Wild [Blu-ray] [2017]

How many years have we waited to see the star of Legally Blonde naked, not only naked but getting bonked in a half dozen ways? Personally I was disappointed—not by her breasts but by her giving in to Hollywood sleaze machine. Apparently, all actresses must get naked and do the sexual bump and grind. Girls go to Hollywood fully robed to become stars and leave having been fully unrobed. Then they wonder why they are treated as sex toys. Isn’t that what they are when they get naked and engage in simulated sex before a film crew and others? Afterwards they want a little respect.Soft porn titillation is what all Hollywood directors use nowadays to spice up their films. What they are doing that many viewers enjoy is making viewers into bedroom voyeurs. I find that simulated explicit sex does nothing to improve a film and much to degrade it. Reese has to get all sweating and moan and groan and pant with delight. In one scene she sucks on a penis looking finger. Yuck! I thought she was better than that. Of course, actresses get extra money for nude and sex scenes. Next, will Reese be acting in a remake of Deep Throat?Why 3 stars? Nature. Remove everything but the cinematic photograph and the movie would get 5 stars. Nature is always inspiring and never dirty even when dirty. The most entertaining scenes are of nature’s non-human creatures. And then there’s the real Cheryl Strayed. She deserves 5 stars just for embarking upon and completing an awesome trek that most of us would be afraid to attempt. And by the way in 1958 Colin Fletcher embarked on a similar though even more challenging journey chronicled in his book The Thousand Mile Summer. Absolutely worth reading. In the special features we discover that Cheryl watches many scenes. I’m curious whether or not she watched the ones where Reese gets and naked and then gets you know what. Also the young girl in the movie is the Cheryl daughter. She won’t have to ask mommy about the birds and bees. She can just watch the movie. Perhaps the family already has.Is the explicit sexual raunchiness necessary? No. It can be suggested, but that does take some artistic imagination and desire on the part of the director. Or did Cheryl insist that she be shown sucking on a finger and having sex in an alley on her coffee breaks? The brutal behavior of her father toward her mother, the death of her mother, her drug addiction, being ripped off by a doper, aggressed and threaten men on the journey, etc., all of that makes the point that she was traumatized and needed to find herself. The sex scenes accomplish nothing in this regard. They are neither profound nor inspiring. I suppose the message was that she had become a slut. I’m not sure that message is even necessary. It creates no sympathy for her, though perhaps revulsion. So what good is it?Another aspect of the film I really disliked is Cheryl’s going into nature is all about Cheryl, not nature. That is one reason Into the Wild is a cinematic masterpiece and Wild is just another movie. Also the book of the former is also a masterpiece of journalistic reporting. I have no interest in reading Cheryl’s book. There is one scene in Into the Wild where a little soft porn was an option but that use of the scene probably never entered Sean Penn’s mind.The film is a feminist work, though it is honest enough to recognize that women as well mess up their lives. There are perhaps one or two minor male characters who would qualify as acceptable by feminist standards. There are many men are physically or sexually aggressive toward women, who take advantage of women, or simply cannot avoid seeing woman as sexual objects to be had if possible. I agree completely with this view of men, American men in the context of the story. Supposedly one in four women are sexually aggressed by men in the U.S. The number of women who are physically abused by boyfriends, fathers, stepfathers, or strange men is large. Women being raped, murdered, or kidnapped are common news items today. Were American men always so awful to women? Personally I don’t think so, bad perhaps but not so predatory as today. A half century ago tendencies to abuse were present but men were taught to respect women.During the Hollywood’s golden age movies taught men to respect women. Men who didn’t were evil. In Hollywood’s tarnished age, today, Hollywood gets a lot of credit for undermining that respect. Wild certainly doesn’t encourage respect. It simply point out the bad guys but the girl is for a time a slut herself. What is missing in the movie, perhaps unavoidably so since the story is biographical, is a male whose behavior can be admired. I expected decency from the forest ranger but he came on to Cheryl. Today one of the telling characteristics of serious Hollywood movies is the ambiguous male hero or the dominance of male villains. (The only heroes are action heroes like Captain America.) Take the television series Mad Men or House of Cards. There are no good white guys in Mad Men (the only good guys are the black elevator operator and custodian). The men in House of Cards are all bad (and one is actually a real-world villain).Wild could have been a great film but turned out to be a flawed okay film. If it were purely fictional, I wouldn’t recommend it. But because it’s about a real woman who made a remarkable journey (symbolic of her transformation) most of us, including most men, wouldn’t, it’s worth watching. The best part, however, comes with the credits.

OK film a little slow.

In response to dalton mcteague on wildI have never written a review on Amazon for any film as I felt it unnecessary. However, when the first review that came up was this I was compelled to defend what is one of my favourite films.To defined the argument that this film contains gratuitous sex - I would completely agree, but that it is necessary for the film to show what Cheryl did that led to her hike on the pct. To make this pg-13 style would have missed the point of the extent her life was spiralling out of control.To respond to the point that it is feminist. Having actually red the book it is based on it is pretty faithful adaptation, it does miss out her mother’s 2nd husband. I don’t think you can’t critique a film for being feminist when it is based on the point of view of a woman walking alone in the desert, it’s her experience!In comparison to into the wild, the first review claims that the into the wild is a better film because the central character wanted to be with nature, whilst Cheryl’s is solely about her own selfish needs is completely flawed. The whole premise of into the wild is that human interaction and family is crucial, as the main character realises at the end, he may believe he is about nature but he is running away from bad experiences exactly as Cheryl is.In conclusion. This is an excellent film of someone dealing with loss and trying to fix their lives by getting lost in nature, pushing themselves and understanding their own strength. It is a beautiful, poignant film and worth watching.

Wot can I say great productGreat filmThanks

I adore this film. It’s an absolutely must see for any wanderlust, hiker, or adventurer.It’s based upon the true story of the first woman to walk the PCT, a famous west coast trail in the USA.I’m sure that parts are embellished, prettied up, etc for the sake of the big screen, but it’s most definitely a captivating movie, that does a great job of defining our leading lady, getting to know her, and helping to understand her motivation for wanting to start the hike to begin with, and why she was so determined, even when things got so tough, to complete it.I don’t want to give too much away and ruin the film for anybody yet to see it, but I will say that for me it is a well told story. The cinematography is amazing, Reese Witherspoon is amazing, and the lady who plays her mother is amazing. We really do get to see the family dynamic.There are some weepy parts, but they are valid to the storyline, and the breakthrough at the end is heartbreaking, but it is made better by the heroic and brave ending.The credits do show the photos of the real lady along her journey too, which adds to the authenticity, and puts the true face to the story.

'Wild' follows young woman Cheryl (Reese Witherspoon) as she sets out on a one thousand mile hike around the pacific trail in order to 'fix' herself from past traumas which we learn along the way in flashbacks. What a beautiful and nice film this was! I loved it and found it very inspiring that I am now wanting to do this hike myself. The plot of this film may seem boring at first (a woman walking) but a lot happens in it and Cheryl comes across many challenges on her walk such as dangerous men and a rattle snake. The best thing was the gorgeous cinematography and directing as it just looked beautiful and at times relaxing. Reese Witherspoon gives a fantastic realistic performance that makes you think she is a real person. I would say that at times it can be a little boring, but even then it is always more relaxing and peaceful. Overall, a beautiful heartfelt drama with great cinematography and an inspiring storyline which makes you want to go hiking yourself.