I'll be the lone dissenting voice with regard to the film. I liked it. It wasn't nearly as funny as the book; it was barely funny, at all, in fact. But, it still contained some of the gentle charm of the book. At the end of it, I said to my girlfriend, "I guess I just really like movies about hiking, even when they're kinda boring." (I also really liked Wild, and liked that book, too...in that case, I think the film held up better against the book, as the book just wasn't in the same league as A Walk In The Woods, so the film had less to live up to).
I did like the Wild film as well as (for the most part) the book. Certainly it's much more polarizing than Bryson's book which--like a lot of Bryson's work--is breezy and engaging but doesn't have a whole lot of depth. I likewise think getting people outdoors is a generally positive thing although it's also the case that Baxter in particular has a definite limit to how many people it can handle.
Not a fan of either film but I really enjoyed both books. I think Wild has substantially further reach, especially among women, while Bryson's book is amusing and entertaining, yet ultimately forgettable. Either way, an increase in Americans focused on exercise, spending time in the wilderness, and general soul-searching activities will be a good thing.
The movie Wild is a good film. It might not be good if you know anything about long distance walking and wilderness trails. In the same way that movies get coding and cracking wrong, even if they make an attempt at honesty.
Hacker Cinema
5 comments on Hacker News
I'll be the lone dissenting voice with regard to the film. I liked it. It wasn't nearly as funny as the book; it was barely funny, at all, in fact. But, it still contained some of the gentle charm of the book. At the end of it, I said to my girlfriend, "I guess I just really like movies about hiking, even when they're kinda boring." (I also really liked Wild, and liked that book, too...in that case, I think the film held up better against the book, as the book just wasn't in the same league as A Walk In The Woods, so the film had less to live up to).
Yeah Wild seemed like a good film but I didn't like how much they got wrong. I'll check out Do More With Less per the other poster's suggestion.
I did like the Wild film as well as (for the most part) the book. Certainly it's much more polarizing than Bryson's book which--like a lot of Bryson's work--is breezy and engaging but doesn't have a whole lot of depth. I likewise think getting people outdoors is a generally positive thing although it's also the case that Baxter in particular has a definite limit to how many people it can handle.
Not a fan of either film but I really enjoyed both books. I think Wild has substantially further reach, especially among women, while Bryson's book is amusing and entertaining, yet ultimately forgettable. Either way, an increase in Americans focused on exercise, spending time in the wilderness, and general soul-searching activities will be a good thing.
The movie Wild is a good film. It might not be good if you know anything about long distance walking and wilderness trails. In the same way that movies get coding and cracking wrong, even if they make an attempt at honesty.