Jusqu'au cou: L'appel de la nature

"Without a Paddle: Nature's Calling" (2009) is a comedy/adventure about three old friends who venture into the Northwest wilderness to find a girl whom one of them fell in love with when they were kids. She's now a hippie tree-hugger, but stands to inherit a fortune. Will they find her? Will they even get back alive?

This "sequel" was only made because the first movie, 2004's "Without a Paddle," was a minor hit at the box office, making three times its expense in the USA alone. As you can see from the above synopsis, "Nature's Calling" is merely a retread of the same plot with slight variations and different actors. It also cost $12.7 million less.

If you liked the first film you might appreciate this one, but it's anemic by comparison, not that the first one was that good. The protagonists are likable and the filmmaking is hip, including the soundtrack, but the shenanigans are only mildly amusing and the girls, again, aren't anything to get too excited about, although the brunette is the best of both worlds. The over-the-top scene with the squirrels is easily the best scene and is almost worth the price of admission. I suggest only watching this one if you're a fan of the first movie and want to see a lesser film with the same plot and tone.

An interesting difference is that this one was actually shot in the Great Northwest, in the wilderness East of Portland, rather than New Zealand.

The film runs 96 minutes.

GRADE: Borderline C- or C

While the first movie wasn't all that entertaining - it was passable, this doesn't come close to it what-so ever.

Dialoge is poor, setting is not to full effect, story is lame, casting is all wrong, nothing in this is memorable.

The squirrel sequence is just retarded and it's subplots are just as stupid.

I saw this free and was glad that I didn't pay for it.

It saved me the cost of a rental, but regardless is was still lifeless and bring.

Not even the two eco-chicks were from the first movie - which I guess is a good thing...

Who thought of this story as something to produce is severely looking to get fired.

Soundtrack didn't offer anything either.

If you liked the first Without A Paddle, you should leave it at that and forget about this one, because you will enjoy this.

Nothing really works in this. It's just a mess of sub-stories that were mishmash-ed together to put together a sub par script that is not funny or entertaining.

There is a reason that this went straight to video...because it would not have lasted 2 weeks in a theater.

It's poorly developed - even the sound nature effects are over done.

The continuity is atrociously horrible as is the timing and looping.

Save your money, save your time...go to sleep instead.

When I heard a a sequel had been made to "Without a Paddle," I was kind of excited. Dax, Matt Lillard & Seth Green were pretty fun in the first movie, so I expected a decent flick. With a cast of relative no names, this movie seems to be a more straight to DVD type of movie. The biggest name had to be Hall of fame football player Jerry Rice, playing crazy woodsman "Hal Gore."

Two lifelong friends (a laid back nurse and a stressed lawyer) and a Limey-Brit must take raft down river, in search of a beautiful hippie girl, who lives deep in the Oregon woods. Adventures unfold with white rapids, crazy squirrels and angry mobsters making things tough on the guys.

All in all, the movie is pretty entertaining throughout. Very simple and kind of silly plot, with a fair amount of laughs. This is a movie that kids will enjoy a lot more than adults and overall I found the first movie in this series to be better than this one.

I'll be the first to admit, I'm VERY tolerant when it comes to movies. I will watch almost anything at least once. This movie was no exception, and after the first movie (which I have to admit I liked) I figured there was no harm in watching this one.

I almost never say this... but, I wish I'd turned the channel. Seriously, that is saying a LOT for me. I willingly sit through movies that most people cannot stand. I knew from the start that this was not actually a sequel to the second as far as characters and events; but rather of concept and idea. I have no problem with that. My problem is, the things that made the first movie endearing to me (a halfway decent script, fairly likable characters, and a nice good feeling at the end) were completely missing from this one. Add in goofy CGI squirrels (such things have a proper time and place people, come on!) and it was bordering on unwatchable.

I will say, you just cannot blame this on the actors, because that part wasn't bad - the material they had to work WITH was the problem. This movie started off on the wrong foot with a shaky script. And the actors are really the only reason I've rated this even as high as I have.

Even a bad comedy can be good sometimes. Not this one though - not even close.

Terrible story, terrible cinematography, terrible continuity, terrible casting. This is one of the worst movies I've ever seen.

Oh - and please - was there not one Canadian any where near the shooting of this film to teach the director that Canadians do not talk as though they were portrayed in this movie. The use of the sound "eh" and the 'sayings' (like "Holy Halifax") were contrived and - well, okay, I'm going to use a bad word: stupid. It was so annoying and so ridiculous, it was hard to even get close to the end without eye rolling and chucking popcorn at the screen. Is it really so challenging to portray a Canadian? After all, we are America's closest and largest neighbour and have thousands of Canadians working in Hollywood alone. This wasn't funny, it was lazy writing and unacceptable.

I'll be sure to avoid anything with these actors and directors in the future.