Good story, Not enough for a whole film

Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Movie Critique By Francis BeckertI have a strong feeling that Mark Giffith actually never went into detail about the main idea of the book. The main plot is all about a boy named Brian Robeson who is played by Jared Rushton. He was on his way to visit his father when the pilot gets a heart attack and the plain crashes in the middle of the Canadian back country. He faces many challenges of survival and goes through many changes in the personality department.The Movie really shows what it would be like in Brians situation. As well it also portrays Brians emotional personality, Jared Rushton was able to show what Brian felt like (sometimes to an extreme) and acted mostly as Brian would have done.Additionally; I have quite a few harsh critiques, but I shall begin with the biggest one of them all. The sequence of the move quite discombobulating in the way that some major events come in an odd order that doesn't make sense. Another huge event in the move doest exist namely Brian evolving into the new nature connected Brian. The movie is old so I will not criticize it on its pitiful special effects. In addition, the movie move an eon to quick making so that some very important events were not show either at all or in their required detail for the average person's satisfaction. Since the book is all about Brian changing and becoming more adept to nature I would expect something quite different than what Mark Griffith created. The movie pretty much skips over the main idea of Brian changing and doesn't show their effect on the plot. Lastly Mark Griffith added events odd events which I did not understand, like the ending of the book. I only give the Movie 3 stars out of 10 because of the odd plot and the fact that Brian doesn't change enough which is the main idea of the book. Although the movie does capture a bit of the book although strangely it is strangely altered. The movie has the wrong main idea and because of that falls flat.

Mark Griffith's unique movie "A Cry in the Wild" is a movie adaptation of "Hatchet", a novel written by Gary Paulsen. The movie features Jared Rushton, acting as the 13-year old Brian Robeson, who is on a plane flight to visit his dad for his summer vacation. Unfortunately, the pilot suffers from a heart attack and the plane crashes into a lake. Only carrying his clothes and a hatchet, Brian has to learn how to survive in the sometimes mellow, otherwise harsh wilderness. The movie crew does a decent job trying to portray the same events that occurred in the book; however, not all of them are described as vividly as in "Hatchet". Jared Rushton does an exceptional job acting as Brian because he expresses the "main" emotions in a pretty detailed way. The scenery and props are fitting to each situation, so the setting of this movie is superb!Now to change my tone, and direct attention to the negatives. Jared Rushton is not behaving as Brian was in the book, for example his facial expressions are very mild and he doesn't cry at all or act as anyone would if they were in his state. I mean, wouldn't you be scared? Also, expressions such as wonder, disappointment, scared, etc. are basically not shown, so Jared R. could have expressed those more distinctly. There were lots of occasions in the movie that didn't exist in the book, for example the bear showed up several times in "Hatchet", as to replace many other wild animals, so someone should know the book before watching the movie. Brian Robeson had no exact memories of his parents before the divorce either, while in "A Cry in the Wild" he does. All in all, I would rate the movie "A cry in the Wild" 2 and a half stars out of 5, because the movie team didn't exactly mirror the novel "Hatchet". Jared Rushton could not invoke the same emotions he was feeling in me. Also, the movie has scenes that don't occur in the book, and the events also take place in a different order than in "Hatchet". There isn't much drama either, a characteristic you'd expect in most movies. To get a 5 out of 5 stars , Mark Griffith and his crew could have added more excitement in certain parts of the adaptation and made Jared Rushton act out some feelings more precisely. I would advise you to read the book before you see "A Cry in the Wild". Although not a must watch, this movie adaptation still is worth a look, so if you have time to kill, check it out.

Mark Griffith turns the well-known classic "Hatchet' into "A Cry in the Wild" in this fantastic movie adaptation of the book by Gary Paulsen. Brian (Jared Rushton) finds himself stranded in Canada's forests after surviving a plane crash. His only weapon is a hatchet, which he finds useless at first, but then discovers it will save his life. As various adventures chase Brian through fire-making, shelter-building, and food-searching, he discovers skills and abilities he never knew he had before. First, let's begin with the praise. I tip my hat to the actor, Jared Rushton. He really steps into Brian's shoes, showing his emotions and feelings. When Brian arrives in the woods, fresh from the city, he isn't part of nature yet. Jared Rushton makes a very good impression of first hacking at the fish with his hatchet, then falling right in. That shows he hasn't had any experience yet. When the movie's Brian encounters the porcupine, his pain seems fairly realistic. When Brian finds the emergency box at the end, the book says he didn't think he liked the experience of holding the rifle. Jared Rushton acts out that scene quite correctly, first aiming at the "fool birds" on the lake, then lowering the rifle again hesitantly. Continuing with the setting and props: In many ways the background and surroundings seem logical to me. The mountains are similar to the inner that I got while reading. (They were a bit rockier, though!) The materials that Jared Rushton had were all very realistic. The plot of the movie was a little different than "Hatchet". The rough story was the same, which made the viewer clearly see that "A Cry in the Wild" was a relative of "Hatchet". In all, the movie was very enjoyable. Even though many things were done very well, several parts of the movie irritated me. For example, Jared Rushton was stronger than any 13-year-old I've ever met. He wrestled with a full grown bear and survived! Next, his clothes weren't tattered like the book described. But the fact that confused me the most about Brian was how easily he managed to kill the "fool bird". It took him more than 20 tries to catch fish, and then suddenly he's a perfect hunter! There weren't too many things to criticize with the setting and props. What was not that great were tiny facts: Jared Rushton uses porcupine quills for his spear, not a sharpened branch, his shelter is a lot lower than the book described, and he uses hay instead of birch bark for his fire. But there were lots of differences in the plot. The movie starts in the store, not already in the plane. Next, Jared Rushton, doesn't look for food or shelter until at least one day after his arrival. The book describes Brian searching for the necessities right away. Adding to that, Jared Rushton finds the berries before he finds his shelter. That was the opposite in "Hatchet". After that, a raccoon plunders his berry supplies. A raccoon never comes in the book. In a similar way, Mark Griffith adds the fact that Jared Rushton eats maggots and worms. That never happened in Gary Paulsen's idea of the story. Afterwards, the movie's Brian encounters the bear several times, not just once at the berry site. For example, the bear destroys his shelter, but then Jared Rushton kills it. Some time later, the tornado occurs, which brings the plane up. Hatchet ends with Brian meeting the pilot that rescues him, with an epilogue. The most frustrating thing of all in "A Cry in the Wild" is that everything is out of order! The berries get found before the shelter, the bear attacks several times; often it's really confusing to follow the story! All the problems with the plot will definitely interfere with all of the "plus-points"... Last of all, we come to the summary of everything and the grading. The main points of my positive feedback would be that Jared Rushton does a good job playing Brian, the set was well designed and the most important scenes of the book were used. The biggest setbacks of "A Cry in the Wild" included that many props, names for things, or events were changed, often very much, and that most of the parts were mixed up. Out of ten stars, I'm giving this movie 6 stars, as it was enjoyable, but confusing. For ten stars, Mark Griffith could have based "A Cry in the Wild" more on "Hatchet" and made it clearer what happens when. Overall, this was O.K. and I'd recommend it to people who don't like exiting movies. All right, Mr. Griffith!

( A Cry in the Wild )Mark Griffith teams up with Jared Rushton recreate the adventurous story of the book Hatchet by Gary Paulsen. Did he succeed? We'll get to that later. In the movie A Cry in the Wild, young Brian Robeson played by Jared Rushton goes to visit his father. On the way, the pilot suffers a severe heart attack which causes the plane to crash in the middle of the Canadian wilderness which happens in the book as well. Brian has to face many hardships such as bears, food scarceness, building a shelter, making a fire, and more. To make things worse, all he has is a hatchet that his mother had given him before the trip. When in the end the plane rescues him, he is reunited with his family. The director Mark Griffith did a fairly good job of making the movie similar to the novel with a few mistakes here and there. All in all, Mark Griffith and Jared Rushton did a pretty good job of reinventing the novel into a movie.Mark Griffith and his crew really do a great job in choosing the right setting. There are mountains, a lake, a thick forest, and everything you'd expect to be present. Also, they did a satisfying job of showing that in the beginning of the novel Brian acts very much like a city boy and doesn't adapt to the wilderness until later. I think it's important that the setting is very similar to how it was described in the book because then you can really see what it looked like and see if your imagination of it is similar. It is important that they showed "Brian" as a city boy in the beginning because the change from the " Old Brian" to the "New Brian" is a major part of the novel. In conclusion, Mark Griffith and his team did a fair job of recreating the novel.Things I didn't like about this movie are mainly about how it's different from the novel. For example, in the book Brian never eats grubs or rubs mud in his face to repel the mosquitoes. He also never has memories of home which he does in the movie. Also, in the novel he finds turtle eggs and raspberries. In the movie he never finds any sort of eggs and blackberries instead of raspberries. Plus the bear comes up way too much in the movie, in comparison to the book, where the bear only comes up once or twice. In addition, the events are all out of order. For example, the tornado comes really late. I think it is important for the scenes to match the novel and robe in the right sequence in order to resemble the novel well. Now for the horrible special effect. When Brian in the movie stabs the bear, blood comes squirting out of the bear's chest in a highly unnatural way. Also in the book, Brian's windbreaker was torn but in the movie it was in top condition. Additionally, when the plane surfaces after the tornado, in the novel Brian builds a raft to get to it and it takes him the whole day. However, in the movie he hangs onto a log and it only takes him a few hours maximum to get the emergency pack. He also manages to shoot a bird the first time he tries with his new bow and arrow which is slightly unrealistic because that takes some practice. Finally, the movie has some major mistakes and some minor fixes, but it's a pretty fine movie for the 90's.As one can see, the movie "A Cry in the Wild" has its ups and downs. This is why I give it 2 1/2 out of five stars. I gave it this rating because I think it should resemble the novel more. Plus the actor Jared Rushton could have shown more emotion. In conclusion, the movie " A Cry in the Wild" is definitely not my favorite movie. It was unrealistic, didn't represent the novel very much and wasn't very exciting.