Seraherrera The movie is wonderful and true, an act of love in all its contradictions and complexity

Calum Hutton It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

Allison Davies The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Cassandra Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

brunofedericoluque Nice story set in Africa based on a real life story about a construction site in the Tsavo region terrorized by two African lions The story is nice Val Kilmer acts perfect as Paterson and Michael Douglas as Remington is good too the movie is nice, edging and scary i mean, after all, i believe that after been eaten by a great white shark think about been killed by a lion must be the second scariest thing...Really nice movie and, like i said, think that this was actually a real story it scares you more because "that happened" which means that nature can be truly scary... real but scary...Watch it if ya can...

SnoopyStyle In 1898 London, Robert Beaumont (Tom Wilkinson) has grand plans to build railroads to connect Africa. He hires Col. John Patterson (Val Kilmer) to build a bridge across river Tsavo in 5 months. The construction is behind schedule due to lion attacks. The camp includes supervisor Angus Starling (Brian McCardie), local liaison Samuel (John Kani) and cynical Dr. David Hawthorne (Bernard Hill). The workers are from conflicting groups of Africans and Indians. Nobody gets along. Patterson kills one lion but two large males attack later. The workers called them "The Ghost" and "The Darkness". Beaumont loses confidence in Patterson and hires famed hunter Charles Remington (Michael Douglas) and his Masai warriors.I don't think it's as horrible as some critics claim it to be. There's no way Val Kilmer deserves to be nominated for the Razzie although it was for both this and 'The Island of Dr. Moreau'. I actually like the first half with the conflicting workers. It reminds me of 'Hell on Wheels' which I like a lot. Michael Douglas comes in at around 45 minutes and he seems to be an old style character. There is something about him that annoyed me. The lion hunting has its moments but sometimes it is really bad. The climax happens in a fog and loses any possible tension. There is a ridiculous scene where a lion is literally climbing a tree. The last half has too many problems.

BobbyT24 I'll forget facts for a moment about "The Man-eaters of Tsalvo" and focus on this entertaining story about two man-eater lions thirsting for blood on the African plains in the middle of a race to build the first African transcontinental railway system. I had watched this movie the year it came out in 1996. It looks as good now as it did when new since it was set in the late-1890s and looks like it. Gorgeous, magical cinematography. The setting is lush and very African-specific, as it should be. The main actors, background characters, and direction were perfectly executed. Magnificent actually. I had also read that William Goldman (screenwriter) had written this true story based on a 1910 book by the main character, Colonel John Patterson. It's scary, and this event really happened. Just not entirely as written for the screen...Basic story: Col. Patterson (Val Kilmer) is a charismatic and visionary bridge builder who has a tight time-frame to build a railroad across a specific river in Africa to keep Great Britain ahead of the French and German railroads in a race for African dominance in the days of empires. If he succeeds, it's a knighthood. If he fails, his career is finished by his sadistic benefactor. Once he arrives, almost immediately workers start mysteriously disappearing. They realize a lion is attacking them. What they don't realize is this is no mere hungry lion. It's a man-eater. And there are two of them. Through a series of events, they hire a legendary hunter, Charles Remington (Michael Douglas), to track down and kill the blood-thirsty beasts. What transpires is a cat-and-mouse game (pun intended) where who is hunted and who is the prey is always in question until the very end.This is a good movie. Don't get me wrong. I watched it again last night for a reason. However, had this story not started with the narrator telling us, "...And no matter how outrageous it seems, all of it is true," it would have been easier to take. That part is not factual. For one --- there is no Michael Douglas character in real-life. When the cover of the poster and DVD cover shows two main characters -- and one of them isn't factual -- yet your narrator says everything we see really happened... You see where I'm going with this. Had they just stated, "This is based on a very real, very scary story in the heart of Africa," I would have understood artistic license. Douglas was fascinating as the fictional Remington btw and well worth the addition to the script. Dramatically, the story was enhanced in some very keen ways. Unfortunately, that "true story" part keeps rearing it's ugly head. Oh well. Minor issues I guess.Overall, this is a very enjoyable movie adapted for the screen. Kilmer is terrific as Patterson (although his Irish (I think?) accent comes and goes at mysterious times). Douglas is mesmerizing as the mercurial Remington. The supporting natives and landscapes are breathtaking and fantastic. Just don't go in with expectations this is the entire true story of "The Man-eaters of Tsalvo". You'll have to read the book for the facts. Watch this movie expecting to see a stunning African tale of overcoming terror in the jungle by an unstoppable force of nature and you will be rewarded with a first-class production. Think "Jaws" in the African plains. It's that terrifying for the natives. 8.5 out of 10 from that perspective. But I rate it a 7 out of 10 simply because it lauds the facts openly and proudly but ignores them for the production. Pretend this is an original, well-written, FICTIONAL screenplay that could possibly happen in real-life (because it did) and enjoy the show. Worth watching for sure.

gavin6942 Set in 1898, this movie is based on the true story of two lions in Africa that killed thirty-five people over a nine month period, while a bridge engineer (Val Kilmer) and an experienced old hunter (Michael Douglas) tried to kill them.I only recently (2015) became aware of the story of the two lions, who I believe are now housed at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago. I had no idea this film was about them, which is not surprising given that I did not know they existed. I recall the picture coming out in 1996 and not having much interest. Maybe I should have.We have some really good performances (Kilmer in his prime, and Michael Douglas who is always good). But more so, a very rich color palette for the cinematography. Impressive, and it looks wonderful, far above and beyond the typical 1990s movie.