The Canyon

The general plot line of stranded individuals in any particular setting is nothing new to Hollywood, as we have seen many marooned protagonists go up against mother nature, blood thirsty villains, and both fictitious and very real beasts alike. However, of all the places we have seen films set in, the grand canyon is mostly new. With a fresh setting we should have endless possibilities and plenty of room for an exciting and unconventional script. Unfortunately, 'The Canyon' cannot capitalize on it's sources. The final product that director Richard Harrah presents us with is nothing short of boring film-making, extremely grating 'come on' moments, erroneous use of wolves, and a very empty script. The actors are very talented and do what they can with the material, but not even talented actors can save a script that is as empty, dry, and desolate as the grand canyon itself. There are a few shining moments, but not enough to carry this movie into the entertaining zone. There is a nice gore scene (that will surely make anyone who watches it wince), the scenery is put to very beautifully shot aesthetic use, and of course nicely acted moments that accurately evoke the hopelessness of the situation and sometimes are even ironically witty. Notice that I have yet to mention the word 'thrilling' or 'thriller', which is extremely sad because this movies is obviously supposed to be just that - a thriller. 'The Canyon' simply can't cut it as a thriller and is obviously too straight forward to be anything else. Avoid this one just as you would avoid going into the grand canyon with a guide who could possibly double as the homeless guy who shines shoes outside of your office.

Plot: The possibilities of getting lost in the Grand Canyon escalate dramatically if you choose not to properly plan your trip into the canyon, use uncertified guides (esp with drinking problems), no wilderness survival training, no maps or compass, and have no way of communicating with the outside world. Having no food or water, lost in the canyon, under high heat conditions can alone kill you, much less the idea of wild animals attacking you? I must point out that idea about wolves in the Grand Canyon Park and outlying areas attacking people is totally absurd! Whoever thought this one up did not do much research because wolves, though they have been spotted in these areas on occasion, are for the most part rare and shy of humans. Timber wolves, which the movie portrays, mainly exist in Canada and the northwestern states towards Canada. So this part is completely unrealistic for an already busy plot. Wolves only act like this when they are starving to death, but the Timber wolves shown in this movie looked pretty well fed.

However this movie does make you think twice about roughing it alone out in no man's land. If you don't have the stomach to see what people have to do under desperate circumstances, then perhaps you need to look for another movie?

I went into this movie with certain expectations. The expectations were met. There are no real surprises in this movie. Early in the movie, you know the set-up, man (and woman) against nature. All of the main players are likable. Their character is developed. You care about these people! The scenery is beautiful. There are plot contrivances, like shoddy cellphone coverage and random injuries. Of course, there has to be poor cellphone coverage or there would be no movie! You would just call for help and that would be the end of the movie! There has to be injuries to add insult to "injury" to the players struggling against the odds already. The ending is truly thought evoking instead of cliché. It could not have ended better. I recently saw the movie "Thirst." The two movies are very similar in plot line. This movie was enjoyable. I found "Thirst" tedious and overly predictable.

The wilderness can be a great place to visit, when everything is going okay. But introduce some unexpected problems, and an excellent adventure, far removed from other people, morphs into a nightmare. It's a story premise that has a long history in cinema, and it's the premise on which "The Canyon" is based. An attractive newlywed couple hires an old backwoods coot (played by Will Patton) to guide them through the back-country of the Grand Canyon. Everything goes well ... for awhile.

The script's characters seem credible. But the plot lacks creative imagination. One particular adversity propels the film's second half, which goes on and on, tediously. Either the editor needed to chop off some of the plot repetition, or the writer needed to introduce additional, more varied, adversities.

Further, the story's inciting incident, which involves a reptile, is not remotely credible. And the characters react to this event in ways that add to their misery. What would films be without characters who make stupid decisions?

Casting is acceptable. Acting is okay until near the end when one performance becomes almost laughable. Sound effects and background music are fine.

Scenery is spectacular, helped along by competent color cinematography. And the final scene is arguably the best scene in the entire film. As the camera zooms out, viewers get a stunning visual perspective, one of the best such perspectives I have ever seen in any film.

An unimaginative and at times silly plot renders the story somewhat tiresome and tedious. But this is partially offset by terrific visuals, the most impressive of which is right at the very end.

I'm not gonna say much. What struck me and really disappointed, which flavored the whole film, is how stupid they were to not stay put and find the mules. Idiots.