Wild Movie Effect

[bsteinberg]

I am curious if the popularity of the movie Wild will create a surge in folks attempting a AT or PCT hike this year. Bill Bryron's book A Walk in the Woods brought national interest to the trail. I did a selection hike the year after the book came out and town folks and toruist who read the book would gravitate to me with interest about my hike.

I'd be curious if those who saw Wild will do the same.

[MuddyWaters]

At least 2 others posts on this topic.
I personally dont think Wild will have much of an effect, its not a very popular movie and it doesnt glamorize hiking or even make it look like fun.

Well find out about the AWITW movie in August 2015 I think.

[HooKooDooKu]

There will be some increase in hikers on the PCT and similar trails over the next few years if for no other reason because a movie like this will simply advertise the fact these trails exist that didn't know about them before.

[burger]

The book already had a huge effect on the PCT. When I thru'd in 2009, there were around 300 starters. This year there were around 1100: http://www.bendbulletin.com/home/2387040-151/going-wild-book-adds-to-pacific-crest-trail# And that was well before the movie came out.

I expect the movie will lead to even bigger crowds on the trail, some in 2015 and even more in 2016. They already had to expand the kick-off party at the start of the trail from one weekend to two separate events to fit all the crowds. It's only going to get busier.

[SouthMark]

Wild will have almost no effect. It is not a hiking movie, It does not portray the best part of the PCT and it portrays hiking as a miserable experience. Only people that may have similar life issues as Cheryl might consider doing some of it for the same reason that she did.

[SouthMark]

PS. Her book was called "Wild" not because she hiked into the wild but because her life had become wild.

[imscotty]

Wild as already grossed $18 million. With an Oscar nomination that could easily double, when it goes to DVD I think it will double again. I know that I am pulling numbers out of my a** but I think that four million people could end up seeing this movie. I know that is not a big success by Hollywood standards, but I think that this could still result in a big impact on the PCT.

First, there is just the awareness factor. A lot of these people will be hearing about the PCT for the first time. Some will dip their toes in the water with a day or section hike. Yes, the movie did not glamorize the trail and all its beauty, but a few days on the real thing might do the trick for some of these people.

Lets say one in a hundred moviegoers identify with Cheryl. They have trauma in their life they want to walk off. Lets say just one in a thousand actually have it together enough to attempt a thru-hike after seeing this movie. That is still (assuming 4 million see it) 4000 new hikers. They might be spread over the next few years, but I think it is very conceivable that the number of PCT thru-hikers could double as a result of this movie.

I am not saying this is necessarily a bad thing. But I think it is wise that the PCT Association is ahead of the curve and seem to be working on education for new PCT hikers.

[Traveler]

The book already had a huge effect on the PCT. When I thru'd in 2009, there were around 300 starters. This year there were around 1100: http://www.bendbulletin.com/home/2387040-151/going-wild-book-adds-to-pacific-crest-trail# And that was well before the movie came out.

I expect the movie will lead to even bigger crowds on the trail, some in 2015 and even more in 2016. They already had to expand the kick-off party at the start of the trail from one weekend to two separate events to fit all the crowds. It's only going to get busier.

I think there are a lot more drivers that are increasing long trail starts than a book or movie about drug recovery and scattered life woes that uses the PCT as a backdrop to tell a story. While books and movies can be sources, in my view You Tube is a huge contributor to trail interests given how many "What I Did on my Summer Vacation" films are posted every year about trail adventures and product/use reviews.

There are other motivation crossroads as well, few people go from the couch to back country activities based on a casual interest from a book or movie. Enter big outdoor retailers as a connecting point for these folks and a large part of interest development, maneuvering someone who comes in the store into back country pursuits is a marketing goal of high measure given the potential for each of those people to spend a few thousand dollars in the process.

In the trail journals and WB announcements of start dates, I don't see many saying "I have dreamed of doing this since I read Walk in the Woods", or "I was inspired by Reese Witherspoon to do a thru hike". Not even major headlines seem to be a major driver either, as you rarely hear someone say, "I want to meet my Argentinian soul mate on the ol' Appalachian Trail".

Though I agree trail use has gone up, it's still fairly rare to run across a lot of people on these trails, despite the parties.

[kayak karl]

i think it has increased more threads on hiking forums then anything else and not from new members. just something to talk about and prove their ability to project the future :)

[MuddyWaters]

i think it has increased more threads on hiking forums then anything else and not from new members. just something to talk about and prove their ability to project the future :)

Well, things have been slow lately. If the mods would just seed some fake posts from newbies asking if they should bring a gun, we wouldnt have to talk cinema.

[kayak karl]

Well, things have been slow lately. If the mods would just seed some fake posts from newbies asking if they should bring a gun, we wouldnt have to talk cinema. i say we just run with the dogs for now :)

[burger]

I think there are a lot more drivers that are increasing long trail starts than a book or movie about drug recovery and scattered life woes that uses the PCT as a backdrop to tell a story. While books and movies can be sources, in my view You Tube is a huge contributor to trail interests given how many "What I Did on my Summer Vacation" films are posted every year about trail adventures and product/use reviews.
The evidence proves you wrong. The number of PCT hikers has increased by over 300% since 2009. The number of AT thru-hikers has increased by about 60% over that same time: http://www.baxterstateparkauthority.com/pdf/meetingAuthority/Dec162014/AT%20Ron%20Tipton%20Wendy%20Janssen%20letter%2011% 2019%202014%20scanned.pdf. If this was just a Youtube effect, then you'd expect both trails to have increased by the same amount. Wild (the book) brought the PCT to the attention of a lot of people who had never even heard of long-distance hiking. As pointed out above, far more people will see the movie or at least hear about it than read the book, so PCT numbers will surely go up even more.

I don't understand why so many people are in denial over the fact that a book or movie can increase number of long-distance hikers. The same thing happened with AWITW in the late 90s.

[Connie]

I had never heard of Baxter State Park, until the thread at this forum.

In contrast, the AT is heard of worldwide, I would think, for the most part because of White Blaze forum.

Any book, any film, any YouTube will "impact" the known trails, and not the less known trails and parks.

For example, if I wanted to hike in the Canadian Rocky Mountains, I do not know the name of places, the districts, the government entities with rules for hiking and camping. I don't know how to begin to inquire. Let's see: there are Provincial parks and National parks, right?

[MuddyWaters]

The evidence proves you wrong. The number of PCT hikers has increased by over 300% since 2009. The number of AT thru-hikers has increased by about 60% over that same time: http://www.baxterstateparkauthority.com/pdf/meetingAuthority/Dec162014/AT%20Ron%20Tipton%20Wendy%20Janssen%20letter%2011% 2019%202014%20scanned.pdf. If this was just a Youtube effect, then you'd expect both trails to have increased by the same amount. Wild (the book) brought the PCT to the attention of a lot of people who had never even heard of long-distance hiking. As pointed out above, far more people will see the movie or at least hear about it than read the book, so PCT numbers will surely go up even more.

I don't understand why so many people are in denial over the fact that a book or movie can increase number of long-distance hikers. The same thing happened with AWITW in the late 90s.

I dont think anyones in denial, it obviously can.
People are only speculating about how much it will


AWITW was a NY times bestseller, WILD the movie, doesnt seem to be that popular.

We will have to wait and see what AWITW brings. I though it would suck, but now Im not so sure.
Just look at these geriatrics. Old men can be funny, just because they are bitchy old men.

29358

[Jeff]

In contrast, the AT is heard of worldwide, I would think, for the most part because of White Blaze forum.

Whiteblaze is a very useful hiking forum, but suprisingly more than half the hikers we host have never heard of Whiteblaze.net.

[MuddyWaters]

Whiteblaze is a very useful hiking forum, but suprisingly more than half the hikers we host have never heard of Whiteblaze.net.

I would bet that more than half of thru hikers starting could not tell you what ATC stands for either, even when they could probably guess the AT part.

[bsteinberg]

With but Wild and AWITW coming out, it's a hiking year in film. I didn't realize AWITW was coming out this year in Augs during my actually hike. Not sure if it will bring more folks on the trail, but fans of the films will be intrigued when/if they see hikers.

"Are you hiking the trail? I say AWITW. Did you see it?"

I usually enjoy the extra attention. The modest of popularity of the films may give hikers a bump in tourist attention. I imagine being flagged down for photo opts more than usually considering everyone now has a camera phone.

I will say that I plan to see AWITW during my hike with any fellow hikers I can drag to it for a fun town night out.

Why not? When is there a movie coming out about exactly what you are doing while you are doing it?

[shakey_snake]

I'd guess that Wild will have about the same effect on our long distance trails that it has on heroin use.

The A Walk in the Woods movie is going to have a much larger effect.

[ColleenGoldhorn]

I saw Wild and it made me actually want to never hike ever again. Not to mention that the movie is not very popular. I have seven movie theaters within a half hour of my house and it only played at one

[Traveler]

The evidence proves you wrong. The number of PCT hikers has increased by over 300% since 2009. The number of AT thru-hikers has increased by about 60% over that same time: http://www.baxterstateparkauthority.com/pdf/meetingAuthority/Dec162014/AT%20Ron%20Tipton%20Wendy%20Janssen%20letter%2011% 2019%202014%20scanned.pdf. If this was just a Youtube effect, then you'd expect both trails to have increased by the same amount. Wild (the book) brought the PCT to the attention of a lot of people who had never even heard of long-distance hiking. As pointed out above, far more people will see the movie or at least hear about it than read the book, so PCT numbers will surely go up even more.

I don't understand why so many people are in denial over the fact that a book or movie can increase number of long-distance hikers. The same thing happened with AWITW in the late 90s.

My comment was that other motivational elements to this increase outside of a movie or book. However, if there are interviews with all these hikers that develops statistics on this percentage increase being from a specific book or a movie, I would like to see that data. My suggestion was there are more sources to "hear about" these trails than a movie or a book. I am not in "denial", while I understand there is a connection with hollywood and books, I recognize other avenues of motivation to those unfamiliar with these trails, which may be more at work on a daily basis.

[Colter]

The book has had a HUGE impact on the number of PCT starters. I see no reason the movie won't have an impact as well.

As to whether or not the movie makes the PCT (or AT) look like fun? Most people aren't aware of the PCT or haven't given it a thought. This will raise awareness to millions. Even if a tiny fraction thru-hike as a result, it will have a big impact.

That said, hiking the PCT will still be an awesome experience. Often people are the best part of the experience. There are many ways to avoid people if one so chooses.

[Traveler]

The book has had a HUGE impact on the number of PCT starters. I see no reason the movie won't have an impact as well.

As to whether or not the movie makes the PCT (or AT) look like fun? Most people aren't aware of the PCT or haven't given it a thought. This will raise awareness to millions. Even if a tiny fraction thru-hike as a result, it will have a big impact.

That said, hiking the PCT will still be an awesome experience. Often people are the best part of the experience. There are many ways to avoid people if one so chooses.

I have heard that claim, but have not seen a lot to substantiate it. I have also heard the economy tanking in 2009 had a huge impact on the numbers that suddenly spiked that year as well. I don't claim movies or books have no impact, only that there are a number of different avenues people will become aware, then motivated to walk these trails.

[burger]

I have heard that claim, but have not seen a lot to substantiate it. I have also heard the economy tanking in 2009 had a huge impact on the numbers that suddenly spiked that year as well. I don't claim movies or books have no impact, only that there are a number of different avenues people will become aware, then motivated to walk these trails.
If you're right, then you need to explain to me why the PCT had a huge spike in hikers the last couple of years while the AT has shown the same modest, steady increases that it had been showing for 10 years or so. Wild (the book) just makes the most sense. Your explanation should have numbers of AT thru-hikers skyrocketing, too, and that hasn't happened.

And if you want more evidence, then go down to Campo next April and ask all the thru-hikers. Because besides that, correlation is the best and only evidence we're going to get.

[Traveler]

If you're right, then you need to explain to me why the PCT had a huge spike in hikers the last couple of years while the AT has shown the same modest, steady increases that it had been showing for 10 years or so. Wild (the book) just makes the most sense. Your explanation should have numbers of AT thru-hikers skyrocketing, too, and that hasn't happened.

And if you want more evidence, then go down to Campo next April and ask all the thru-hikers. Because besides that, correlation is the best and only evidence we're going to get.

Given there is no statistical correlation to a specific motivator via interviews with hikers, the claim that a movie alone was the chief motivator is anecdotal at best, without data its difficult to support as the prominent motivator. There are any number of motivations for taking up long distance hikes, I think it fair to say hollywood movies and books add to the allure, along with a lot of other sources. Looking at the ATC numbers of 2000 milers (in decades), there appears to be a fairly predictable increase every decade that movies would not necessarily account for;

1970s 770
1980s 1422
1990s 3315
2000s 5890

I can't find similar information on the PCT outside of there being some 3,300 people who have completed the 2,600 mile trek since records started. I do agree its pretty clear by the numbers something causes long distance hikers to increase at roughly twice the previous decade numbers. It may be something as simple as section hikers taking a decade or two to reach the 2100 or 2600 mile brass ring, or that there are more kids in or graduating college that have the time for a thru hike adventure, but statistics are foggy in that regard.

I sure don't mean to quarrel, but just as there are many different types of people on these trails, there are equally as many motivations at play. I just don't believe its fair to lay that blame at the feet of an author or a film producer and not look at all the other sources with equality.

[Miner]

I do think the economy has had some influence on the numbers on long trails of late and as more people hopefully re-enter the workforce in the next few years, less will have time for a long hike. But it it was reading the the book "A Walk in the Woods" back in the late 90's that made me realize that thru-hiking a trail was even possible and many people did it. So yes, in many ways, reading a book had a big influence on creating my desire to thru-hike the PCT and AT. So I have to believe that some of the huge spike in numbers over the past 3 years on the PCT is related to the book Wild (I also hiked in 2009). I often attend the ADZPCTKO event and have seen the number of hikers skyrocket. And from talking to a couple of first time thru-hikers, many did read Wild and it had at least some influence on their choice to thru-hike. No idea about the majority since it's impossible for one person to talk to the vast majority of people.

The PCTA though has really been pushing the Wild/PCT connection (to the point of being annoying). I can understand why though as it's free publicity for the trail. The more known the PCT is, the easier it is for them to shake money from the government for the trail and to get donations.

[burger]

Given there is no statistical correlation to a specific motivator via interviews with hikers, the claim that a movie alone was the chief motivator is anecdotal at best, without data its difficult to support as the prominent motivator. There are any number of motivations for taking up long distance hikes, I think it fair to say hollywood movies and books add to the allure, along with a lot of other sources. Looking at the ATC numbers of 2000 milers (in decades), there appears to be a fairly predictable increase every decade that movies would not necessarily account for;

1970s 770
1980s 1422
1990s 3315
2000s 5890

I can't find similar information on the PCT outside of there being some 3,300 people who have completed the 2,600 mile trek since records started. I do agree its pretty clear by the numbers something causes long distance hikers to increase at roughly twice the previous decade numbers. It may be something as simple as section hikers taking a decade or two to reach the 2100 or 2600 mile brass ring, or that there are more kids in or graduating college that have the time for a thru hike adventure, but statistics are foggy in that regard.

I sure don't mean to quarrel, but just as there are many different types of people on these trails, there are equally as many motivations at play. I just don't believe its fair to lay that blame at the feet of an author or a film producer and not look at all the other sources with equality.

Sorry, but your ATC decade data are just useless. First, breakdowns by 10 years don't allow you to look at individual events. I saw a post earlier (I can't recall where) that showed the number of starters at Amicalola by year and there was a big jump after Bill Bryson's book came out. If I find that post, I will link to it, but it is probably lost in the whiteblaze archives somewhere.

Also, the number of 2000 milers is not the number of attempted thru-hikers. Because the completion rate is around 20-30% and the number varies a lot depending on the weather, the more relevant statistic is the number of starters, not the number of finishers.

Really, though, your numbers support my conclusion of a steady and constant gain in thru-hiker numbers over time on the AT. How do you explain how PCT numbers have gone up from 300 in 2009 to 1100 last year (and the 1100 is just NOBOS---don't know how many SOBOs there were)? Wild has to be part of the explanation. It's not as if the internet or youtube were just invented in 2010.

If you were correct about Wild not being important, then the rate of increase should be about the same on the AT and PCT. Check out the numbers in that Baxter SP letter: there is no big spike in AT numbers recently. Why is there a big spike in PCT numbers but not AT hikers the last 4 years??? Answer that question, please.

Anyway, you keep ignoring what I write, and we've wasted enough threadspace already, so this is my last post here. Happy new year!

[Traveler]

Sorry, but your ATC decade data are just useless. First, breakdowns by 10 years don't allow you to look at individual events. I saw a post earlier (I can't recall where) that showed the number of starters at Amicalola by year and there was a big jump after Bill Bryson's book came out. If I find that post, I will link to it, but it is probably lost in the whiteblaze archives somewhere.

Also, the number of 2000 milers is not the number of attempted thru-hikers. Because the completion rate is around 20-30% and the number varies a lot depending on the weather, the more relevant statistic is the number of starters, not the number of finishers.

Really, though, your numbers support my conclusion of a steady and constant gain in thru-hiker numbers over time on the AT. How do you explain how PCT numbers have gone up from 300 in 2009 to 1100 last year (and the 1100 is just NOBOS---don't know how many SOBOs there were)? Wild has to be part of the explanation. It's not as if the internet or youtube were just invented in 2010.

If you were correct about Wild not being important, then the rate of increase should be about the same on the AT and PCT. Check out the numbers in that Baxter SP letter: there is no big spike in AT numbers recently. Why is there a big spike in PCT numbers but not AT hikers the last 4 years??? Answer that question, please.

Anyway, you keep ignoring what I write, and we've wasted enough threadspace already, so this is my last post here. Happy new year!

Suit yourself.

[RainbowDash]

I've been wanting to hike the AT since middle school so you can thank my middle school English teacher for that.

[i'mthru]

I disagree that with the assessment that the film portrays hiking as "a miserable experience." Yeah, it shows her dealing with adversity from being inexperienced, but she gets advice, learns and adapts too. She is shown admiring some breathtaking scenery, connecting with nature (the fox and the frogs), sharing in camaraderie with fellow hikers, and receiving trail magic from a farmer and his wife. The film was not told as a cautionary tale in any way as it concerns her actual hike. The hike was her therapy.

[colorado_rob]

I disagree that with the assessment that the film portrays hiking as "a miserable experience." Yeah, it shows her dealing with adversity from being inexperienced, but she gets advice, learns and adapts too. She is shown admiring some breathtaking scenery, connecting with nature (the fox and the frogs), sharing in camaraderie with fellow hikers, and receiving trail magic from a farmer and his wife. The film was not told as a cautionary tale in any way as it concerns her actual hike. The hike was her therapy.Agreed. No idea why people keep saying this, I can only guess that they are themselves miserable when doing long distance hiking.

In my group of pals, everyone who has seen the movie wants to try a long-distance hike now, mostly the PCT or CT. So, I suppose this movie will create a greater demand, unless, of course, more people are like those that say Wild makes hiking look miserable than I think.

By the way, more people want to do a long distance hike is a GOOD thing, not a negative.

[Miner]

By the way, more people want to do a long distance hike is a GOOD thing, not a negative.

It is a good thing, providing that the extra people spread out and don't all want to hike the same section at the same time. Unfortunately, on the PCT, most people want to start around the same time which can make the added numbers a negative thing.

The issue on the PCT is that it passes through 37 designated wilderness areas, a couple state parks, and 7 national parks that consider their backcountry to be wilderness areas. As part of their mandate, they are trying to preserve the wilderness experience for their visitors. Thus they limit party sizes and in popular areas and may limit the number of people starting at a trail head with daily quotas. The PCTA has done a good job in negotiating with all these areas for a One Permit to Rule Them All for PCT hikers doing 500 miles or more and thus a hiker doesn't need to apply for individual permits with fix entry/exit dates. As someone who lives along the southern end of the trail, the larger numbers in recent years means that very large groups of hikers form quickly and easily exceed the party limit sizes (and there are multiples of these groups going through at the same time).

The main concerns are as follows:

Unlike the AT, a lot of people do hike the PCT for the scenery and wilderness experience and not to party their way north. And thru-hikers aren't the only users. Some people want solitude. I know I often did when I thru-hiked. And one of the purposes of designated wilderness areas is to allow people to get just that. As the numbers were smaller and I hiked at least a week behind the main herd, I didn't have a lot of trouble finding it when I wanted it. But the numbers are now almost 4x greater in just 6 years and the concern is the movie will further increase that.
Only some of the wilderness areas in Southern California currently require permits, but the continued increase in the already large amount of hiker traffic in spring will eventually cause a change to that as the large amount of PCT hikers are already compromising the Wilderness Experience that the agencies are trying to protect. The managing agencies may finally say enough is enough and start restricting access. PCT hikers aren't the only users of these areas and other hikers have a right to expect a wilderness experience and not a vast migration of people.
For the same reason, the wilderness areas and national parks along the entire trail may cancel their agreement with the PCTA in allowing them to issue a single thru-hiking permit to have better control of the number of people entering a trailhead on a given day due to the increase. If this happens, PCT hikers will have to apply and possibly wait for days before being allowed to enter some wilderness areas and national parks.
The large numbers of hikers grouped together hit town all at the same time overwhelming services and trail angels. Most towns the PCT passes near are small and can't handle very large numbers well.
There are also bad apples in every group (not just hikers). The more hikers in one place means the more of these negative elements are in one place at the same time. And many people, when they get in a large group become rowdy. People tend to remember the negative experiences better then the other 99% positives ones. So people having to deal with several negative incidences in a single day, instead of just 1 or 2, may turn against the hiking community even though the vast majority of hikers are good people. How hikers are treated in town is determined by those that came before them.


These concerns have been debated in the PCT community for several years, but the numbers of hikers continues to grow. The ADZPCTKO doesn't really help matters since it causes a large number of hikers to start within a short period each other; which is why there are vocal people against that gathering as well. The ADZPCTKO is not an official PCTA or any land governing agency event. It's done by private organizers of past hikers who have been just as vocal in keeping it. And it is a fun event though too crowded in the past 4 years. I came to my first event 2 years before I hiked, but there is no longer room for such people anymore. This is a shame as an inexperienced person can learn a lot there and incorporate it into their planning. By the time you are starting the trail, it's too late to change much so it's not of much use to a current thru-hiker other then as a fun gathering of other hikers just as fearful of what lies ahead as you.

There would not be as much controversy if more people would stop starting during the last 2 weeks of April and the 1st week of May all centered around the ADZPCTKO like a bell curve. The window is actually a few weeks wider most years. People doing a speed hike would be better off starting in late May/early June; most of the speed records over the last decade were done by people doing just that since they miss most of the snow of the Sierra Nevada and they finish before winter snow comes. People starting without training or experience would be better off starting earlier and taking a slower pace instead of pushing themselves like it's a race to Kennedy Meadows and hitting the Siera too early (while it has more snow) while increasing their risk of injury from pushing too hard too soon. A lot of hikers get overuse injuries, stress fractures, pulled tendons/muscles during the first 2-3 weeks as a result. You see them limping in to Idyllwild and Big Bear every year.

[Connie]

It is no fun to have to get a reservation for California parks: Credit card. Early registration, as much as months ahead. I think that is the fear: reservation required.

It is very threatening to the experience of hiking in a natural environment to have party-goers and speed hikers threaten that with their end-goal mind set.

As far as I am concerned, they could be "hiking" dirt roads or running marathons and starting up new long distance marathons rather than overuse the trails.

There really isn't that much that is a natural environment to experience, what with clear-cuts, selective logging, leased public land for grazing.

Do we see hikers in natural areas in movies, on YouTube, and in Blogs? No.

The Nature tv is all "survivalism" or "sentimentality".

I don't think the producers of tv or film have experienced a natural environment.

We are natural. How could we know that without experiencing a natural environment?

No, we "think" "this or that" is "natural".

<very artificial>

[FlyFishNut]

Well, I remember when the movie "A River Runs Through It" came out and flyfishing went from unknown to stylish.

The only issue I had was that etiquette went out the window and you had guys walking right up next to you instead of yielding to the spot you were fishing. It was pretty obnoxious there for a while.

Flyfishing (especially for trout) appealed to the uppity types who loved to buy a ton of Orvis gear and fish once or twice a year with a guide and brag about being great flyfisherman.

I doubt that Wild will have that same effect b/c one can't be a lazy poser but for so long and the trail will have it's way with you:). In Flyfishing, unless you are saltwater flyfishing and need to actually cast into the wind or if you hike your ass off into some nice wild trout water - you can simply get out of your car at a stocked stream or pay a guide to put you on fish - either of which is tacky.

So, my two cents is the fair weather types will be weeded out fairly quickly OR on a positive note, some folks will develop a love and appreciation for backpacking and be hooked.

[SouthMark]

I think that new rules should be implemented for ALL hiking trails. No permits needed just a HIKING LICENSE needed by EVERY hiker. You would have to take a hikers test to get a license. (Sarcasm)

[lilysafox]

Before I saw the movie, my girlfriend and I were worried about the same thing. I was concerned that the movie would interest people in hiking and that it would interfere with our hike in 2016. Once I saw the movie I wasnt so much concerned about it anymore because the movie doesn't make hiking look fun. It shows the hard part of it, not the fun and exciting part of the hike.