Review of Arctic

Arctic (2018)
6/10
Frustrating Screenplay For Any Survivalist...Or Person With Basic Common Sense
16 August 2019
Warning: Spoilers
Water, shelter, food - the three most important elements to survival. While short on dialogue, this film offers more than enough details for the viewer to establish the structure: Our protagonist has crashed in the artic and is awaiting rescue, with all three survival elements present. He has water from snow melt, shelter in the airplane fuselage, and a very sustainable supply of food (ice fishing).

***Spoilers*** The first outside contact comes via a rescue helicopter. In the real world, after about two weeks any search party is called off, so we can surmise the protagonist has not been crashed and lost longer than two weeks. The film reaches first climax when said rescue helicopter discovers our hero, only to crash after a windstorm arrives. After our protagonist rescues the lone helicopter crash survivor, does our hero once try using the helicopter's radio or try salvaging it? Nope. Instead our protagonist doubles down on the stupidity and tries to hike out back to civilization - with an unconscious person in tow via dog sled! Why would he choose to leave all the basic survival needs he has? And more importantly, why leave when you know civilization is now going to be sending a new search and rescue party for both you and the newly crashed helicopter? This type of bad decision making ultimately leaves any halfway educated viewer frustrated, with the film's ending feeling undeserved.
56 out of 96 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed