Selvagem

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.

The Wild was advertised as a movie for kids, and it lived up to it's billing. I saw it this past weekend with my 5 year-old. It had a good story line and enough action and music to keep him entertained. He has already asked can we buy it when it comes out on DVD. Since it is a clean movie I will happily get it for him. I didn't have to cringe or be on edge because of suggestive dialog or foul language like Ice Age 2 has. I don't enjoy exposing my son to entertainment that contains language he cannot repeat. If you want to treat your kids to a real kid's flick, take them to see this. It's not a contender for an Oscar, but you'll enjoy it, too.

At first, this appears to be a rip-off of "Madagascar," with New York City zoo animals leaving the comforts of "home" for the wilds of Africa. However, it is a totally different story and feel to it, more serious and sentimental than "Madagascar." Personally, I like "serious and sentimental" but not in animated movie, at least not to the degree it was in here. I preferred the other "NYC zoo" film to this one because "The Wild" lost almost all of its great humor in the last 20-30 minutes.

The first 50 minutes of this film was spectacular. I was thinking, "Wow, another great animated film. How many is that in the past year or so?" The jokes were excellent, the characters mostly funny and the animation superb. The dark, rich colors in here are magnificent. This is a beautiful movie! The minor characters are the best in here: the snake, koala bear and squirrel. Eddie Izzard, Richard Kind and Jim Belushi, in particular, are great in their voices of these characters. The two crocodiles that the wandering zoo animals meet in the sewers are hilarious. They produced the biggest laughs, at least with me. The major characters: the lion (Keifer Sutherland), his cub (Greg Cipes) and the giraffe (Janeane Garafolo) were all a little too much on the serious side.

Speaking of serious: the last third of this film totally switched gears. I wonder how this went over with very young kids and their parents? It got too serious, frightening in spots (for little ones) and then the usual corny Disney ending. It's too bad: this could have been super if they had just continued doing what was working the first 50 minutes.

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.

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.