Without a Paddle: Nature's Calling

"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

My little sister accidentally rented this movie thinking it would be as funny as the original Without a Paddle film. However, its only use is as a Frisbee, and even then it doesn't fly straight. Avoid. The acting was abysmal, a total joke to be honest. The plot was non- existent, and the movie was simply made up of lame joke after lame, stinking joke. Oliver James used to be good, in 'What a Girl Wants,' he is a half decent actor and is rather hot too, but this film is simply a great disappointment if you were watching it only for him. And really, that seems like the only reason anyone would watch this movie, because honestly, you would be better off cleaning the bathroom or writing a ten-page essay as this would be both more entertaining, and a better use of your time. Sure, if you're bored out of your mind, it is vaguely possible you might gain some slight entertainment value from this film, but you would have to be an immensely sad, lame-humoured person for such an impossibility to occur.

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.

Even a bad comedy can be good sometimes. Not this one though - not even close.

Terrible story, terrible cinematography, terrible continuity, terrible casting. This is one of the worst movies I've ever seen.

Oh - and please - was there not one Canadian any where near the shooting of this film to teach the director that Canadians do not talk as though they were portrayed in this movie. The use of the sound "eh" and the 'sayings' (like "Holy Halifax") were contrived and - well, okay, I'm going to use a bad word: stupid. It was so annoying and so ridiculous, it was hard to even get close to the end without eye rolling and chucking popcorn at the screen. Is it really so challenging to portray a Canadian? After all, we are America's closest and largest neighbour and have thousands of Canadians working in Hollywood alone. This wasn't funny, it was lazy writing and unacceptable.

I'll be sure to avoid anything with these actors and directors in the future.

Being a teen I thought this movie would be hilarious but I was wrong.Like others have said I enjoyed the first movie but this has to be the worse sequel I have ever seen.... I guess I have to say that no other movies are as funny as Superbad but there are still funny movies but this is clearly not one of them Do not waste your time! I usually sit through movies and do not complain but there was nothing good in this movie at all. The acting was not horrible but the plot had nothing and there was no excitement! Ido not think I laughed during this film once.I would have turned it off but paying $5 to rent it I was finishing it!