Wuchak
"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
madsen_holly
I loved this movie. The actors were great and this is not a continuation of the last movie, it simply is just a movie that is supposed to have a similar story line. I cant get enough of it. It is the perfect blend of humor, adventure, comedy and romance. They have selected the best actors for this role because they all seem to play off of each other bringing out the best in each of them. I think its amazing that Oliver James is able to hide his accent so well, it shows that he has talent and is willing to expand his skills. A person watching this should view it as a completely new movie enjoying the humor and the beauty of nature.
Caleb Mitchell
With out a paddle natures calling was a terrible movie i disliked it very much. it took the old movie which was awesome and made a complete knock off of it. it had the same story with a few quarks to it. the director Ellory Elkayem took and ruined the first (directed by Steven Brill) now if they had the original cast it would have been a great sequel. or if Steven Brill was directing it at least. but why take a great movie and completely destroy its title! i thought the movie was bad. if there was a zero rating for this movie i would have gave it that! alls i would want is the original cast i don't even think they tried to get them in the project. therefore without a paddle natures calling was bad!
chellethecat-1
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.
AD
