Walk in the Woods - the movie

[billski]

I laughed myself so silly reading Bryson's book that I read it a second time. Looked at the trailers for the movie (to be released this weekend). I don't find it compelling at all. From the little I've seen, it's rather contrived (even the bears and their behavior look fake) and leaves nothing to the imagination. Sometimes books are better left at that. Let me conjure up my own images based on my own experience.

It's clear this movie is oriented to the non-hiking public, by a non-hiking crew and cast. One of the things that makes the book funny and the movie not is that in reality moments of humor cap days of drudgery. That's what make it humorous there is a crescendo of discomfort, pain and longing for civilization, which all melts away when a seminal moment occurs. That's what makes it all worthwhile. Things I laughed about in the book I didn't find at all funny when delivered in the trailer. Yet, I'll probably go see it.

It's not all about expansive vistas, nor is it about the encounters with other hikers, characterized as trite and unimaginative. there is a heart and soul to hiking that cannot be expressed in words. It's not romantic, it's not clean, it's not comfortable. Then again, it's not just another peakbagging experience.

There is a fear that this movie will inspire another crush of unprepared flatlanders into the woods. Probably so in Georgia next springtime, but I don't expect many to last.

My non-hiking wife read the Bryson book a few years ago, and found it dull, lacking in character development. So be it. It's a diary after all.

 

[Billy]

Great post. Well said. I saw the trailer and cringed. I have a mental list of good books that got turned into awful movies.
Tops on that list are "The Bonfire of the Vanities" by Tom Wolfe, and "Into Thin Air" by Jon Krakauer.
Pretty sure this movie will earn a top ten spot on my list.

Full disclosure: I liked Bryson's book but didn't love it. Some parts were too contrived at best, or total bulls**t at worst..... for example, the hypothermia incident on Franconia Ridge, and the bear encounter at the campsite. But I understand that the goal of writing a book is to sell the book, so even in a non-fiction book sometimes the truth takes a holiday.

 

[Stan]

... so even in a non-fiction book sometimes the truth takes a holiday.

Who needs truth if it's dull ... that doesn't sell ... another case in point: the media.

 

[nartreb]

Count me as a non-fan of the book. Guy gets a book advance to hike the AT, manages to walk a few short segments (what, fifty miles total?) in a few months? Still makes a best-seller out of it... maybe I'm just jealous.

 

[dug]

We should probably realize these movies aren't made to please hikers...there just aren't enough of us. They are made to make money, which means appealing to as many as they can. If you wanted one to please us, I vote for putting a GoPro on StinkyFeet, Tim Seaver, et al and go from there

 

[Grey J]

I thought the book was funny but it's probably a mistake to think of it as a "hiking book" or as a book about the AT. The trails are merely the vehicle for his peculiar brand of witty travelogue coupled with observations of human behavior. Considering that the actors are probably 30 years older than Bryson and his friend in the book, it's likely to be merely "based on" the book anyway. Bryson's book on Australia (In a Sunburned Country) was pretty good too imo.

 

[Raven]

I laughed many times reading that book. It's not great literature, but a good read if you like hiking.

Bryson hiked somewhere on the order of 400-500 miles I believe, some 20-25% of the trail or so. He spoke at the ALDHA conference at Dartmouth somewhere around 1998 or 2000.

Prediction: at the end of the book version of The Natural Robert Redford strikes out. In the movie, he hits a home run which coincides with lighting strikes or electrical bursts from a scoreboard...forget which.

I expect in the movie, Robert Redford hikes the whole trail.

Movies are make-believe.

 

[Brambor]

Should I see this movie ? I appreciated the writing style but hated the book and Bryson and ultimately did not finish the book. Is the movie making the two characters more likable than the original characters?

 

[Puma concolor]

I dig Bryson's writing and have read a few of his books. Beyond the two mentioned here, there was one where he drove all the hell over the US in an old car. Can't remember the name of it.

Anyway, the movie looks lame. Will wait for Everest to come out in a couple of weeks. Now, THAT looks awesome.

 

[Stan]

Generally you can't go wrong with a couple actors like Redford and Nolte and actors and actresses usually make up my mind on which movie to see; but I don't see very many except occasionally on DVD or cable.

I fully expect to be critical of this movie, not so much for the movie itself but for all the hiking mistakes we'll likely see and perhaps an opportunity lost for some good lesssons in backpacking, leave no trace and such issues dear to us here. But ... I may be wrong, which is why I'll watch it ... which I might not otherwise consider doing if not for the quality of the stars. Redford, in particular, is a strong environmentalist so I would hope there would be some good sensibilities around that. He wrote a book, with lots of photos, about the "outlaw trail" out West which I enjoyed and would look forward to a movie around that theme.

I suspect we all share a certain disappointment when a movie, or TV show, covers a topic with which we are very familiar and it doesn't live up to the factual side of things. Makes me wonder about those movies covering a topic I'm not familiar with and would hope to learn something from.

 

[skiguy]

I thought the book was a lot of fun to read and the movie should be fun to watch. Great to see these two great actors put together in the same flick. Not really getting to critical of the whole thing just looking for some entertainment. This story's main message IMO is don't take life to seriously. So I plan on watching it with that mentality and hopefully get more than one good laugh in.

 

[sierra]

I was not a fan of the book, to be honest, incompetency in the backcountry irks me. I'm also not a fan of comedy's in general, ( there are some I like but not many). The trailer made them looked like complete bumbling idiots. I'll pass. I did see a ad for a new IMAX Everest movie, that has my interest.

 

[Ed'n Lauky]

I just got back from seeing the film. I thought it was one of the funniest films I've seen. The theater was rocking with laughter through the whole film. You have to take it for what it is, a comedy with the AT as a backdrop. There are though some great scenic shots. Again I thought the two old pros, Nolte and Redford, really pulled it off. If you want a straight hiking film then this may not be for you. If you don't like incompetence in the woods then this certainly isn't for you. If you want a good comedy with some great scenic shots along the AT then this is your film. Those who know me know I love a good laugh so in that respect I highly recommend it. Oh yes, and to answer another question, they did not hike the whole way.

 

[alexmtn]

I saw an advance showing of the film a couple of weeks ago and liked it. Without issuing any spoilers:

- To make a coherent movie, they had to make the storyline a lot more coherent than it was in the book. That meant a number of significant omissions, and in some cases, alterations. It's now a nice, tight story that paced well in the time allotted.

- I thought Nick Nolte did a great job. Redford wasn't bad, but I didn't feel as though he was in 'acting' mode a lot of the time. Emma Thompson was wonderful, but she was only in a few scenes.

- I'm not an enormous fan of the book, but I did love the dozen or so really wonderful unreelings of his dry humor. Not all of that made it into the movie, but some did. To make up the difference, there were various brand new elements added, and they worked, for the most part.

- I had fun experiencing the movie with the book in mind, and likely would have enjoyed it cold turkey as well. I think that to enjoy it, though, a viewer should at least have some level of awareness and curiosity about hiking, if not thru hiking. Not a blockbuster, but still a pleasant evening. A solid B.


My guess is that the film will have a positive impact on thru hiking participation, but not enormous. I think folks will come away with a "that was enjoyable and interesting to watch" feeling more than a "man, that's me, I've gotta get out and do this" fire in the belly.

Alex

 

[Raven]

This is not the story of two people doing it the right way, for sure.

I cannot wait to see another film on Everest as well.

I'm going to keep a light attitude like Skiguy on this one and not take it seriously. I expect it to be a good laugh. Like when seeing airplane vapor trails in the skies of medieval movies, I'm going to let the small stuff go.

I've read a few of Bryson's books. He's an interesting writer in the sense that he has hit on some very good things IMO (A Short History of Nearly Everything for example, his book about Australia was well received but I did not read) but has written some real duds as well...or maybe I'm just not interested in the origins of language which he writes about as well. I give him credit for having sparks of brilliance and continuing to write books even when some of them are not good....because some are.

How many tries did Edison have for the light bulb? About 1000? (And what he really invented was a heater that gave off a little light)

 

[Grey J]

I saw it yesterday and would give it 2 stars. It's really more in the buddy movie genre than anything else. One's enjoyment of the film hinges on whether or not you think Nolte's Katz is charming and funny and believable as an AT hiker. Redford is just the straight man but then Redford is only capable of playing Redford anyway. I thought they would use the majesty of the trail and the mountains to greater advantage but there are only a few frames expressing the glory of, shall we say, the views from the top.

 

[1SlowHiker]

I read the book and was in stitches for the first half and will probably read it again. Started a few other Bryson books (the Australia one and? ?) but they just didn’t quite do it for me – too much historical/geographical trivia for me. Still have to try "A short history of everythin"g which is suppose to be his best.
Saw the movie yesterday. Sorry but I just didn’t care for it. Got a few laughs out of me though it did get a lot out of the rest of the audience which was surprisingly sparse. I liked Nick Nolte’s performance (though the script went overboard on his crassness) but it actually hurt to watch Redford.
Wish Newman had made it with Redford 10 years ago like originally planned.
I don’t think there should be any concern about increased use of the AT because this movie. In fact, it may have dulled any slim hopes of mine of ever doing it. - JMHO

 

[Raymond]

I would like to see it, but I’m skeptical because I never heard of any filming actually taking place around here. Supposedly it was shot in Georgia, but surely they hike further than that. Right??? I also doubt that the movie will have anything about the once sprawling chestnut forests, the endangered fish that were killed, or Bill’s visit to Centralia, Pennsylvania, but who knows. (A few of you above, that’s who.)

The audio version of the book read by Ron McLarty is the best. His drawling, ‘‘I took the opportunity to switch pillows with Katz’’ always makes me laugh.

Based on one review that I read, it looks like they even blew it with Mary Ellen, although Kristen Schaal seems like perfect casting.

 

[Peppersass]

I loved the book! I am admittedly a "book about hiking" snob - Into the Wild, Into Thin Air, and Wild all left me irritated that someone would glorify stupidity. (Oddly, Between a Rock and a Hard Place was enjoyable - I think because right from the beginning Aaron Ralston discusses how his reckless behavior endangered others and caused him to lose friends and ultimately got him in hot water. I liked that he acknowledged that).

Anyway, saw the movie. Redford as Bill Bryson? Stodgy, roundish, big glasses, a helluva lot younger - I don't think Bill Bryson would approve if not for it being THE Redford. IMO he wasn't right for the character.

I got bored of the dialogue but that's just me. I came for information - how the southern terminus of the AT looked, the people they met, the jar of peanut butter and snacks being thrown out. I came for scenery. I liked the ditzy know-it-all-hiker though. And I enjoyed the whole idea of it. Very funny book.

I saw Bryson at the UU church in Portsmouth NH years ago and someone asked him if there were any books he never finished. He said yes, one. A Walk in the Woods.

Apparently he was supposed to write about his adventures as he lived them but he was too exhausted to do that each night and hey, he didn't finish the AT so he told his publishers that he would not be doing this book (this is what he told the crowd). They replied, no, no, you have a contract with us, write the book. So he had to revisit places and recall things and do the research and make stuff up. I was mortified but got over it - its still a very funny book!

BTW the opening shot of his car has too many numbers on the license plate. If we are going to be picky.

 

[Raymond]

David Roberts addressed the knack of writing adventure books long ago, and I bet he would not disapprove of ‘‘A Walk in the Woods’’ (the book). I remember he quoted a passage from a book in which the author claimed to be on a rope on a cliff, and a rock fell from above and knocked the cigarette from his mouth. Roberts wrote that he doubted that such a thing had actually happened, but he approved of including it anyway, I think because it read more truthfully than the mundane truth may have. Or something like that.

We saw Bill Bryson at the Groton, Massachusetts, Public Library in February 2000. Someone asked if he had heard from any of the people he met along the Trail, and he told us that he met the wife and mother of the man and boy who were in the lean-to down south that Bill and Katz took refuge in during a bad snowstorm, the ones who had a cloth rigged up to keep the snow and wind out. So that must have happened, at least. Unless he made up the encounter with the woman, I guess.

He also told us that it really bothered him that they hadn’t made it to Katahdin, so (he said) Katz was going to join him that summer and they were going to do the last part of the trail together. Never heard any more about that, though. He was also supposed to be doing a book about Cuba, but that must have fallen through as well.

James Herriot’s books were pretty great, too, but I don’t think he spent each night writing down the conversations he had had during the day so that he could accurately recall them decades later when he was writing his books. He was just getting the sense of various incidents and assembling them in such a way that they would be entertaining to his readers.

I don’t think it’s fair to characterize ‘‘A Walk in the Woods’’ as a novel, as some recent articles have.