The ATC has gone mad

[Skyline]

I am surprised that it grossed $30 million. Where I live, the theatre playing AWITW was sparsely attended for its two-week run according to someone I know who works there. The night I saw it at the same multiplex, myself and a friend had the theatre to ourselves. We could, and did, talk aloud without disturbing anyone.

Still, I'd like to see the demographics behind the $30 million. Were most of them potential hikers? Would many of the moviegoers be inspired to try a hike of any length on the AT? Guess we'll find out soon enough...

[Traveler]

It was a shame Newman became ill about the time Redford wanted to do the film, I think a final "buddy" film with those two would have been a heck of an attraction. But fate interrupted and the movie lost some of its luster as the screenplay was rewritten.

However, I doubt a tale of two old acquaintances using the AT as a backdrop will have the same impact as the internet and the 82,000 video diaries, hiking how-to videos, hike along videos, and other websites, blogs, and promotional stuff have. If people are looking for a "bad guy" in luring all these people to the AT, a quick look at Youtube will find far more than a guy who wrote a book that many people have never read, which some other famous guy made a movie of even less went to see.

Adding to the mix, large outfitters like REI who continually promote long distance elements in hiking, canoe/kayak trips, and mountaineering, the amount of promotion that occurs during the year makes AWITW pale in comparison. The history of trail population is pretty clear in its routinely escalating numbers long before AWITW, due to promotional activities, one on one awareness, and media access for people inclined to discover such things. I don't see that changing anytime soon, nor do I see the bubble crowd conditions easing in the foreseeable future.

[shelterbuilder]

No, the ATC has NOT gone mad. Given the inevitable nature of the movie's release, they did the only thing that they could do: mitigation, both before and after the fact. I guess it's true that you can't please all of the people all of the time. (B. M. would not have been pleased to see an A.T. without work camps dotting the landscape.) Bobbleheads are a "groaner" no matter where they rear their ugly heads. Personally, I didn't care much for the book, but I thought that the movie was a hoot! HYOH, people.

[Sarcasm the elf]

I have a suspicion that the movie may have more of an impact once it hits HBO/netflix and the like. I know a fair number of people who got interested in hiking due to the Into The Wild movie, not so much because of MCCandle's story as because of the way the movie depcited the adventure. There are a lot of people with wanderlust who have simply never conceived that they could throw on a pack and tramp from place to place. I feel that AWITW will have the same effect on a fair number of people who catch it by chance once it's on cable.

[shelterbuilder]

Interesting thought. Personally, I don't do the HBO/Netflix thing - I prefer to make movie night a REAL trip to the movies (the popcorn is better!). It will be interesting to see if your idea is true. I know that ATC is expecting a mad rush NOBO this coming Spring....

I have a suspicion that the movie may have more of an impact once it hits HBO/netflix and the like. I know a fair number of people who got interested in hiking due to the Into The Wild movie, not so much because of MCCandle's story as because of the way the movie depcited the adventure. There are a lot of people with wanderlust who have simply never conceived that they could throw on a pack and tramp from place to place. I feel that AWITW will have the same effect on a fair number of people who catch it by chance once it's on cable.

[Lugnut]

Other than a couple picturesque views it didn't show them having much fun with the actual hiking part. I doubt it will convince many to emulate their experience.

[4eyedbuzzard]

...However, I doubt a tale of two old acquaintances using the AT as a backdrop will have the same impact as the internet and the 82,000 video diaries, hiking how-to videos, hike along videos, and other websites, blogs, and promotional stuff have. If people are looking for a "bad guy" in luring all these people to the AT, a quick look at Youtube will find far more than a guy who wrote a book that many people have never read, which some other famous guy made a movie of even less went to see.

Adding to the mix, large outfitters like REI who continually promote long distance elements in hiking, canoe/kayak trips, and mountaineering, the amount of promotion that occurs during the year makes AWITW pale in comparison. The history of trail population is pretty clear in its routinely escalating numbers long before AWITW, due to promotional activities, one on one awareness, and media access for people inclined to discover such things. I don't see that changing anytime soon, nor do I see the bubble crowd conditions easing in the foreseeable future.

Other than a couple picturesque views it didn't show them having much fun with the actual hiking part. I doubt it will convince many to emulate their experience.

I don't see AWITW increasing AT traffic as much as is feared by some either. Okay, maybe it will be more crowded from Springer to Neel Gap. It might even provide a boon to shuttlers ferrying people out and back to Hartsfield. But it will be nothing like the 10 fold increase witnessed from 1970 to 1980, a lot of which was attributed to (blamed on) Ed Garvey's book, "Appalachian Hiker". Garvey's book coincided with an already growing back to nature movement, increases in leisure time, etc., that no doubt also fueled this massive increase. The social climate just isn't the same. Typically from 1980 on the number of thru-hikers has doubled every decade since 1980, and no doubt there will continue to be growth. The book hasn't spurred that much increase since publication, nor do I think the movie will either. The social climate just isn't conducive to it.

[rickb]

It wasn't long ago that you would tell someone you hiked the AT and they would not have a clue what the heck you were talking about.

I am sure that still holds true more than we realize-- perhaps in other countries. The movie has got to raise awareness across the globe. And that has to translate into more traffic.

Some of those learning about the AT will turn to the ATC.

Not many will ever see their bobble head and the CONTINUED embrace of all things Robert Redford and Bill Bryson, thankfully. Hopefully that contact, in whatever form it takes, will lead to an introduction to a more authentic introduction to the Trail.

In the end the Bobble Head mentality will pass -- or stay, who knows. But lest anyone think I am anti Bryson, please let me assure everyone I am not. It's just a matter of time and place.

Sort of like how one can love Dunkin Donuts and Little Debbie's (especially) but still be aghast if you saw them being served at a conference for the American Diabetes Association.

[Professor Paul]

I must confess to being a bit surprised and disappointed with the tone of many of the posts on this thread. I happened to get to know the AT because I grew up in its shadow, so it was always kind of "there" for me. Who cares if others get to know it from a book or a movie or in any other fashion? If people are made happier by hiking or even driving past the trail, and if that experience was made possible because they watched a boring movie, then that boring movie did something good in my view. One of the things I had always found appealing about the hiking culture (other than the "hiking" part) was its deep tolerance and respect for the diversity of people and nature. Hikers always seemed to be to be just a little bit more relaxed and open-minded than most.

Many of the comments here, by contrast are not only judgmental--highly judgmental--but would be smarmy, arrogant and obnoxious if the topic were anything other than hiking. The attitude seems to me like it can be rephrased as, "how dare these hikers who are not as purely dedicated to the AT mission as I am defile the woods with their presence?" I'm not talking about litterbugs, who genuinely DO defile the woods, or people who actively detract from others' encounter with nature. I'm talking about the subtle mockery in some posts of dayhikers, folks who can't or maybe won't endure the very real hardships of the trail, folks who support the trail very deeply but choose to do so by spending their money to do so (like maybe old or disabled people) rather than live in the woods, and others who apparently fall short of the thru-hiker ideal. What happened to HYOH? Who made you mockers the official interpreters of what the AT is or should be? Everyone engages the trail in their own way, for their own reasons, and as their own circumstances allow. Some people even like or collect bobbleheads. Plenty of folks out there in the horrible "real" world, who might be too busy to spend a lot of time in the woods but sincerely wish they could get out more, might like bobbleheads. Who cares? I like books, they like bobbleheads. Whatever. And if they buy a bobblehead and it helps raise money for trail maintenance, that is a very, very good thing in my view.

I guess I was naïve in believing the AT crowd to be unusually tolerant and accepting of folks as they are. I guess that for many, it's the same dynamic as any other clique, with just a different focus and identity.

[TOW]

Really, they have.


Attachment 32608

Yeah I could not believe what I was seeing when I received that sales catalog in the mail, I hope Bill Bryson fell out of his chair with laughter....

[Pedaling Fool]

I guess I was naïve in believing the AT crowd to be unusually tolerant and accepting of folks as they are. I guess that for many, it's the same dynamic as any other clique, with just a different focus and identity.

Yeah, that was hugely naive on your part.

[4eyedbuzzard]

...I guess I was naïve in believing the AT crowd to be unusually tolerant and accepting of folks as they are. I guess that for many, it's the same dynamic as any other clique, with just a different focus and identity.

I think threads like this unfortunately often bring out a lot more of what you may consider intolerant opinions, even from people who are generally very supportive of the notion that introducing people to hiking and the AT, and having as many people involved, even casually, is a good thing. The AT is often called the "The People's Trail". Most folks here at WB are very supportive of that concept, especially as it was Benton MacKaye's vision that the AT provide a wilderness experience to as many people as possible. Most of us here are NOT elitist hikers who believe the trail is only for them. Most of us here are NOT even thru-hikers. Most of us here aren't long distance hiking every year and living on the trail. Most of us are just regular people who have jobs, families, and other interests - but with a passion for hiking and also protecting the AT from ABUSE.

One of the greatest causes of trail abuse are uneducated hikers whose behavior often isn't in keeping with protecting the trail and what the greatest part of the hiking community would like to present to society. It's everything from not practicing reasonable LNT, to excessive partying, etc. And unfortunately, mass media exposure of the trail tends to increase this demographic on the trail. Sure, there are a few members here who are at times rather intolerant, but sometimes even those that seem so simply present a very narrow comment that doesn't reflect their overall opinion due to the thread context. That said, like any internet board, opinions also tend to be over-stated and rather blunt at times, compared to how the same person would present their opinion in real life. I think that is more a reflection on the nature of social media though, than it is a reflection on the vast majority of hikers and WB members.

[dudeijuststarted]

Jesus (according to legend) finished his mission.

Bryson didn't.

Excellent.

[rafe]

[snip...]
The attitude seems to me like it can be rephrased as, "how dare these hikers who are not as purely dedicated to the AT mission as I am defile the woods with their presence?" I'm not talking about litterbugs, who genuinely DO defile the woods, or people who actively detract from others' encounter with nature. I'm talking about the subtle mockery in some posts of dayhikers, folks who can't or maybe won't endure the very real hardships of the trail, folks who support the trail very deeply but choose to do so by spending their money to do so (like maybe old or disabled people) rather than live in the woods, and others who apparently fall short of the thru-hiker ideal.

Yep, there's some ageism there, ya think? Remember also that a lot of trail maintainers and builders are in the Redford and Newman and Nolte demographic. The majority, from what I've seen. You know, the folks who organize and do the real work of making the trail a thing.

[rickb]

The attitude seems to me like it can be rephrased as, "how dare these hikers who are not as purely dedicated to the AT mission as I am defile the woods with their presence .

That take away is just plain weird.