Le Territoire des loups

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.

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.

Those who Go Into this Liam Neeson Flick Expecting Fisticuffs, Gun-Play, and Action Tropes Leave Mostly Disappointed.

Some Actually Hostile at the "Trailer" for Misdirection and Neeson for Signing-On to this because it's NOT THAT.

It's a Macho-Man-Movie All the way with Females Only Glimpsed through a Few Flashbacks, and Memory Laden Remarks around the Numerous Fires...

Used as Shields Against a Pack of Wolves that Already Attacked and Devoured 1 of the "Human Pack" that have come in Close-Contact to the Wolves Den.

Herein Lies Bones of Contention...

Many "Experts" on Wolves and their Behavior state LOUDLY and Angrily that the Wolf-Pack in this Film do Not in Anyway Behave Like Real-Life Wolf-Packs...

If that's a Fact and You Can Not Suspend Disbelief Enough to Enjoy the Film, and Chalk it Up to "Artistic-License" than Stay Far Far Away from this "Tale".

On the Other Hand, it is a Bleak Psychological Study of Men Under Extreme Threat at the Hands of Ravenous Monsters and the Wrath of Mother Nature.

Images Stripped of Color, Signifying an Unforgiving Atmosphere on the Path to "Hell".

It's Engaging, Suspenseful, "Out-There" Entertainment with an "Edge", that's...

Worth a Watch.

Surprised by all the poor ratings given apparently by a bunch of wildlife/wolf/survival experts! Guys, this is a Hollywood movie! Let me emphasize - a movie. All this analysis on how much a wolf weighs and how their behavior is incorrectly depicted... please stick to NatGeo or Discovery channel programs and stay away from fiction! Going by the logic and reviews, Spielberg's 1975 classic 'Jaws' should be given just a star or two as it has a highly inaccurate portrayal of sharks. But surprise surprise, it's 8+ on IMDb! Wow how did that happen?! I enjoy a movie for the entertainment value it provides. And if the film can hold my interest for about 90 minutes, I'd say it worked. The Grey definitely worked!

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.