The Grey - Unter Wölfen

If you're like me you saw the trailers with Liam Neeson strapping glass bottles to his hands and fighting wolves and thought, "Holy cow! They made Wolf Taken. Violence and wolves!" Well, they didn't. There's really not that much action in the film. The trailers really, really did a dis-service to the film. They were selling an action movie when they really made an intensely somber film about a group of desperate men as they try to survive a plane crash. The film is quietly beautiful.

I saw it in theaters and was hopping mad at how the trailer misled me. People all over the theater fell asleep (my girlfriend included). However, I think if you're looking for a non-action flick, you'll really dig this.

An airplane loaded with roughneck oilmen crashes in Alaska and the survivors trek through a snow storm to survive while a pack of wolves kill them off one by one.

Some reviewers loved it. Some hated it. Those who loved it saw a competently directed action horror film in a realistic setting filled with real people facing real threats. Those who hated it saw an unrealistic depiction of wildlife behavior and unworkable outdoor skills. People who loved it thought the movie was realistic. People who hated it thought it was ridiculous.

Without giving away the story, let me tell you that this is not a story about actual wolf behavior. This is more like the numerous movies of the produced through the '70s, '80s and '90s about a group of people picked off one by one by unseen creatures lurking in the dark. In the '70s, they were natural animals like sharks, killer whales, reptiles, furry animals and insects. In the '80s they were space aliens and robots. In the '90s they were super assassins. Lately they are vampires and zombies. Now we are back to furry animals. But the overall theme is the same.

It is refreshing to see this theme played out in the Alaskan wilderness rather than on a space ship or an underground city overrun by zombies. In that sense, this movie is realistic. But the furry animals in the movie behave more like space aliens than actual wolves. The "expert hunter" in the movie is not actually giving you wisdom that will be useful in the Alaskan wilderness. He is more of a generic zombie hunter. In that sense, this movie is unrealistic.

So whether you like this movie or not depends entirely on what you are in the mood to see. If you want Discovery Channel, look elsewhere. If you want to see good acting in a scenic backdrop with lots of scary moments, you will like this movie. You don't have to really check in your brain at the door. Like so many Ridley Scott movies, this one is also a meditation on the nature of fate. This movie is a good piece of fiction. Just a bad documentary.

I'm surprised to see the number of negative reviews here and also surprised as to the number of comparisons to Lee Tamahori's 'The Edge'; a completely different type of film in my opinion despite the similar locales. Unrelentingly bleak with almost no glimpse of warmth ( both literally and figuratively!) during the whole running time it's easy to see that this film will not be for everyone. The absence of a heroic ending and the depiction of the absolute fragility of man (and futility of machismo) will also serve to divide audiences even further. But, if you can get past these things and can overlook a couple of plot points that might seem illogical you are in for one heck of visceral cinematic ride. The story is simple - Liam Neeson is a distraught widower contracted to shoot Wolves in the Alaskan oil fields. On a flight to the mainland for R&R the plane goes down in the middle of nowhere and he and six other passengers are the only remaining survivors. The motley group must contend with a grim situation that see's them dropped in a freezing barren wasteland with no food, shelter or weapons and a pack of hungry Timber Wolves keen to pick them off one by one. I liked the AO Scott review for this film in which he pointed out that the film posed and answered a number of theological and existential questions in a very quiet and dignified way. Quite un-Hollywood. This is no Tom Hanks picture and unlike the aforementioned The Edge it's never for a minute considered an option for the men to make a stand against the Wolves in the way that Charles and Bob did with Bart the Bear in that film. They are completely at the mercy of the environment and it's predators whilst also being aware of the increasing futility of their plight. The film goes against the grain right from the outset and it's a stylistic decision from the creators that simultaneously elevates it above many of it's counterparts but also probably limits it's broader appeal - an early scene immediately after the crash where Neeson comforts a dying man is one of the most powerful and beautiful pieces of acting I've seen in recent years. To summarize, I found the film a very intense watch and it stayed with me for long time afterwards. Surely the hallmarks of a great picture?

Without pontificating about hidden meanings and artsy interpretations, I'd simply say that this is a film about a man who doesn't care if he lives or dies after the loss of his partner. It is not an action movie or a survival movie in the strictest sense: it is more about the manner in which we die and the way we face death, and it is beautifully filmed. It could be seen that, as well as representing the visceral, raw savagry of death, the Wolves represent the metaphorical relentlessness of death, its hopelessness and inevitability. This is certainly felt strongly in this film and it is very well done. The weakest are taken early on and the strongest live longer, but it comes for us all eventually.

I would place this film alongside The Edge with Anthony Hopkins as it has a similar feel in its vast isolated beauty and a similar metaphor for life and its meaning: how we're all relatively vulnerable and tiny in the face of mother nature in her purest form.

I'll start off by saying this movie is not made for everyone. This is about a movie based off of survival instincts between man and nature. First time watching this, It's a thrill chiller. If you're wanting a movie that's depressing 90% of the time, this is the movie for you. This movie grasps way beyond an imagination of dealing with nature's worst environments after a plane wreckage. Traveling through the coldest winter, little to no food, wounded, tiredness and cold, it's a rough marry go-round. Not only the harsh environment for the remaining survivors have to deal with, the movie decided to throw in Northern Arctic Wolves and that made the survivors a living nightmare of hell. Only reason why I gave the movie a 8 star was Ottway (Liam Neeson) was a huntsman. His job subscription should have made him an expert of dealing with the current situation a little more suitable than just trying to survive with some ideas. None of the less, excellent movie for drama watchers.