La Montagne entre nous

There are films that I only watch because of the actors. Kate Winslet is always a reason for me, and Idris Elba can't do any harm either. Both of them have the ability to act very relaxed, there is never anything tense or over the top - good British acting, in other words. The story is that of a struggle for survival, but never deviates from keeping the focus on both actors. It is told in a relaxed way, has some exciting moments, but actually you ask yourself all the time whether the two get each other or not. In the end it is a romantic story with a light humour, which is mainly thanks to Winslet's laconic style. Entertaining, and very welcome in the dark times of November 2020

Forget the movie and read the book. They took everything great about the book, changed it and in the process lessened the story in almost every way. It feels like they are in such a hurry to get to the action that they gloss over the beginning. Then they proceed to take every character and give them baggage instead of just letting them be good people. Sad.

A classic boy (Idris Elba) meets girl (Kate Winslet) story, only this time it begins with the plane crashing into mountains, and they have to make their way down without, you know, freezing or starving to death.

I haven't read the original novel by Charles Martin, but the movie starts as simple but inventive mix of classic story types such as boy meets girl and survival, with even some light but good verbal humor thrown in.

The makers don't want to expose the general direction early on, so for most of the time we concentrate on survivors overcoming the harsh conditions.

Sadly, there's not much variety to sloshing in the snow and shivering near the campfires, so it gives one time to begin to notice how the storytelling tends to stay on the lazy / shallow side.

For example, some of the basic points of survival stories are not adequately explained - how the duo always have strength to find and carry food, or how they manage to keep the dog alive and healthy who survived the crash too.

The dog just disappears and is re-insertedwhere convenient. There's even scene which hints they had to climb down a steep cliff but never have equipment to take the animal with them. Or even take care of themselves, for the matter.

Anyway, all these niggles don't quite break the suspense but don't exactly help to uphold it either.

And it wouldn't be a problem at all if the story would not be so mainstream (the two's backgrounds and relationships would benefit from some depth)

The makers even go as far as adding some true Hollywood style flashbacks which don't fit at all. Not to mention that these lay bare the general direction that they story has tried to hide the whole time.

Luckily, it's mostly about Elba and Winslet who don't disappoint, giving solid if workmanlike performances to bring the material alive.

They quietly and confidently carry the experience, so if you are OK paying to see two top thespians doing their thang, then "The Mountain Between Us" is good enough watch.

There's almost no other human characters - the only notable supporting roles are by Beau Bridges and Dermot Mulroney.

All in all, "Mountain" is watchable but too professional rather than passionate project from all involved, thus not eliciting true commitment from the viewer either.

There are moments of authenticity, and moments that might make you care for a moment... but there's not enough to make it stick in memory.

I'd like to finally see a movie that's entirely worth Elba's talent and charisma, as HBO's unforgettable "The Wired" managed in TV world more than 10 years ago already.

Two factors save The Mountain Between Us from romantic oblivion: Breathtaking cinematography (Mandy Walker) and two fine actors, Idris Elba as Ben and Kate Winslet as Alex. They are lost in the cold snow somewhere in the mountains of Idaho or Colorado after a small plane accident, but fortunately he's a neurosurgeon and she's a plucky photographer. Lucky about his medical skills.

If Nicholas Sparks could do lost in the snow, then he could have written this rather trite and predictable romance. Why wouldn't they fall in love with no one else around and such attractive people to boot? That they both are vulnerable becomes obvious; that they will fall in love is a given of the genre and maybe of survival itself when there's no one else around.

Lest I forget, a lovable dog also is a tie to bind. To be fair, director Hany Abu-Assad and his writers J.Mills Goodloe and Chris Weitz keep the real romance from happening through at least half the film. During that blessed time we can enjoy the spectacle and the survival techniques. Always with the thought of what we would do in those circumstances.

More outrageous than the clichéd circumstance is the fact that she needs medical help consistently where he just needs it toward the end. Why then does the old trope of the damsel in distress come to mind? Why not,in a film shameless with tear jerking.

He just lost his wife, and she doesn't seem overly joyed about her impending wedding and her husband, Mark (Dermot Mulroney). So you know what's going to happen right to the end.

I am happy to see Canada so beautifully captured on the screen. As for me, I felt captured in a melodramatic survival story from which I needed rescue.

I really enjoyed this movie. The cinematography was absolutely stunning & the two leads were well played. I bought into the story & left the cinema with a smile on my face. A girl could drown in Idris Elba's eyes!

I don't understand the terrible reviews on IMDb. The acting was not terrible, nor was the story-line. Critics seem to expect a romantic survival film to be somehow cerebral. Most movies are just regurgitated ideas, so the hate here is undeserved in my opinion. Maybe these are the same reviewers that thought La La Land deserved all those Oscars? Now there was a boring movie! Don't get me started....!

Don't believe the highbrow critics here. Grab your besties & have an enjoyable night out at the movies.