie and takes 1/100th the time.No suspense, no action, no comedy, little drama, mediocre acting, mediocre plot, a few good scenes out of dozens, stretched out nearly 2.5 hours.Avoid.
I can't explain why this completely film completely devoid of entertainment value or meaning gets any kind of positive overall scoring. I can only see it as political bias as some may have resonated with the anti-white, anti-colonial messaging. This movie did not inspire and had no meaningful journey for the protagonist and those that surrounded him. His story was not told in the context of the times but, rather, was judged from the current vantage point without any attempt to show why people believed the way they did. Compare to Master and Commander for a fairer treatment of the context with a subtext of questioning, a much more thought-provoking handling of the issues, and a thoroughly riveting story.
I was wondering when a full production on this subject matter would be done, overall pretty good watch. I think it was very very accurate to the real life story, a little bit of fantasy on the lost city would have been great, focused a little to much on the dram side of things, but that's a personal perspective.
Since about 1970, I've been interested in Fawcett and so this movie fits into the niche of 'gotta see it.' I liked the movie's daring to be made at all, frankly, so congratulations to Pitt; the subject of exploration with hype suited to early 20th century mindsets rang true. The depiction of the departure final trip's acclaiming crowds made me happy for Fawcett and to see him charmed by the fame and financial support touched me. He certainly had it difficult for years and years.Now I've read Grann's book and yes, admired its treatment of a difficult personality to our 21st century ways of thinking. For him to explore years at a time, and on more numerous expeditions than the film covers, by leaving his growing family behind is hard to take. It's like workers who leave their countries to work in other countries for the money and leave their families behind; it's acceptable but certainly not desirable to have to go 'where the work is.'As a movie, the cinematography of jungle and countryside captivated me and the British costumes looked right. The attitudes of Fawcett and his wife seemed to me to be okay for the period, as Fawcett lived in a strict military world and Mrs. Fawcett played along to a certain extent. Her yearning to accompany her husband into the wild was wrong-headed basically, but her 'independence' dictated that she at least try to come along, I guess, in terms of emotional logic. A movie without Miller's Nina Fawcett would have been a poorer movie. I liked her performance even while disagreeing with the urge to leave her three children behind. Other reviews stated how the raft miraculously floated upstream and ha, I didn't even notice that bit! The character study that was this movie carried me along and I didn't care about that unrealistic part. All in all, I recommend this movie as a paean to courage and love of the unknown; the cost of that love sure looks to have been paid by Fawcett and his son.