top of page


The film's second act relies almost exclusively on the banter between Sandra Bullock and Channing Tatum, which is problematic because they have zero chemistry.

I've always been a big fan of Sandra Bullock in romantic comedies. I think the comic timing of Channing Tatum is among the best of his generation. And I feel that pairing them in a movie reminiscent of underrated eighties gem Romancing the Stone is an inspired idea. So why is it that The Lost City is such a horribly tame and unfunny film?

Cracking that conundrum isn't as easy as you might expect at first, since the premise is actually quite solid and both Bullock and Tatum display the exact qualities I have just outlined. The problem is: they have zero chemistry between them, which specifically is a problem in the film's second act, as it relies almost exclusively on the banter between them.

Thus a picture that starts out with an element of fun quickly is sapped from all entertainment value, not helped either by unconvincing set-pieces, subplots that add nothing in terms of humour or suspense, and – in a Daniel Radcliffe performance that isn't nearly as scene-chewing as it should be - a boring, one-note villain.

This didn't prevent a group of 20-something women from giggling all the way through the screening I attended, but I remain immune to The Lost City's appeal.

release: 2022

director: Aaron Nee, Adam Nee

starring: Sandra Bullock, Channing Tatum, Daniel Radcliffe, Brad Pitt


bottom of page