The Wild

Saw a preview screening last night, and it was really fun. First, the movie is visually gorgeous. The texture (hair especially!) work alone is enough to recommend the film to animation enthusiasts. To all the comparisons with Madagascar I will add that The Wild is much funnier. And judging by the 10-year-olds sitting with me, kids will love it. As the movie was made by C.O.R.E. in Toronto, was directed by a Canadian, and stars a lot of Canadians -- there are a few Canadian jokes (and sports) in the movie that international viewers might miss. It also has a fun self-referential attitude in the humor that's enjoyable without becoming gimmicky. To build on the previous poster, it is not Citizen Kane -- but has much funnier animals. It's a movie that does what it sets out to do -- entertain you. And it does that very well.

For some reason, the various Hollywood studios occasionally display almost telepathic communication. Simultaneously, seemingly independently, they release two films which are very similar. We saw it with Dante's Peak and Volcano in 1997 (Two films in which a volcano erupts in a populated area of America), Deep Impact and Armageddon in 1998 (Two films where a giant meteor is going to destroy all life on Earth) and this year saw two studios revisiting the "capsizing cruise liner" genre with the Poseidon remake and the made-for-TV The Poseidon Adventure. Why do they do this? Surely it cannot be a coincidence. And films take years to produce, so it's not like one company can see an advert for a film and rush out their own version. Maybe it's because Hollywood is not a very secretive place. Ideas and scripts are touted round all the studios before they are bought, so it's not surprising that sometimes a company will set off down similar paths.

So, after last year's Madagascar was a reasonable hit for Dreamworks, arch-rivals Disney have "independently" come up with this, The Wild. A coincidence? Let's review the evidence.

Madagascar features a group of animals who are residents of a New York zoo. And so does The Wild.

In Madagascar, the group's leader is a lion, and it also includes a giraffe. And it's the same in The Wild.

In Madagascar, the group break out of the zoo to set off on a cargo ship for a remote jungle location. And it's the same in The Wild.

In Madagascar, the Lion comes to terms with the contrast between his pampered existence in captivity and life in the wild. And it's the same in The Wild.

And even the humorous sidekicks are similar. In Madagascar, the group are aided by a team of military penguins, who operate with hilarious efficiency and speak in short, sharp sentences. In The Wild, they're chameleons.

So if you have seen Madagascar, you've basically already seen the Wild, right? Not exactly. Because if you ignore those suspicious connections, The Wild is actually a different kind of film, with clear signs of its heritage. Madagascar is more about the comedy, while The Wild follows the classic Disney themes of family values and adventure against adversity. If Masdagascar is Shrek, The Wild is Finding Nemo.

Except that is too much of a compliment. The Wild is still a second-rate animated movie, clearly from the Disney half of the Disney-Pixar partnership. Kiefer Sutherland plays Samson the lion straight down the line. His motivation is just to save his son from volcanic fiery death, so he saves the jokes and pratfalls for his entourage, most notably the scene-stealing koala played by Eddie Izzard. In fact, Sutherland might as well be reprising his role from 24, where he was invariably trying to save his annoying daughter. Only this time he's a lion, of course.

The film dallies too much with tired old psychobabble father-son nonsense, much in the same way that spoiled Chicken Little earlier this year. The quality of the animation is another step forward in the ability of artists to render animals, and it takes a more natural approach to Madagascar that is really very impressive indeed.

But Madagascar stole the march, leaving The Wild look a little bit preachy and rather old-school.

Well I hired this film out yesterday along with two others and must admit i was expecting to be the same old stuff in Disney films, but i was pleasantly surprised.

I thought it had good characters in and that the actors and actresses that did voice overs really took on the persona of the animal they were betraying and it made me laugh my favourite actor within film was Eddie izzard as he is so cool but saying that as i mentioned every one of them did good job.

Where watching this film is concerned defiantely give it a go as i think many people will be surprised i have not seen Madagascar but think this was under rated due to them coming out around about the same time, i am definitely added this to my collection when i get time.

Similar to Madagascar but not the same this is the story of a zoo lion and his friends who race off to save the lion's son who has been shipped back to the wild. The movie is the race to find the son before he gets to the wild and what happens once they get there.

I have to start by saying the voice cast is top notch here. Everyone does an excellent job. However I must single out Jim Belushi and Eddie Izzard as turning in classic animated performances. Belushi plays a street smart squirrel who is in love with a giraffe and he is a ball of fun. Its clear why he is the best friend of Keifer Sutherland's lion. He is a joy to behold.

Even better is Eddie Izzard as Nigel, a koala who is totally crazed. Izzard is in constant motion and is constantly chattering about everyone and everything and he effectively turns a movie about a lion and his cub into a movie about a deluded koala with a tenuous grasp on reality. Izzard's Nigel will probably go down in history as one of the great cartoon characters of all time.

This is a movie with fantastic animation. It all looks great. The director and some of his crew are from the effects team that made Terminator 2 and other big budget special effects movie look so great.

The problem with this movie is that it was made by guys who until this film made their living making soulless special effects for soulless action films. The net effect is a soulless film. There is no pacing, there is little sense of danger. Worse the characters inhabit a world that isn't real. In this world, especially in the New York scenes, no one exists except the characters. They drive all through the city and encounter no one. There are no other cars on the street. To be frank there is no sign of life anywhere. Its terrible. It kills the film. Its sad but as alive the actors are their animated characters, while looking good, come across as dead constructs.

Still the movie is worth seeing. Eddie Izzard, with an assist by Jim Belushi make it worth seeing. Clearly abandoned by Disney in theaters, you should make a run by this on home video or cable, where its less than the sum of its parts construction will be less annoying.

I definitely didn't hear much about this animated Disney flick upon its release in 2006. In fact, I just rented it the other day, and I believe I had heard of it by then, but didn't know much about it, so I didn't know how well it had been received in general. I was hoping for a decent animated family flick, but when I looked this particular movie up on IMDb, I saw its low rating, and after that, I didn't have very high expectations. The best I could hope for was slightly above average, and unfortunately, I didn't even get that, even though it looked like I might around the beginning.

Samson is a lion who lives in a zoo in New York and is the father of a cub named Ryan. Samson claims he is from the wild, and often tells stories about his days out there. One night, Ryan finds himself taken away in a green box on a truck! Samson, as well as other animals at the zoo, see the lion cub taken away, so Samson sets out with some friends (a giraffe named Bridgette, a squirrel named Benny, a koala named Nigel, and a snake named Larry) to try and find Ryan. They manage to make it to the New York shoreline, where the lion cub is taken away on a boat. Samson and the gang manage to get on another boat and set out on a journey across the ocean, where Ryan has been taken. After they arrive on the other side, they find themselves in the jungles of Africa, searching for Ryan. Unfortunately, they are in danger, as Samson comes clean and confesses that he never did live in the wild, so he has no experience in this environment! To make matters worse, they will have to face an evil wildebeest named Kazar and his clan, who are determined to turn from prey to predator!

This Disney film's biggest merit is the animation, which is probably the only thing I can't say anything critical about. Without a doubt, the animation is absolutely stunning, with some very nice jungle scenery! Unfortunately, not much else about the film can match the animation, if anything. None of the characters really stand out too much, that's one thing, and the humour is another problem. I did laugh quite a few times at some of the slapstick, but found that the humour was often kind of lame, such as Nigel saying, "I've got popcorn up my bum," and a mother hippopotamus' reaction to seeing Ryan talk to her offspring. So, while I've definitely laughed less at comedies, overall, I am not impressed with the humour here. I don't know what else to say about "The Wild", except that the story is also a bit bland, and not quite as touching as it probably should be. In conclusion, there really wasn't much about this film that impressed me, and I can see why it's not the most widely recognized computer animated feature to come out in recent years.