1/10
It's wet, very wet.
14 February 2024
Warning: Spoilers
This film shows just what is wrong with Australian film making. It looks like a telemovie. It's just not the type of film which creates any sense of a 'night out at the cinema'. There is nothing epic or grand about it. It is a dull, plodding story told by very pedestrian actors who just seem to be there for the money.

Could Robert Connelly really look at the finished product and say, 'That's a winner! That's going to attract large audiences and make a stack of money.'

If he thinks that . . But no, let's not insult his judgement. He must know it is not going to be a huge smash.

But as one of the producers, surely Eric Bana knew it was pretty poor? Why didn't he object?

Have all these people lost their sense of quality? The broad reader consensus is that the second Dry book was not as good as the first, yet the film was still made. Why?

I saw it 4 days after release, in a large cinema on a hot Melbourne day when going to the movies is an attractive activity. Yet, there were 5 people in the audience.

After seeing it, I compared it with other films I have seen recently, including: Saltburn, Napoleon, Fallen Leaves and Anatomy of a Fall.

Those films all take you on a journey and have something to say. Force of Nature you on a soggy walk in the bush with some very boring people. Avoid.
14 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed