Not sure if it was the writing or the acting, but it was tough to watch. It got 4 stars just for at least being family friendly.
18 Reviews
Tough to watch
crosemnnc28 September 2021
Not the best
judigoodfellow-804398 May 2022
I had such a hard time understanding the dialogue that I really didn't notice the acting talents or the goofs. I did wonder why someone would take their dog offleash in a forest... really? I did love the scenery though. Makes me proud to live in Ontario.
So bad it was great!
tridotter11 October 2021
We had queued up a bunch of Whose Line is it Anyway on UpTV while they were advertising this movie hard. Just the ads cracked us up, especially when the plane blew up, so we were stoked to see this one.
Didn't follow the normal formula, even the opening was confusing as the timeline went out of order. Movie did not disappoint, the laughs continued throughout. We had to keep rewinding because it was so funny at times we wanted to capitalize on the hilarity. The FX were pretty bad, so more laughs there too. It is hard to believe that the FX, writing, acting, on again-off again injuries were all intentional, that this was really a spoof of cheap disaster flics (which we love).
So fun!! Can't wait for the sequel. Seriously.
Didn't follow the normal formula, even the opening was confusing as the timeline went out of order. Movie did not disappoint, the laughs continued throughout. We had to keep rewinding because it was so funny at times we wanted to capitalize on the hilarity. The FX were pretty bad, so more laughs there too. It is hard to believe that the FX, writing, acting, on again-off again injuries were all intentional, that this was really a spoof of cheap disaster flics (which we love).
So fun!! Can't wait for the sequel. Seriously.
Lowmance in the wilds
sbpiech-7699911 October 2021
Not wild at all about this romance
TheLittleSongbird17 March 2024
'Romance in the Wild' (2021)
Opening thoughts: Actually saw 'Romance in the Wild' a while back and wasn't impressed by it at all, but with music commitments and being behind on my reviewing at the time it took me a while to review it. Very nearly forgot about it, until coming across its very poor follow up 'Christmas in the Wild' as part of my Christmas completest quest without realising at first that that was a sequel. Decided to watch it again, immediately after watching that and disliking it, to give it a fairer chance and to compare.
Unfortunately, 'Romance in the Wild' was not much better on re-watch. Actually thought it was worse, with all the flaws found first time still problems and bigger (which the sequel repeated just as poorly), while finding more along the way. UPTV were responsible for quite a number of above average films, Christmas and not, but they were also responsible for a fair share of misses. When they missed, they did so big time. They did so here in what is for me one of their worst.
Good things: The scenery is nice, but there is nothing else good to say about it.
Bad things: Despite the scenery being nice, it is wasted by the chaotic editing that constantly jumps around and the poorly framed and equally un-cohesive photography. The direction is unfocused and never seemed to be in complete control or that engaged with the material.
Which unfortunately is incredibly weak. The dialogue throughout is heavy in cheese, is very flat and never flows. The story never picks up momentum, suffers from a complete lack of tension and has no charm or heart. There is little atmospheric about it and everything is taken too seriously.
The characters with no exception had little to no development and had bland or/and grating personalities, with exaggerated negative traits and groan inducing decision making. Calling the acting bad is being generous, nobody looks comfortable and it was like the cast knew the material was bad and decided to not try.
Closing thoughts: Overall, very poor.
2/10.
Opening thoughts: Actually saw 'Romance in the Wild' a while back and wasn't impressed by it at all, but with music commitments and being behind on my reviewing at the time it took me a while to review it. Very nearly forgot about it, until coming across its very poor follow up 'Christmas in the Wild' as part of my Christmas completest quest without realising at first that that was a sequel. Decided to watch it again, immediately after watching that and disliking it, to give it a fairer chance and to compare.
Unfortunately, 'Romance in the Wild' was not much better on re-watch. Actually thought it was worse, with all the flaws found first time still problems and bigger (which the sequel repeated just as poorly), while finding more along the way. UPTV were responsible for quite a number of above average films, Christmas and not, but they were also responsible for a fair share of misses. When they missed, they did so big time. They did so here in what is for me one of their worst.
Good things: The scenery is nice, but there is nothing else good to say about it.
Bad things: Despite the scenery being nice, it is wasted by the chaotic editing that constantly jumps around and the poorly framed and equally un-cohesive photography. The direction is unfocused and never seemed to be in complete control or that engaged with the material.
Which unfortunately is incredibly weak. The dialogue throughout is heavy in cheese, is very flat and never flows. The story never picks up momentum, suffers from a complete lack of tension and has no charm or heart. There is little atmospheric about it and everything is taken too seriously.
The characters with no exception had little to no development and had bland or/and grating personalities, with exaggerated negative traits and groan inducing decision making. Calling the acting bad is being generous, nobody looks comfortable and it was like the cast knew the material was bad and decided to not try.
Closing thoughts: Overall, very poor.
2/10.
The dog was the best part of the movie
mythreegirls199827 September 2021
I usually enjoy the movies on UP but was really disappointed in Romance in the Wilds. The acting was horrible and the storyline was unrealistic. I have liked Victor Zinck Jr. Work in past, however this was not one of his best films. The writing was awful. Downright cheesy.
Lets hope the sequel is better, but I doubt it.
Lets hope the sequel is better, but I doubt it.
Great movie
dsweeting-838-64293629 September 2021
Bad movie
drbreakwell26 October 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Bad script. First, why would a crew leave a open gas can tipsy on a bunch of palates? How can a plane blow up when the fire is barely near it. The fire fighters are dropping fire retardants and water onto perfect forest not near any fire. The ground crew takes hours to get to the area. The only good thing was the dog. Fire crew all women--don't think so. The writers and movie company should stop while they are ahead.
Horrible movie
MisterButts22 January 2022
Cringe fest galore in this one. Terrible acting, terrible dialog, unrealistic. Stupid decisions made by so-called professionals. The best scenes are of the forest smoke and the bear. That's all this movie had going for it.
What the heck ...
toncincin27 September 2021
Jessica the highlight
johnteetsarchitect28 September 2021
Loved watching Jessica who had a unique personality but the pic storyline and sequencing that defied all logic was embarrassing. Tons of stock fire footage was totally not cohesive and not progressive and of the same fire
and people at risk of dying do not amble or sit and talk about relationships. Key plot items came and went without reason. Easily one of the least accomplishments I have seen on UP TV. A totally amateur effort.
No chemistry.
fredintoronto4 June 2022
Worst Disaster Film Ever
januszlvii9 July 2023
Warning: Spoilers
I should have avoided Romance In The Wilds, because of the word "Romance" in the title, but I like disaster films ( while not liking chick flicks) and have not seen any I disliked until now. This is also an unrealistic film with ladies (along with Ranger Buck) being in the safety/fire prevention business without baby other guys ( how can they carry people if they are unconscious?),. This is also too nice of a movie with the closest thing to a villain being a bear, and no suspense in the movie whatsoever. The.best actor in the movie is Charlie the dog, but you can predict the dog gets injured and of course you know will be okay ( as is everyone else ( no deaths in a disaster film ( that seems like an oxymoron disaster film and no deaths). As for the romance part, the woman Buck falls for (Geologist Jessica) is pretty but not a knockout by any means. I had to skip through half the movie because it was to sappy for my taste. Finally do Buck Jessica, and Charlie ( Jessica's faithful dog) end up together? Spoilers ahead: Of course they do. Oh by the way I read there is actually a sequel to this movie called Christmas In The Wilds. 0% chance of me watching it. I wanted to be nice and give this movie 2 stars: One because Jessica is easy on the eyes and one for Charlie, but I can't. One star for looking at Jessica for me. Go watch Dante's Peak, Twister, Towering Inferno or countless other disaster films instead. 1/10 stars.
Maybe Americans might like it?
craigvincent-837388 April 2024
Seemed like a low budget daytime TV show except worse. Unrealistic danger situations for 2 people to stand around in too busy smiling and giggling at each other to be bothered to try harder to save their lives. Worst film in many years. I expected much better on Netflix which usually has high budget dramas. The romance wasn't romantic and the wilds weren't very wild. Perhaps I'm just a cynical man and it's more designed for more emotional people who are happy to suspend their disbelief, but I found myself repeatedly saying "why don't they do this" or "that's ridiculous, there's no way that would happen". Even my wife said it was ridiculous and she likes Rom Coms.
Disaster flick
Jackbv12328 September 2021
This movie is awful. Bad acting. Stupid story lines. Trained professionals doing stupid things. Very flat dialogue delivered badly. If there was any chemistry between the leads it was obscured by the bad acting.
This is more of a small scale disaster flick than a romance. Definitely not a rom/con.
Actor credit: as of this writing Laura Vandervoort is not listed in the cast on this website. She is in the movie even if her acting is barely any better than the rest of the cast.
This is more of a small scale disaster flick than a romance. Definitely not a rom/con.
Actor credit: as of this writing Laura Vandervoort is not listed in the cast on this website. She is in the movie even if her acting is barely any better than the rest of the cast.
Worst movie I've seen. SO Bad You Had to Laugh! Bad acting, Super Lame!
mamachikn20 October 2021
Warning: Spoilers
This was unbelievably lame. Script and acting both. I don't know how the actors remained serious. A failed attempt at drama.
PROS: The lead actress was pretty. I liked Charlie the dog. The forest was nice to look at.
CONS: Too many.
How didn't Buck know the phone number of the head Ranger he surely would have had to contact many times before?
The CGI smoke over the pretty forest was obvious.
They were in a hurry to escape the fire and drove frantically for a LONG time. Then when the tree fell and the jeep wouldn't start, they proceeded to walk the 16 miles at 1/2 mile per hour max, strolling and casually talking and getting to know each other. A lovely slooow walk in the woods.
Then the BEAR! That was hysterical!. Instead of yelling, making noise, and scaring it away, as we have learned is appropriate, they cowered in fear INSIDE the cabin! The door had been left open, so Buck quietly and slowly sshhh! Closed the door and latched it. Haha. As if the bear wouldn't know someone was there because he would have smelled them!! Then of course, we expect a claw through the cabin...and the bear swiped at the cabin and almost went through it. SO funny!! So they all ran out the back door!
I agree with the person who said they enjoyed the laughs, and the review that said it was like from the 1980's. I think it was more like the 1960's! Bad script, bad acting, worst movie EVER! Amazed it made it to the TV screen. Embarrassing. All the authority figures were women. Was overly obvious. Not strong women, either; they just happened to be female. The sister was the worst actor. Not believable at all.
PROS: The lead actress was pretty. I liked Charlie the dog. The forest was nice to look at.
CONS: Too many.
How didn't Buck know the phone number of the head Ranger he surely would have had to contact many times before?
The CGI smoke over the pretty forest was obvious.
They were in a hurry to escape the fire and drove frantically for a LONG time. Then when the tree fell and the jeep wouldn't start, they proceeded to walk the 16 miles at 1/2 mile per hour max, strolling and casually talking and getting to know each other. A lovely slooow walk in the woods.
Then the BEAR! That was hysterical!. Instead of yelling, making noise, and scaring it away, as we have learned is appropriate, they cowered in fear INSIDE the cabin! The door had been left open, so Buck quietly and slowly sshhh! Closed the door and latched it. Haha. As if the bear wouldn't know someone was there because he would have smelled them!! Then of course, we expect a claw through the cabin...and the bear swiped at the cabin and almost went through it. SO funny!! So they all ran out the back door!
I agree with the person who said they enjoyed the laughs, and the review that said it was like from the 1980's. I think it was more like the 1960's! Bad script, bad acting, worst movie EVER! Amazed it made it to the TV screen. Embarrassing. All the authority figures were women. Was overly obvious. Not strong women, either; they just happened to be female. The sister was the worst actor. Not believable at all.
Cheesy, Cheesy Movie
wmackirdy-8903227 September 2021
I thought I was watching a B-movie from the 1980s. One-dimensional, low budget...what can I say. No real story, unrealistic scenes, amazing. Really! I thought was something out of the 80's. I was stunned when I realized it was released this month.
I am speechless...nothing I can add.
I am speechless...nothing I can add.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
