MovieChat Forums > Backcountry (2015) Discussion > I think the movie would've been better i...

I think the movie would've been better if SPOILERS

posted 10 years ago by marcus_stokes2000
2 replies | jump to latest

They scrapped the boyfriend (who wasn't a character as much as a plot contrivance, since his only contribution to the plot is to get the protagonist in the mess she has to get out of AND absolve her of any and all fault, which makes the writer even more of a moron) and had the Eric Balfour character be the boyfriend.

They fight, she decides to head off on her own, and she ends up in the bear's territory.

We didn't need the 50 minutes of dreadful contrivance and sexist disrespect to a real person.

Hawkeye: Do you know how it feels to be unmade?
The Avengers

[–] cashmccall 10 years ago

I think you're right but it was a good film anyway. I don't know why film makers feel the need to make everyone in conflict; do they think kind, smart people don't get lost or don't get attacked by bears? Or do they think film goers would be bored by ordinary, nice people getting eaten by a bear?

[–] marcus_stokes2000 10 years ago

All writers use conflict, because it moves the story along, but only bad writers write characters doing stupid stuff just to make the plot move in the direction they wanted.

And personally, I thought this was a bad movie, because of a) the plot contrivances, b) the utter predictability (who didn't know that the woman was going to survive from the start?) and c) because it's truly disrespectful to the real story (they switched the genders of the survivor and made the male character - who survived in real life - the one to blame for everything).

It was NOT a good movie.

Hawkeye: Do you know how it feels to be unmade?
The Avengers

I think the movie would've been better if *SPOILERS*

I think the movie would've been better if SPOILERS