Backcountry

The film does not tell us much about the central couple, and spending an hour with them wandering in the woods and watching them argue with each other will not bring much pleasure to the audience. But from the moment things start to be dramatic (and brutal and cruel), the tension rises and the last third is worth it. There is some very confusing editing in key scenes, but it is rescued by the terrifying screams of the victim, from which you can feel their agony. Ambient music and the occasional psychedelic shots that match it seem strange in a wildlife film, but they’re acceptable. (27.03.2015)

Not even Bear Grylls can prepare you for some situations. The real terror, which will make you put your hand over your eyes, comes only after an hour, but the preceding minutes will still keep you on the edge of your seat. With its subjective shots, close-ups of the protagonists’ faces and shallow depth of field, Backcountry effectively evokes a feeling of a constant threat of uncertain origin. We can infer exactly what and from whom the central couple are under threat and how much danger they are in. The hour-long build-up also serves to introduce Jenn and Alex, to whom we are not indifferent thanks to the fact that they act sensibly (they have rational justifications for most of the decisions that turn out to be wrong) and, at the same time, they are not perfect, but they are completely honest with each other. With its visceral intensity, the final act is thus exhausting not only physically, but also emotionally. Backcountry is proof that even with a very simple concept, it is possible to make a truly brilliant and brutal survival movie that is consistent and convincing, compared to which Wild with Reese Witherspoon, for example, seems like a casual walk in the park. 85% (01.01.2021)

A very realistic and minimalist survival flick, the script can’t have been more than five pages long. I think that’s what it must look like when two people get lost while camping in the wilderness and get attacked by a bear on their way back. The level of credibility and crudeness is very high in Backcountry, including those “main” scenes when the bear attacks. It’s on a completely different level (in conception and ambition) that this year’s Grizzly, fortunately so, I must say. My only quibbles are the self-serving and pointless episodes with the foreigner and that the survival part “proper” begins rather late. Edit: I sometimes think about this film, even a year later, and that main attack scene still remains very much alive. Quality. (26.03.2015)

Deliverance with a bear. The script is fairly tame, but just enough to maintain credibility, and at the right moments, to stretch to the limit the negative feelings about the suffering of the two main characters. The bear attack scene is one of the most shocking and intense I've ever seen in film; after seeing it, nobody can convince me to go hiking in the countryside. (11.08.2017)

A terrible bore with two total morons. Or maybe also a yuppie horror movie about how if you get off a trail in the countryside featuring half-meter high signs in the trees telling you where to unload your kayak, where to pitch your tent, and where to shit, you can't avoid being mutilated. (22.07.2015)

There are only a few of those actors here. Four who actually have some space. But "Backcountry" doesn't mind that at all. Its strength lies in how it utilizes beautiful nature for drama, which mostly happens off camera, but that definitely doesn't detract from it. On the contrary, there is power in that as well. It's just a shame that the atmosphere isn't a little more intense. Nevertheless, a successful film. (11.11.2015)

Much better than last year's thematically similar Grizzly. But Backcountry does without the well-known actors and the perfectly trained bear Bart (who can play even the most subtle nuances of expression). While the central bear doesn't look all that menacing on the surface, can't even stand on its hind legs properly, and is even noticeably artificial in some close-ups, he's still much more frightening by acting quite authentically. It's not an unconvincingly intelligent monster that takes revenge and systematically murders people, as in the aforementioned Grizzly, but a normal hungry animal roaming the woods that scares with its unpredictability. The first half is tedious and it's a shame the film doesn't start building tension much earlier. The bear attack, which is visible in only a few shots, is relatively brief but all the more believable. And I imagine that's probably how it would have played out in reality. The whole tent scene, by the way, reminded me of a similarly chilling moment in Herzog's documentary Grizzly Man. (30.03.2015)