King Solomon's Mines (1985)

The Worst Film Ever

If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Excellent but underrated film

It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

Ever in search of adventure, Allan Quatermain agrees to join Jesse Huston on a mission to locate her archaeologist father, who has been abducted for his knowledge of the legendary mines of King Solomon. As the kidnappers, led by German military officer Bockner, journey into the wilds of Africa, Allan and Jesse track the party and must contend with fierce natives and dangerous creatures, among other perils.......The Cannon Group, arguably the finest makers of really cheesy movies that were churned out during the finest decade ever...........The wonderful Eighties.Here was their chance to try and emulate the success of one Indiana Jones, but without the budget, it was always going to be a hard sell, and the fact that it's adapted by such a wonderful piece of art, was going to make it all the more difficult, so they don't even begin to try, and this is why it's just so watchable for all the wrong reasons.The predominant problem with the film is the fact that Chamberlain isn't even trying with the character of Quartermain, he's obviously been told by the producers to do his best Harrison Ford impression, and while he's perfectly average in the film, that's all he is, a poor mans Harrison Ford, and he just doesn't put any effort into the actions sequences or the one liners, he just looks like Ford a bit, and moves like a constipated middle aged man with a hangover.Stone fares little better, but to be fair on her, she was at the beginning of her career, and she just plays the eye candy in peril.But the mind boggles as to why Herbert Lom decided to appear in this. Here is a man who is such a prolific actor in his own right, he didn't need to be in something so absurd. It's like imaging Charlton Heston appearing in a Van Damme movie..................oh wait a minute....But there is a lot of fun to be had. The special effects are so bad that the green screen should have been credited as a main character, and then there's the escape in the large cumbersome cooking pot, and the spider, one of the poorest special effects ever committed to the big screen.See it for all the wrong reasons, it's a film for lovers of bad movies, it's nothing seriously awful, because it's so stupid, but the sight of Chamberlain riding rail tracks like water skis does stay with you.......

When Richard Chamberlin signed on to portray adventurer Allan Quatermain in this (1985) version of H. R. Haggard's novel "King Solomon's Mines," he probably gave no thought to how his co-star, the young Sharon Stone, would look on screen.Bad move, Richard. But it's a great boon for us viewers. The then 27-year-old Stone wears short shorts almost all throughout the movie, and after about two reels it's a strong bet that the audience was fixated on Sharon's gorgeous legs, never mind Chamberlin and his quest for African gold.The picture did well enough that the following year, 1986, a sequel was mounted, "Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold," again starring Richard Chamberlin and Sharon Stone. This time, however, Sharon wore long pants all the way through, and judging by the warm reception of Sharon's legs in the original film, there was absolutely NO reason to hide those perfect pins in the sequel. Maybe Chamberlin, the nominal star of the picture, objected to being upstaged... again?Dan Navarro [email protected]

Some reviewers here think that it's a fun movie because it's so ridiculous, sadly I can't share that feeling. Comparisons to Indiana Jones are out of place; a much better movie to measure it against is "Romancing the Stone", and it loses every single point. The main problem is not the cheap stock footage, nor the ridiculous script (that could basically work as a comedy), nor the silly sets and costumes - the main problem is the atrocious acting. A comedy needs actors and a director with good timing; it doesn't get funnier with bad acting but boring.This would really only get 1/10 from me if it weren't for Sharon Stone's legs which get more and more exposed throughout the story. I can't find any fault with those legs, so 2/10.

No excuse can erase the travesty that is King Solomon's mines. Spoof. Camp. Fun. HOmage. Whatever! Now, if you're looking for the best post-1985 submission to Mystery Science Theater 3000... then you have yourself a winner.Let me address some of those 'it's funny' good reviews here... There are NO funny lines in this film.... if the creators wanted it to be funny they would have used some lines that WERE actually funny... no, I don't get a kick out of watching terrible site gags with wires, fake backdrops, fake everything and dull, forgettable, anything but funny performances.... NOW IF THAT's your bag baby...by all means rent this one. If I want that I'll watch a comedy....and if I want 'campy' comedy I'll watch 'army of darkness' or something that has A.Comedy...and B. a little of something else to offer... Admittedly, this film does 'appear' that it tried to achieve the 'worst movie of all-time status' that I'm granting it... BUT THAT DOES NOT make this viewer want to watch it... THere's a REASON the networks NEVER replay this one.... NEVER.... it would be a broadcasting death sentence.King Solomon's is terrible. HOnestly, this is right there with Ishtar, Leonard Pt.6, and Pluto Nash as the worst high profile film ever made. I figured I'd write one review on 'my worst theater experience ever'... this is the choice.... We walked into the adjacent theater and watched the end of Rocky 4.... I could have killed my parents for making me sit through 3/4 of this film. I did revisit this about ten years later to confirm my opinion, and I must say, my opinion has not changed. The.....Worst.....EVER! If Indiana Jones sold out their rights and they made 12 MORE sequels with no-names(that nobody rented).... this would be the equivalent of 16th installment, probably starring some washed up wwe wrestler and Shaq. You can always notice the truly terrible films...the one's with bad numbers(here on IMDb) and a bunch of 1/13 'thought this comment was useful' votes from the 'OBSESSED IDIOTS'. There will obviously be a 'cult' following when you're talking about one of the 'worst ever'.10/100