17 April 2001 | enazwo
Though I enjoyed certain components of this movie, being a former resident of Alaska, having lived in Skagway, Ketchican, Palmer, Wasilla, Anchorage, Soldotna, Kenai, Homer, Kodiak, and even Nome, and I think people should know that this movie wasn'nt filmed in Alaska, but British Columbia, which also rivals Alaska in beauty and wildlife. Also Polar bears do not venture much further south then Nome and never, I mean never make it to the panhandle. There is a disputed photograph, on record, of a dead polar bear on an ice floe, that drifted south, but it is argued that the bear wandered onto an ice floe, died, and then drifted south. Any way the movie "Alaska" does have enough authentic visuals, in the background to give a viewer some idea of the majesty of Alaska. The story does have many loopholes, of a technical nature, example is the father's plane, precariously lodged at such an elevation, would have caused hypothermia and an inevitable death. Alaskan's have a saying, it goes like this, "Alaska does not forgive mistakes". Alaska is very beautiful, however it is very dangerous and the movie "Alaska" does not convey that reality. If you would like to see a movie that convey's what kinds of people go to and populate Alaska see the movie "Leaving Normal". However there is yet to be movie filmed in Alaska that captures the real Alaska. Why? I don't know.