Gorillas in the Mist (1988)

With all due respect to the late Dian Fossey and to the legacy of her groundbreaking work among the mountain gorillas of central Africa, it should be noted that her big screen biography is little more than a glossy star package with postcard scenery and sentiments, presenting the anthropologist as just another white woman who goes into the jungle to 'find herself'. Sigourney Weaver gives the role plenty of energy (mostly by over-acting shamelessly), but the film suffers from too many tactical errors, beginning with a childishly simple script that reduces complex issues into one-dimensional conflicts between corrupt humankind and the unspoiled splendor of animal life in the wild. Critical moments are further undermined by gratuitous voice-over letters home and by Maurice Jarre's overwrought (and therefore not entirely inappropriate) music score. Even the expected romantic interest between Fossey and a handsome National geographic photographer is given the regulation Hollywood screen treatment, proving yet again that sincere intentions are never enough to salvage a trite and superficial film.

I guess I shouldn't vote on something I haven't seen all of. It could have risen to an 8. Then again it could have sunk to a 1. Or a zero.The best words to describe it are clunky, awkward, clumsy and uninspired. Sigourney Weaver (who I think is a terrific actress most of the time) is terrible here. I couldn't tell if she was going for camp comedy or melodrama, but it had to be one of the two. Her delivery was either wooden or awkwardly over the top. John Waters likely would not have allowed it, his movies have a consistency and flow to them, regardless of whether or not you are drawn to the subject matter.Granted, the script doesn't help and the director seems to be on auto-pilot.I'm also never a big fan of movies that depict ignorant foreigners entering a culture and loudly and brashly disrupting it and becoming very indignant when they can't walk all over it and subvert it for their own needs, despite centuries of culture being at stake. This kind of lack of sensitivity and tunnel vision tends to remind me of the attitudes that precluded slavery.I do however, give the film 2 points for beautiful cinematography, and one point for the acting of Weaver's friend who seems quite believable as a loyal friend and guide who sees the bigger picture but is powerless to impart this wisdom to Fossey. I took off the film (for a second time) about halfway through, just as Bryan Brown's character arrived, and he had only spouted a few clichés before I took it off again, so my I've made no judgement of that actor.The late 80's was a time of smug, disposable movies being churned out. Thank god it's over, (although some say it's coming back again) but you still be burned at the video store, and of course for a few hours of your time. I escaped with only one hour wasted.

It is a shame how a movie treatment can be made of a world-renowned character, like Ms Fossey, that bears very little relationship to the person she was, as portrayed both by her own book and the books written about her.Her character remains unknown in this movie. And I've watched it for a second time now, to see if the first frustration with which I viewed it, when it was first released, had left me. No, it hadn't. It starts off poorly, with a fictionalized account of how Fossey met Louis Leakey, the famed anthropologist and how she begs him for a job. Simply not true. Fossey had already been to Africa at the time she met Leakey and he was the one who asked her to go there and work with the endangered gorillas, then numbering well under a 100. I don't even see the benefit of making this autobiographical change to the story. Fossey's motivation for going on this hazardous mission, leaving a fiancé in the U.S. is never explored. Was she is in love, as some speculate, with Leakey? Her love and interest in the gorillas is never in doubt and in real-life her obsession consumed her such that her eccentricity became sociopathic to the degree that her distrust of humans encompassed anyone who crossed her path from her students to the government of Rwanda.Her relationship with the National Geographic photographer is unfortunately Hollywoodized here and does not reach the intellectual level of harmony that they had in real life, they knew from the beginning , because of their individual interests and pursuits, that it was doomed to short-term, but celebrated the "in the moment" aspect of it. This could have been portrayed on screen a lot better.The shift to sociopathic personality, about halfway through the movie is too sudden to ring true and the ending feels rushed and "let's get it over with already". Her murder was appalling and undeserved but she had made many enemies, not the least of whom were her students from whom she demanded servility and unquestioning obedience.Sadly, I think she was ill-served in this bio-pic, perhaps a deeper psychological exploration of her character will be made at some point.However, the gorilla filming was breathtaking.6 out of 10.

this movie was OK it was pretty boring. if you like gorillas tou would like this movie. i however felt this movie to be boring. the movie was boring until the end because it was about a girl; living with monkeys and she studied how they lived in nature. the end of the movie was exciting because Dian Fossey went crazy. she had the illusion that the Mt had become her own and they gorillas were her personal playmates. she left the man she loved for the hairy beasts, which in my mind is stupid. she threatened people who were just trying to make a living. she ended up getting what she deserved after burning down those peoples houses. i don't feel sorry for that crazy lady even though she did help the scientific world.