By CONNOR KEATING
Tiger Media Network
A long time ago, back when Blockbuster had fallen and Red Box had taken over for a short time, my dad managed to do something unbelievable – he managed to rent an old movie from Red Box – 1996’s “The Ghost and The Darkness.” That’s when I first saw the film, and it was one that always lingered in the back of my mind. So when I found it on DVD at a crappy antique store, I had to get it. It quickly became a favorite of mine, but my experiences with the tale the film is based on don’t end there. I went to G-Fest (Godzilla Fest) up in Chicago a couple of years back and while we were up there, my dad and I stopped at the Chicago Field Museum. Truthfully, I had no idea that was where we were. I saw a banner with a pliosaur on the side of a museum and wanted to check it out, but after noticing some of the taxidermy on display, I grew suspicious.
The old fashion style and displays looked familiar. After a quick Google search, my suspicions were confirmed. We accidentally ended up in the same museum where the Ghost and the Darkness themselves are kept. So my dad and I raced through the place (we were on a tight schedule), but eventually, we found them. They may not look too impressive now; they had been turned into rugs originally, but in their prime, they were killers. Earlier this year, I learned that very well as my dad had gotten a very old copy of the book the film was based on, “The Maneaters of Tsavo,” and of course I read through it. So this is a tale I am very well versed in.
Also this is my Christmas movie for the year since one of the characters says “Merry Christmas.”
So what is this exciting tale based on a true story all about? Well, the film follows John Patterson, a bridge builder and hunter who is sent to Africa to build a bridge over the Tsavo River for Britain’s railroad. However, shortly after arriving, things take a turn for the worse. A pair of man-eating lions are stalking the camp and night after night, they drag a worker from their tent and devour them. So Patterson is forced to try and hunt down the lions, but these lions are not like normal lions…
As stated before, the film is based on Patterson’s autobiography, in which he goes over his experiences in Africa. The first half of the book, “The Maneaters of Tsavo” is entirely focused on the maneaters, while the second half features other miscellaneous adventures of his. The film, of course, only looks at the maneater hunt and it’s interesting to see what was added for the film, and what stayed the same. There are a number of characters who were invented for the film, particularly Samuel and Remington. There were also a number of action set pieces that were made more exciting for the film. However, plenty of things really did happen.
The description of how the lions feed on the workers is ripped straight from the book, the ineffective trap encounter happened exactly the same. Patterson’s borrowed rifle did misfire, and before killing the first lion, Patterson got hit by an owl and thought he had died. At the end of the day, I think that changes made work for the film. You just have to understand going in, this is not a 1-to-1 recreation of what happened.
The film’s story is pretty good. The lion pair begin their rampage fairly early on, but much like “JAWS,” the lions aren’t always on screen. Now that I think about it, the execution of the lions is fairly similar to “JAWS.” While the lions may not be on screen all the time, their presence is felt throughout the film. This leads to rising tension between the main characters and uneasiness among the workers. Nowhere is safe. The lions can strike anywhere at any time. When the lions do strike, it’s presented beautifully using a combination of real lions and puppetry. There are some dated compositing shots, but overall, the lion effects look fantastic. Once the beasts have struck, we follow the characters as they try anything in a desperate attempt to stop the lions. Because Patterson is a bridge builder at heart, we get to see him come up with different contraptions and ideas to combat the big cat problem, and when Remington arrives, he brings his hunting knowledge into the plans.
Speaking of the characters, they’re all great. While only a few of them really existed, they all worked well for the film. Patterson is a great protagonist who we watch go from high spirited at the start, convinced the bridge will be finished ahead of schedule, to total desperation as he tries to combat the lions. Samuel and Dr. Starling are great as Patterson’s closest friends in the camp, and they all play off of each other wonderfully. Remington, the wild big game hunter, is awesome and brings an interesting extra flavor to the film. He and Patterson are great together as they hunt down the lions. Then there’s Abdullah, who is a sort of antagonist towards Patterson most of the time, being the voice of the workers. And then, finally, there’s Dr. Hawthorne, who, despite being the only other character I remember being real, is definitely the flattest of the main characters, though he has some great lines. Overall, the film has a pretty great cast of characters who you watch get brought to their limits, but even in the face of danger, they all play off of one another very well, creating a fun crew to watch.
Famed film critics Siskel and Ebert may not have liked it, but I certainly think “The Ghost and The Darkness” is one of the greatest animal attack movies of all time. It has great characters, exciting action, and a fantastic soundtrack that I listened to quite a bit in art class earlier this year while painting Antelope. If you haven’t seen this film, check it out. I give “The Ghost and The Darkness” nine “angry British men” out of ten.
Connor Keating is a junior at Fort Hays State University, studying digital media and journalism. Connor is an old-school movie fan, particularly Japanese monster movies, and is an avid DVD collector.
You must be logged in to post a comment.