The Adventures of the Wilderness Family

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.

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 .

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.

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."

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.