Benutzerrezensionen

I thought this movie was a fine, clean motion picture with action and adventure. I appreciated the high moral values portrayed in this entertaining film. If you are looking for a picture to enjoy with your family(small children included) for an evening, then I would recommend this one.

First off, I am very fond of these movies. They remind me of my childhood and how much I love the outdoors. These movies aren't stellar, Oscar types, but, hey, they work when you want young children to see different animals and people who want a better quality of life. Although the action scenes may startle young ones ( they probably WON'T with all the stuff they see in the "movies" today). And, yes, the movies DON'T show all the important stuff (like how they knew how to build a cabin, etc) but it's a MOVIE, not REAL LIFE. If you want REALITY, I would strongly suggest you watch PBS's "Frontier House". That was GREAT and it CHALLENGED 3 families to live an 1883 lifestyle. No easy way out here, folks! These people were REALLY doing it. Otherwise, I will ALWAYS cherish these movies and when I have children of my own, share them with them.

An urban family looking for getaway from the hassles and tiring of city life and rush-hour traffic , furthermore an ill daughter , for these reasons they turn into pioneers on the rugged Rocky mountains . The film depicts an agreeable family , formed by a father (Robert F Logan) , mother (Susan Damante Shaw) and sons (Holmes , Larsen) who leave civilization for the freedom of the Rocky wild . But they soon encounter troubles in paradise and that the wilderness may be more harsh than grumpy bosses and the difficulties of the city . As they must escape some violent animals and learn to survive .

This is an enjoyable film filled with adventures , familiar feeling , beautiful songs , wildlife and breathtaking landscapes with majestic scenarios . The movie is plenty of animals such as bears , moose or elk , mountain goats , deers , raccoon , wolves , some of them are uncultivated and other tamed as a dog that defends and saves them in several occasions . Sensible score with wonderful songs fitting to environment . Spectacular outdoors and acceptable photography , though being necessary an urgent remastering because the film-copy is worn-out .

This movie seems to be the first of a series , these are the following : ¨Further adventures Robinson family (1977)¨ by Frank Zuñiga from the producers of the first part and turns out to be a predictable retread ; ¨Mountain of Robinson family (1979)¨ in which the family is determined to return to wilderness and moves to the Rockies . In similar style and also offering a pleasant scenery are : ¨Sea gypsies ( 1978)¨ in that a sailing crew is shipwrecked off the Aleutian Islands and ¨Across the great divide (1976)¨ in which two orphans must cross the dangerous snow-covered Rocky mountain in order to claim their inheritance , being based on facts happened in 1876 . All films are mostly starred by Robert F. Logan , Susan Damante Shaw and usual appearance as secondary actor the likable George Buck Flowers and being produced by Joseph Raffill ( father of Stewart Raffill who habitually results to be the filmmaker of the series) and also financed by producer Arthur Dobbs . This family-oriented tale about modern-day pioneers who head for life in nature will appeal to wilderness buffs .

This is a good concept of a film, but unfortunately the execution falls flat.

Los Angeles family moves abruptly, not because of crime or overpopulation, but SMOG. (that smog will get you every time). They blindly move into an isolated section of the wilderness 25 minutes away from the nearest people. The parents apparently didn't do their homework because their house is a rundown one-room shack that makes Charles Ingalls' house look like a mansion in comparison. But wouldn't you just know, the father is a man-of-all-trades (just like Ingalls), so he's able to build a new house.

The entire rest of the film is filled with lots of shouting. And YELLING. And SCREAMING. And ARGUING. And SHRIEKING. Did I mention the shouting, because there is a lot of it. You really think these people would tone it down now that they are just by themselves and would seemingly value their peace and quiet, but I suppose not. Oh, and wild animals. Lots of befriending wild animals and running from wild animals. If you like shouting or wild animals, this is the flick for you.

Obviously, there's no large cast with this film. The father does lots of YELLING. The mother is acceptable, if not bland. The daughter alternates between being in a seeming euphoria and positively SHRIEKING at the top of her lungs when she is in danger. The boy is young and has vast difficulty carrying his end of the load.

Despite all of this, the movie does have a few redeeming qualities. The scenery provides for some spectacular shots. The movie also does a good job of portraying animals as living things and explaining the value of befriending them or respecting their territory. The father does kill a moose, but explains to his son they had to because they needed to eat and not because the dad wanted to mount its head on the wall.

This movie was on repeat when I was a kid and shaped my dreams heavily. It was pure magic back then.

I just watched it for the first time as an adult (Who has spent a lot of energy on wilderness skills and lives in the woods) with my kids and... the magic definitely seems to be relegated to my childhood. Sadly, I spent the entire time poking holes in the plot.

That said, If anyone knows where exactly the lake where it filmed was, I would love to know. It would be a childhood dream to be able to make it out there. I saw somewhere that it's in Gunnison National Forest in CO but that's the most detail I've been able to get.

I saw this film from what my father told me about it; I like watching cheese, and from what he'd said, this is CHEESE. As people started moving into the mid-1970s, they were leaving behind the hippie-dippy daze, getting into more sophisticated drugs, then becoming clean corporate slaves. Everyone began forgetting how wonderful the earth was because they were too busy drilling it for oil or tearing down trees to make room for our growing population. This film's answer?? Make a senseless decision involving your entire family by moving into a wooded area you know NOTHING about where there's no help for miles and you have no skills dealing with wild animals, baking from ABSOLUTE scratch, hunting, etc. We went from the streets of L.A. to the hills of the Rockies in less than two minutes. Were there books taken out of the library on survival techniques in the wilderness? Did the family take shooting lessons? Was there any talk on food, such as how are we going to grow a garden or bake bread or fish or hunt? If there was, we weren't allowed to see it. We are supposed to believe that this family knew all this, that they had a thriving garden in the city, that the woman could bake bread without so much as a wooden spoon, and that the father had been shooting at the neighbor's cat regularly. The only reason the mother and father had had kids is for the cute factor alone, though it fails miserably at the feigned feel of it all. The little boy sounds like he's reading lines but can't read yet, and the daughter seems drugged into a dazed happiness about everything. Their dog Crust (is that honestly his name?? Crust???) must have attacked wild animals at home as well, seeing as he attacks EVERYTHING in this film; it's surprising he doesn't mutilate flowers if they move too much in the wind, becoming a threat to the family. Here are some things that make me refuse to have suspension of belief: ~The father fly-fishes. He is NOT going to feed a family of 4 on fly fishing. That's called sport, not necessity. ~The dog survives brutal attacks of wolves, bears, and MOUNTAIN LIONS. Something is wrong when a domestic dog from the city makes it out alive in those circumstances with barely a scratch. ~How much does a contruction worker make? Enough to ensure a plane to bring supplies every so often? How about when he has no more job and makes no more money? ~A 10 to 13 year old girl would never outrun a bear. ~Just from my own opinion, I would have lost all faith in myself, my family, and my dog to be able to survive in this place with the attitude and lack of planning that this family accomplished.

Reviews of the plot aside, I'm thinking of starting a drinking game. It's called "Take a shot everytime you see the boom mike."

A couple of hippies living in Los Angeles who were forced to grow up and get jobs when they had kids, decide they've had enough of the smoggy city and pack up their family to move to the Rocky Mountains. Once there they play with bears and befriend a grizzled old mountain man. That is, when they aren't running for their lives from wolves or a big grizzly named Three Toes.

Ah, the Wilderness Family. Despite its laughable premise, it's actually one of the better of the "getting back to nature" genre of family dramas that popped up in the 1960s and 1970s, when the times they were a-changing and people thought by the 1980s the world would be overpopulated with unbreathable air and no natural resources left. Really, there's not much wrong with the idea of living the natural life and getting away from the crowded cities. But these movies were often so irresponsibly naive, treating living off the land like it' s a cake walk and there are just as many Disney-style friendly wild animals as there are ones that will kill you. Oh and they never talk about bugs. As anyone who has ever been camping can attest, bugs are the worst. Nature's PR guy should get a raise for keeping bugs out of the brochures. And I don't want to even get into understanding why these movies all seem to have old men wandering around the mountains being friendly with kids.

Like I said, this movie is one of the better examples of this genre. At least here it is shown that you have to work to live in the wild and there are some dangers, unlike the completely unrealistic "My Side of the Mountain," where a kid goes to live in the wilderness and befriends animals and a creepy old guy who plays a flute. That kid had it easy but there is some effort made here to portray the struggle it takes to live in the wild, although this is still far from realistic. The cast here is decent, led by Robert Logan as the stubborn hippie dad and George Buck Flower as the mountain man. Corny hippie soundtrack oddly works. As always with these types of films, the best part is the scenery. No sets or cheap CGI fakery going on, just real grass, trees, rivers, mountains, and animals. It adds an authenticity to things missing today. Plus, who doesn't love a good view? This was followed by two sequels that are pretty much more of the same.

So many bad reviews! Why? I loved this as a kid-OK so maybe now it's not my favorite but being that this movie stayed with me as a kid and helped fuel my interest in movies I'd say there was plenty of good to this.

What I liked best about it was the adventure. In these times, a movie like this would never be made at all, or at least not without computer generated monsters chasing the family and lots of car chases. The best thing about this movie is it's earthiness and tranquility. The feeling of being in the middle of nowhere-I can appreciate all types of environments but there is something so beautiful about being in the country when it's perfectly still with just yourself and the environment. In this movie that feeling is created beautifully, it touches the nature and quiet, country feeling. The scenery and country feeling created is beautiful.

It is also not boring at all as this family struggles to make it out in the middle of nowhere.Lots of wildlife and lots of Action packed adventure.Lots of adversities to overcome. And as mentioned, the cinematography is great-you'll feel like your out there in the wilderness too!

I'm not saying this is the best movie in the world-but for those who can appreciate a story revolving around a family and their struggles out in the wilderness it's great. I was enamored as a kid. I wanted to be out there with them! I think this is a good movie and would give it at least an 8. Of coarse it wont appeal to everyone but shouldn't be forgotten either.

It's nice to watch this flick every now and then - no cussin', no fussin' - a family where arguments are few and far between-but-although it is praised as a wonderful offering for little and big ones, there are some nervous moments involving some animals who resent the invasion of their turf. The carefully staged scenes involving man vs. animal and/or animal vs. animal could frighten little ones -ooohhh, look daddy, they're beating and biting. What fun.

Still, you can't help but enjoy the idea of getting out of the big city and opting for life with Mother Nature and mother bear, the latter justifiably ticked because her cubs have been humanized.

The humans in the picture are good folk to watch. Logan, a Brooklyn boy, yet, looks like a rugged mountain man. The wife is pleasant, and the children seem to be having a good time. Like other reviewers, I can't help but wonder why the daughter in this pic was replaced by another daughter in the two follow-ups. There is zilch about her on her web site which contains wonderful information - her name.

The movie is certainly watchable, the scenery beautiful and the story - well, it's like a fairy tale.

Somebody complained about the speeding in re-building (not building) their humble abode. Shoot, Ty Penningtonhe does it every week. Of course he has a host of experts and several hundred people to help. If Logan is still around they might draft him.

"The Wilderness Family" is, for the most part pleasant, harmless entertainment unless, of course, you're an animal about to become a dinner.

Still, it is far less vicious than city life where you can get snuffed for no good reason.

The family is living in pick up on Sunset Boulevard, so they charter an air flight Tooele lake in a wilderness region? there were a couple moments during this film where I actually was filled with rage at the screen writers and producers. Seriously, why are they living on Sunset Boulevard in a pickup? What's that about?

I'm giving it 4 stars because the characters are mildly okay. However, the opening scene is a good example. Why is he angrily shouting at his poor wife? Why are the kids in the back of the pickup on a busy city street and they are throwing their full weight against the pickup rear gate? I kept expecting it to burst open and pour them onto the asphalt.

What kind of busted life lef them to be so derelict in for Lauren? And yet to be able to pack up everything and hire a charter flight?

Their actions are so irresponsible that it blows my mind. I lived through the 60s and 70s, so I know that people had these types of romantic delusions about wilderness. But you die in the wilderness. These people would never have the skills to survive. They can't even fish.

I saw this movie as a kid and loved it. Today, I saw it again with my wife and two kids and loved it.

There are aspects that are completely unrealistic (i.e. a welder knows how to build a very nice log cabin, a fast grizzly does not run down the little girl who happens to be ten feet away, the man is not seriously mangled by the mountain lion, the dog is not killed by the wolves, etc.), but what I loved about it was the fact that the family does what so many families long to do--get out of Dodge and head for the high country.

People weren't meant to be stuck in a box 24/7 because they are enslaved to a house payment, the monster SUV, and all the other trappings of civilization. Families were meant to hang together and kids were meant to learn from parents--not MTV, the druggies on the corner, or their friends at school. Parents, to your children love is spelled TIME. This film reinforces that notion and illustrates that this misguided idea of quality time being more important than quantity is ridiculous. The pragmatic message from this film is for parents to sell the BMW and buy a Chevy, sell the mansion on the hill and buy the house in the valley, chuck the ladder-climbing job and take the one that allows you to be home for dinner every night. After all, nobody every regretted not spending more time at work, but they did regret not spending more time with the kiddos.

I believe that it's a movie that was ahead of its time and I'd love to see a more modern (and more realistic) take on the subject. Besides, it's a good family film, which is a rarity these days. It's not a perfect film by any standard, but the scenery is beautiful and the plot is visionary. That's why I give it an 8 out of 10.

This is a feel-good, family movie of the television era of Little House on the Prairie. We watched a lot of crap back then and enjoyed it immensely. If you have no preconceived ideas of being thrilled and scared, and understand that this is a movie pushing why so many of us 'up and left' society and joined communes and built squat toilets escaping from the 'burbs'. My 11 year old thoroughly enjoyed it, though she too could see through it (and also see the microphone in heaps of scenes - delightful). We will now watch the second one and be just as delighted, entertained and taken back to a simpler time. Not just in the movie, but remembering the seventies in general.

The kids will enjoy this enough, but parents beware! This will be a difficult two hours. The cinematography is passable, it's just the dialog and the acting that make this movie tough to tolerate. The family -- the father, really -- grows tired of the big city, so he decides to lug his family into some beyond-isolated mountain valley. How the actual decision to leave is made is just annoyingly laughable.

The credits base the story on actual events, but given the range of things they throw at you, you wonder just how much artistic license the film takes. How many times can you be attacked by a bear and not figure out something is wrong? If you are watching the movie via VCR, DVR or DVD, slow-mo on the window during the bear-attacks-the-cabin scene and you'll see a man in a really bad bear costume.

The film meanders from plot twist to plot twist without any real direction and by the time you've made it through the fourth or the fifth twist, you begin to hope it ends soon. But it doesn't.

I remember seeing this movie on TV when I was a kid, and I am sorry I saw it again. You just don't watch a movie with a critical eye when you're 7. Unfortunately it didn't live up to the memories.

Entertaining family adventure in the wilderness Liked the pioneer spirit conquering the environment Wished the movie showed a little more preparedness on the families part before embarking on such an adventure Great movie for family night Clean, fun entertainment

Robert Logan plays Skip Robinson, a construction worker who has grown sick and tired of the daily grind. So he and his family decide to "chuck it all" (much easier said than done in the real world) and go live in the Rocky Mountain wilderness. The balance of the film details the family's various experiences and and troubles as they set up cabin near a lake.

Love & respect for Mother Nature, the appeal of living simply, and the togetherness of family are the themes of this decent film which proved successful enough to rate two sequels. In this initial tale, episodes are rather redundant as Dad, Mom (Susan Damante Shaw) and the two children (Hollye Holmes and Ham Larsen) regularly interact with some of the tamest wild animals you'll ever see. (One of the animal trainers, William Cornford, appears in the film as the pilot.) These include raccoons, black and grizzly bears, deer, wolves, cougars, etc.

Overall, "Adventures of the Wilderness Family" is okay family entertainment, with sequences that might be scary for the youngest of your kin, but always keeps things at least somewhat pleasant. The family is likeable, the animals appealing (that is one very brave dog), and the rural photography is first-rate. This is filmed on some very picturesque locations in Utah and Colorado. Gene Kauer and Douglas M. Lackey supply a lush score and two reasonably catchy heart-tugging tunes.

Perking things up a bit is the appearance of ubiquitous character actor George "Buck" Flower, in two scenes as a friendly mountain man named Boomer; his friend and frequent co-star John F. Goff plays the city doctor.

Overall, a respectable effort.

Six out of 10.

I loved this film as a child - and was brought up in the Rocky Mountains, backpacking with my Dad, and can relate to the feeling of wanting to drop everything and "head for the hills."

Have seen the movie and its sequel recently, I can still say it is a movie I would love for my children to watch and love. It is wholesome, family value oriented, and in general, a great joy for kids. It makes you want to go out camping and enjoy what little wilderness we have left in the US.

While I do have to agree with other posters that you simply can't "up and leave" as they do in this film (ie - no preparation re: hunting, fishing, planting, learning, etc.), you just can't fit all that into a film. And it would bore the kids to death. It is a family/children's film, after all, not an adult action flick.

I highly recommend this film to anyone with children.

This movie cycled on after the movie I was watching finished. My pup (1yo) was immediately drawn in by the beginning sequence and was glued to the TV for the entire run-time. I've never seen him do this before!

Would recommend for dogs of all ages

... well, maybe you can. I thought this would be a fun and safe movie to watch with my 8 and 11 yr old grandkids. I would have given it less than a six, however if you watch it with the reality in mind that this was done in the early seventies, you will get a kick out of it. It's full of major faux pas and impossible scenarios. My 11 year old grandson and I ended up laughing out loud at several scenes, which was a lot of fun. My eight year old granddaughter on the other hand, was seriously concerned for the kids in this movie. You will be too. In fact you would be calling Child Protective Services. Don't get me started on the roles, activities and lines the mother is performing... just enjoy those parts as pure accidental comedy. Grab some popcorn and be ready to appreciate that movies have evolved.

The guy if attacked by a lion and he never takes his knife from its holster.