Jane and the Lost City (1987) from Tuna

Jane and the Lost City (1987) is one of those films I found in a video store years ago, thoroughly enjoyed, and assumed that the whole world knew about it. It was released on region 1 DVD this week, and I eagerly awaited it. To my surprise, there are no reviews on line, and only 21 voters at IMDB have rated it.
Jane was a comic strip in the London Daily Mirror during WW II. Jane and the Colonel were British intelligence/spies, doing battle with their Nazi counterparts. Jane had the habit of getting her dress torn off by men, women, animals and even inanimate objects. There is no real exposure, but, through much of the film, Kirsten Hughes, as Jane, reminds me of 40s and 50s pin-ups.


None, but see the main body of the text for info
In Jane and the Lost City, Jane and the Colonel are off to Africa, find the "Lost City," persuade the ruling tribe of Amazons to give them the treasure of huge diamonds to finance the war effort, and get revenge on the Nazi spies led by Lola Pagoda (Maud Adams). They meet handsome Jungle Jack (Sam Jones) shortly after arriving, and he helps them with the quest, and falls madly and mutually in love with Jane. Both Jane and the Colonel are incredibly inept, but as lucky as they are bungling. The colonel's butler, Tombs, is the brightest of the lot.

DVD info from Amazon.

  • widescreen anamorphic 1.66:1

I find this film a total delight, and the DVD transfer is gorgeous.

I do wish they had included some special features -- especially a history of the comic strip, but it is still worth seeing.

I imagine the critical average would be 2 1/2 stars, as it is a quirky comedy, but I see it as 3 to 3 1/2 stars.

The Critics Vote

  • no reviews online

The People Vote ...

  • With their votes ... IMDB summary: IMDb voters score it 5.8
IMDb guideline: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence, about like three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, about like two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, about like two stars from the critics. Films under five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film, equivalent to about one and a half stars from the critics or less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

Return to the Movie House home page