Enter the Wild (2018) User Reviews

Old film, new title.

[imnicholls · 4/10 · 14 August 2018]

Something struck me immediately as a bit off with this movie; it looked old, like mid 2000s clothes and film... So I look at the imdb page and sure enough this seems to be the director's previous film from 2008 just retitled and repackaged as a horror.

It might appeal to fans of old mumblecore Adam Wingard, like Pop Skull or Horrible Way to Die, but it is tangentially related to horror at best.

Terrible Amateurish Movie

[claudio_carvalho · 2/10 · 27 August 2018]

The terrible amateurish "Enter the Wild" is one of those overrated movies in IMDb with the wrong genre (horror?). The storyline is awful with a screenplay that does not develop the unpleasant characters and uses the most absurd situations and dialogues. The pace is inadequate and boring, and the dismal camera framework is ridiculous, cutting the heads of the characters in every close-up. The cinematography and locations are also very poor. It is funny to see the gorgeous Ella Scott Lynch wearing mini-skirt in the wild and changing clothes many times along their journey. Watching this movie is a complete waste of time. My vote is two.

Title (Brazil): Not Available

Slow. Non-horror. Lame.

[timothycrugnale · 2/10 · 15 August 2018]

Just completely boring, slow, not the slightest bit scary. Not a horror movie from any angle. Don't waste your time. Best of all there is no ending.

braddy4

[braddy4 · 14 August 2018]

There is no horror to this, it is just young friends on a short camping/hiking trip that run into outdoor challenges and explore their feelings and relationships. I guess the makers/marketers decided that romance and feelings while camping was a hard sell so they called it a 'HORROR' movie but there is no horror, no monsters, no bad guys, no creatures or supernatural forces, no unusual forces of nature or anything else of 'horror' just feelings and relationships. The acting is fine and everything else is fine but there isn't anything exciting to it just an OK portrayal of what? Relationships and feelings.

Leaving you with the question as to why you came.

[redifix · 1/10 · 16 August 2018]

The movie was slow, characters weren't engaging. A horror film this was not. A film on what not to do when bushwalking, yes. And the ending, no ending at all. Just 96 minutes you'll wish you could get back. I would like to say that an EPIRB, a GPS compass, a map, reliable communication, adequate suppies, all are a must if you are going deep into the bush. And, tell someone where you are going and when to expect you back. Doing anything else does not end well, much like this film.

What the hell???

[sirken-75757 · 3/10 · 14 August 2018]

Ok everything that went wrong in the movie is what is wrong with this movie. I mean come on .. Lost your map ..let the animals eat your food..Try to run off with compass and get hurt..etc..etc.. Got to say the acting was not to bad....And i watched it to the end so did keep me into the movie even thou i almost turn it off a couple of times....Only watch if you have nothing to do but watch paint dry.

I can't believe rating is even at 5!

[deetrueman · 2/10 · 16 August 2018]

Wow, this film was described as something about an animal in the wild. It wasn't at all. It was awful! I kept watching hoping something good was about to happen and before I knew it I was at the end where you had no idea what happens to the part of the group that is where they are. It an awfully made Aussie film, I honestly can't believe the rating is where its at, unless the actors and writers, etc. got everyone in their family to give it the highest rating possible to bump it up. I feel if this was a rating that was accurate to the film it would be somewhere around 3.2 and thats being fair because it obviously took some work to write it and film it. The acting was appalling from some of the actors and Uh from others, not good not bad, must beige, its the only word I can think of to describe them.

I am amazed at the amount of votes giving it a 10 and a 9! I've given it a 2, and thats because I feel bad just giving it a 1 or zero, which your unable to do anyway, if you could give a zero I'd of given it a 1 in that case.

I'm honestly not being mean, I like to give honest reviews so with that said, please don't waste your time watching this, find something a little more on the edge and maybe that is more honest to the title. The only animal you see in this a few little crayfish (I think thats what they were, or blue lobster but I believe their in the sea) and a bird flying high in the sky. As for laughs, nope not any of those, sadness, nope none of that, and no fear either. Just a few omg's and yawns.

2*'s is a Bit Generous

[neil-43355 · 2/10 · 15 August 2018]

This film is really, really bad - says its a horror, its not... its pretty difficult to say what it is other than complete and utter crap.

We have a cast who can't act who ultimately you do not care about what happens to any of them one iota, an achingly slow story, the scenery isn't even particularly nice and the whole thing centre's around five people who go off into the woods. Believe me when I say you have seen this a hundred times before, its so predictable and you can literally guess what is going to happen.

Give it a swerve, its rubbish!

Enter the Mediocre

[FrankDamage · 3/10 · 12 September 2018]

Essentially a film about "feelings" and "fools." You'll be scratching your head and asking a lot of questions throughout the film, but the biggest question (that will likely have no answer) is "why did I gamble on this film?"

To be fair there are a few "pearls" in the film, but simply not a sufficient amount enough to make up for what is lacking, of which there is A LOT.

Remember how I said there was no answer to the big question you'll be asking? Well actually there is and you can find it at the end of my first sentence in quotation marks. Welcome to the club.

Lies!

[chicposh · 2/10 · 15 August 2018]

Not a horror film! What's the genre for slow pace, boring, nothing happens nonsense?

Home and Away go camping

[n_allen-70395 · 3/10 · 15 August 2018]

First of all it's not a horror and secondly congratulations on being the first film I've watched where I haven't liked or cared about what happens to any of the cast! Its like a really bad episode of Home and away, where they get lost in the woods......thats it......really

Slow but with horrific idea

[CharbelRahme · 6/10 · 16 August 2018]

One thing i say to those who are criticizing the movie... would you leave your friend out there to die? It is a slow movie with a very deep idea that some peole won't be able to catch it if they are just hoping to shout from horror! The idea is horrific, they lost the map, no food, a friend got lost, another one injured... it's a good movie if we see it in another angle, not the one the reviewers above wanted to.

As a drama, 5 out of 10 seems fair to me

[olaregan · 5/10 · 22 November 2018]

I don't want to judge the film for the misleading genre-labelling (and probably the movie is older than it says). Therefore, I would say the fiIm is a drama and in this respect acceptable. I wouldn't say it's a waste of time. People who expect a classic horror movie will be disappointed, but not because the movie is so bad, I guess, more because they feel deceived.

Not a horror

[engelbrecht-anton30 · 18 August 2018]

Please change the genre from Horror to Drama. It is about friends betraying one another while getting lost on a hiking trail

NOT A HORROR

[mazdie4 · 2/10 · 23 August 2018]

This is in no way in shape or form a horror! Why would the classification be horror?! Very bad movie.

Really?

[brockleyavenue · 2/10 · 20 August 2018]

Why on earth, would this movie be remarketed and packaged out again after 10 years. This is good example of why I hesitate with Aussie movies. The only horror to come out of this movie, was the horror that it was ever made! Having grown up in Australia and spending a huge amount of my activities camping etc....one of the most important part of any trip is back up. Good grief! The movie was so bad with so may holes, that I just wanted to dig a hole for myself to hide my embarrassment. What made me laugh was that they get to the last leg and show a sigh of releif, then the movie ends with them on top of plateu surrounded by cliffs....Sorry, but when I look back on what I just saw, I just laugh!

Bad acting, editing and directing... The 'Horror' Team.

I should have read these reviews first

[sjstoyle · 4/10 · 18 December 2018]

I spent 40 minutes waiting for the HORROR to kick in and I was so bored I checked the reviews here. I should have read these reviews first.

Utter tripe

[aleistad-1 · 1/10 · 16 August 2018]

Not horror in any way form or shape (that's OK in itself, but wrong classification nonetheless). Not good plot (I'd go as far as saying not a plot at all). Not good acting. Not good cinematography. Not likeable characters. Not realistic. Not any ending. And no, not clever, not deep, nothing to reflect on, not avant garde - no nothing.

What it is: Shallow, pointless, unrealistic, badly acted, badly written, badly photographed, unfinished (it's as if they suddenly ran out of film and money), annoying and with whiny, unbelievably stupid characters.

How on earth this has an almost 6 rating remains a mystery. Something is wrong here... I had to submit this review in an attempt to contribute towards some balance in the rating.

Enter the Wild and you'll fall asleep from boredom

[romneymeredith · 2/10 · 13 July 2019]

I gave it 2 stars for only 2 reasons - first, they are right about that pine (not actually a pine) being the rarest tree in the world and second, they were accurate as to the type of place it's found in (Wollemi National Park).

The actors were fine but they were given garbage to work with - it was so stupid and slow I found it amazing that they were given money to make it. I wouldn't pay the director to film a wedding! Though the actors were fine, given that it's a B movie, their character interactions were, to put it mildly, inexplicable. Why did the guy dump the girl (he gave no real reason)? Why did she then come on to his friend? Why was the drug dealer so passive-aggressive? Why did they seemingly sit around forever (having a compass!) and indulge in inane chatter? How in heck could they maintain the energy level needed to pack out an injured drug dealer without food for DAYS? Why did one of them just decide he was heading out on his own to find the pine after they were lost? Why did he take one of the women's camera? We never saw it again. It turns out this moron did find the pine and then slipped and broke his back, and his friend finds him dying - hey, served him right because he took the mountaineering rope. Speaking of which, the group later spots the rope hanging off a cliff (which was a heckuva find considering they were lost and had no idea where he was) and never questions HOW that guy was able to scale the cliff with his bare hands and why did he leave the rope?

Look, the reason they got lost was because they all descended over a cliff using that mountaineering rope and not one of these morons made sure the last guy down had the map. Not only that, the last guy (the same fool who found the tree) only realized he'd left the map up on the cliff AFTER they'd gone some distance - he could have gone back up the rope (his friend does it later in the movie) so why didn't he check for the map before they left the rope!. So these fools decide that since one of them knows the way so well (apparently memorizing it) that they'll push on ahead. The drug dealer correctly wanted to get out at the nearest gully but these bozos pushed on ahead. Eventually the drug dealer decides to steal the compass, abandon them because they're looking for the camera thief and they stop him and he gets injured in a freak accident, so of course they now have to haul him out.

Even bettah - after the movie has tortured you with stupid people, stupid conversation, awkward situations and slow-as-molasses scenes they up the ante by this ending: the last shot is of a white plume of smoke from a fire they built in the middle of the wilderness without having spotted anyone. I'm serious - the credits roll after that so you have no idea if these clowns were rescued. Personally I hope they won the Darwin Awards.

No, just no.

[Kratistos_94 · 1/10 · 27 August 2018]

Enter The Wild is NOT a horror film. Four friends plus a guy (I don't actually know why he is part of the story) decide to go for a hike to find a wollemia pine (a rare kind of tree). They have no equipment and are completely untrained. As a result, they get lost and start to quarrel over events connected to their lives. This film is more like a drama, there aren't monsters or ghosts. There is actually nothing spooky or creepy in this story. People, don't waste your time watching it.

Worst Australian Movie yet

[dohatabikh · 1/10 · 30 August 2018]

Why is it that Australians are terrible actors? This movie proved to be just that, terrible. Got no words to describe the movie almost 2 hours long and nothing interesting happenes through out the film. Bitch fights here and there and that's it. Waste of film time.

When the wilderness kicks your nonchalant butt

[Wuchakk · 6/10 · 27 June 2023]

Two bests friends, a couple females and a dubious acquaintance take a four-day hike into the barren Blue Mountains, west of Sydney, where they face the challenges of the primitive backwoods, not to mention strained friendships and unrequited love. Can they make it back alive and well?

"Enter the Wild" (2018) is a drama/adventure set in the empty sticks of eastern Australia. It comes in the tradition of "Deliverance" (1972), "Nightmare at Bittercreek" (1988), "The Edge" (1997), "Black Rock" (2012) and "Backcountry" (2014), except that it's more mundane than those. In other words, the merciless sticks are the 'antagonist,' not some perverted hillbillies, paramilitary types, an aggressive bear or a boogeyman with a machete. Imagine the set-up of those films with the dramatic approach of "3 Nights in the Desert" (2014) and you'll have a good idea of this one.

Despite some disappointing ambiguities in the last act, the filmmaking is professional, the acting is convincing and the cinematography of the Blue Mountains is awesome from beginning to end. Ella Scott Lynch as Pippa is a plus. If you love nature, hiking and real-life drama, you'll probably appreciate what this flick has to offer. If you need a contrived threat or an explosion every ten minutes, stay away.

I found out after viewing that this is synonymous with "Monkey Puzzle" from ten years prior (2008). Yes, it's the very same flick. How they got away with rereleasing it as a DIFFERENT movie a decade later is a great mystery.

The film runs 1 hour, 36 minutes, and was shot in the Blue Mountains of New South Wales.

GRADE: B-

A complete joke.

[stupid_industries · 1/10 · 9 October 2018]

For starters, this is an old movie from 2008 called Monkey Puzzle. It was a flop then, and it's a flop now. No character development, extremely weak dialogue and a story that makes me wanna cringe. Why would these untrained, unskilled people try to find some tree that they weren't sure was even there? Throw in the fact they had hardly any food or solid directions? The acting was terrible and, as an Aussie, made me feel sad that other people from around the world would see this garbage.

Wanna see a good Aussie flick? Go see The Castle, Muriel's wedding, Priscilla queen of the desert, Strictly Ballroom etc... Or, go take a dump in a bucket, would be much more entertaining than watching this rubbish.

Hmmm

[tpsn · 5/10 · 7 October 2018]

Slow and not scary at all. I find horror films are a hit and miss. This one really disappointed but of course no film that is filmed well and had effort put in is worth a 1. I just can't bring myself to go above 5. It's passable and that is it.

I'm not sure why this movie is considered a horror or thriller

[beechergatewood-73088 · 2/10 · 5 November 2018]

Let me start out by saying the acting in the movie was actually not too bad. But with a weak plot and empty "fillers" this movie just falls flat on its rear end. Miscatergorized in thriller/horror is its first problem. I've seen scarier moments on nickelodeon's goosebumps and I'm not exaggerating! So many pointless holes and what just seemed like a non existent antagonist. Most of the movie is just conversations in which you still don't feel any connection with any of the characters. I had high hopes for this one but from beginning to end just a whole lot of..........nothing.