A very simple story - a young woman, trapped in boring day-to-day business and restrictions, chances upon a lone wolf in a park near her home. This fact alone changes her demeanor - she now has a purpose and some spirit - but when she manages to catch the beast a few days later, things become serious as she starts not only to overcome, but to completely lose the reigns of civilised behaviour.
The motif of man stripping away his (more or less) thin coat of civilisation is not exactly new, but it's very seldom used - a recent example the not-so-successful adaption of Ballard's "High-Rise" - but the film nearest to "Wild" would probably be the Michel Piccoli-starrer "Themroc" from the early 70s. I'd say "Wild" is the best of those three - it keeps its focus on the protagonist (like Themroc) but has just enough outside world left to stay interesting. Also, it has humour - it's no comedy, but there are quite a lot of snickering moments spread throughout the crisp running time.
"Wild" is a low-budget production - since the story is focused on very few people and sets, that's no big problem, but it is told in such an ambitious manner that I wished the production design and especially camera work had a bit more class - as it is, "Wild" seems rather pedestrian despite the outrageous plot, often like a TV production. I also felt the whole thing rushed, the atavism happens very fast once things get rolling.
Despite the shortcomings, I rated it 8/10: The lead actress is enchanting, the wolf (or wolves, two were used for the production, probably the biggest budget point) is terrific, there are a lot of interesting scenes, and the story is extremely quick-footed. That the ending may not seem very satisfactory to some is inherent to the "genre" - once you're back to primitive, free from society, there's really nothing more left to tell, is it?
conclusion: You could argue for hours about the metaphors and meanings which play into "Wild", but even taken just at face value, it's still a powerful, entertaining and thought-provoking low-budget production. Recommended!
The motif of man stripping away his (more or less) thin coat of civilisation is not exactly new, but it's very seldom used - a recent example the not-so-successful adaption of Ballard's "High-Rise" - but the film nearest to "Wild" would probably be the Michel Piccoli-starrer "Themroc" from the early 70s. I'd say "Wild" is the best of those three - it keeps its focus on the protagonist (like Themroc) but has just enough outside world left to stay interesting. Also, it has humour - it's no comedy, but there are quite a lot of snickering moments spread throughout the crisp running time.
"Wild" is a low-budget production - since the story is focused on very few people and sets, that's no big problem, but it is told in such an ambitious manner that I wished the production design and especially camera work had a bit more class - as it is, "Wild" seems rather pedestrian despite the outrageous plot, often like a TV production. I also felt the whole thing rushed, the atavism happens very fast once things get rolling.
Despite the shortcomings, I rated it 8/10: The lead actress is enchanting, the wolf (or wolves, two were used for the production, probably the biggest budget point) is terrific, there are a lot of interesting scenes, and the story is extremely quick-footed. That the ending may not seem very satisfactory to some is inherent to the "genre" - once you're back to primitive, free from society, there's really nothing more left to tell, is it?
conclusion: You could argue for hours about the metaphors and meanings which play into "Wild", but even taken just at face value, it's still a powerful, entertaining and thought-provoking low-budget production. Recommended!