Watch Never Cry Wolf For Free

That was an excellent one.

Plenty to Like, Plenty to Dislike

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

(Some ppl who've watched this movie likely feel the same way I did.) How does this have a score of "7.6"!? Why is this interesting!?? HOW is this Disney-related!?? Whatever does it have to do with Disney??OK, to clarify, I viewed this film while helping some friends (a father and his sons) who were showing a public movie night - first shown was "Ratatouille", hands down a really good film & good choice! And then they showed THIS - now I had never seen this movie before in my life, but I was interested since it was "Disney"-related, and Disney *has* made some pretty decent Disney dramas (i.e. Tall Tale, Iron Will, Mary Poppins, The Big Green, etc). But BOY, I wish it had stayed that way... In fact, that "Walt Disney" logo shouldn't exist above the title! I DEMAND that somebody sue the people who made this worthless pile of NOTHING, and demand that the that logo be REMOVED from the poster!My "friends" thought this movie was nostalgic - and boy, do I feel sorry for them. Not only that they grew up with this, but also for their TASTE of film, I honestly think it's impaired! Understand: the word "nostalgic" doesn't mean "better". It just means you're more attached to it.I thought this film was beyond horrible, weird, stupid, uncomfortable and *painful* to sit through, plus, you had to make sure you had something ELSE to do while watching (i.e. texting, check your music, etc). I didn't get it! I was like, "Big deal. A guy goes to Alaska to study wolves. That's great." I've got nothing against the cast & crew - but this movie BORED ME S***LESS! I even looked around the room at the audience; *everyone* was literally BORED & CONFUSED to death! ...I may say this movie is decently shot; but it's shot more like a *documentary*, with narration & all. Was the director too dumb to know the difference between a "movie" and a "documentary"??? Everything was shot with long drawn-out scenes, devoid of anything remotely interesting or engaging, with a soundtrack that sings you to sleep, ...and also involving scenes eating MICE??? Why did they choose THIS for a movie night!?? WHY!?? Why couldn't it have been a BETTER movie, with effort, or need of attention!??I don't care if it's based on a book! How is this cheap, pretentious flick related to Disney???... And the scenes where the main dude, for some reason I can't remember, has all his clothes off, RUNNING AROUND NAKED, with herds of ANIMALS... Are you flipping kidding me?? I didn't want to see that! What was the point!?? The entire time, I was like, "Dude, ENOUGH! Put some clothes on already!! What the fudge!!?? How is this Disney entertainment??? What was the intended age group?? Ages DEAD to 1??"I literally stepped out of the auditorium when that scene happened, because I wanted to WAIT till that ridiculous, cringe-worthy, stupid, and embarrassing scene was OVER!Again, this is one of those movies from the 80s with a bizarre "PG" rating, when it's clearly got scenes of peril, thematic elements, and nudity! It should've been the first "Disney" movie to be rated "PG-13", not "Pirates of the Caribbean."Feeling almost betrayed, I couldn't believe that this was a film my friends owned, liked, or at the very least decided to SHOW the rest of the community at this summer vacation spot this year!Though to be fair, not everyone has "heard" of this movie, judging by the amount of reviews, it's pretty well-unknown, so I'm glad about that (though I'm still disappointed it's gotten more attention than some other good Disney drama films - like, "Tall Tale" & "Iron Will" I can list right off the top of my head). On a side note, it was interesting that the actor who played the "bad cop" guy from Sylvester Stallone's "First Blood" was in this as the pilot; but after recently viewing that film, I couldn't take his character seriously in this - he still just seemed like a schmuck & mean doofus.And the scene near the beginning where the pilot flies the main protagonist around in a plane, the engine stalls, and he intends to fix it while in MIDAIR; I thought that was kind of impressive, but that was just IT.HANDS DOWN, this is an all-round BAD film, truly one of the worst movies I have *ever* seen! It should not be owned by ANYONE (except for those who perhaps LIKE studying wildlife & have a RedBull to keep them awake), deserves to sued for it's putrid film direction & the fact that it's owned by *Disney* (DISNEY - the amazing lovable company with charming imagination & wondrous stories that remain embedded in nearly ALL our childhoods, the company that brought us "Snow White", "Pinocchio", "Peter Pan", "Dumbo", "Beauty & the Beast", "The Lion King", and "Wreck-It Ralph" has been brought down to THIS!) It deserves it's place in Empire Magazine's "The Worst Films Ever Made", right along with "Howard the Duck", "Twilight", "The Room", "Battlefield Earth" & "Batman and Robin"! Heck, even the movie, "Gigli", a movie that's universally considered "bad", is a film that I LIKE! Yes! I went there! I prefer than much better than this stupid, incoherent MESS of a movie! I think it should switch ratings with GIGLI!2/10(Oh, and IMDb's word limit is 974, not 1000)PS: You want a much better "Disney" film drama about a man, dog-like animals, winter, and an engaging plot??? Go watch "IRON WILL" (1994). It's a true story about a dog-sled race, much like "Balto", and deserves a WHOLE lot more attention, hype, & higher ratings than THIS trash, or any of "the Hunger Games". YES, I'm serious!

Carroll Ballard's 1983 film "Never Cry Wolf" is, in a nutshell, sort of like a small-scale prototype to the 1990 epic "Dances With Wolves" and also like a tribute to the grand visionary visual-packed classics like "Lawrence of Arabia" (1962) and "The Ten Commandments" (1956). At the same time, it is a truly splendid and unique if uneven survival story. "Never Cry Wolf" is a flawed film, but it works on a fundamental level on the fact that it has an allegorical message instilled into its story and personified through its seldom off-camera protagonist."Never Cry Wolf" is based on an autobiography written by Farley Mowat, a Canadian researcher who was sent to the mountains in the 20th century by the government, who wanted to hear back from him that the wolf population was responsible for the quickly disappearing caribou. He is played by Charles Martin Smith as a preliminarily timid, vulnerable pessimist who is quickly regretting his decision to venture out into the wilderness alone. Once marooned, he struggles to survive and all the while, growing more and more isolated and attached to the land around him and all former aspects of his life seem like another world gone by and not worthy of returning to.The element of "Never Cry Wolf" that really works, at least for me, is the allegorical subject matter of the destruction of the once majestic North American continent by what many like to call "civilization" and "progress" and how easily a person can realize this once committed to understanding and experiencing the old world that's continually dying away. Charles Martin Smith plays a somewhat underdeveloped protagonist who begins his quest completely alone and afraid and vulnerable and as time goes by becomes tougher, stronger in his emotions and his courage, and begins to alienate himself from the people he once associated himself with. What's also genuinely interesting is the relationship he has with the wolves he was dispatched to study and condemn as culprits. Though it's no surprise, Smith does indeed come to admire a particular family of wolves who are not the stereotypical bloodthirsty mongers seeking fresh meat and the thrill of a hunt. By contrast, the wolves are represented as their true nature: curious, humble, courageous, and maternal. Smith does not have as much chemistry with the wolves as say Kevin Costner did in "Dances With Wolves" (1990), but the relationship is still interesting.If there are any flaws to the film, they do relate to the characters. There is hardly any dialogue at all in the film and like with "Dances With Wolves", most of the dialogue that does exist is through a voice-over by Smith. The flaw, I felt, was that there was not enough emotion or personality expressed by Smith to make him a sympathetic or relatable character. Brian Dennehy, who personifies the evil of mankind (big surprise) is also kind of underdeveloped and without much of a story to give him a particular air of menace. The major weak point really was the character played by Samson Jorah, who did not hold interest for a moment.In the end, I feel that "Never Cry Wolf" is more of a fleshed-out documentary on the wilderness with a hint for something greater than a visionary epic. This does not mean, however, that it's a bad film. Despite the flaws that were to be found, I did embrace the film as a mildly entertaining pleasure. If I chose to view it again, I wouldn't be going in looking for anything great, but I wouldn't mind the experience either.

I've only seen "Never Cry Wolf" once, during its original theatrical run. I was eight years old then and was completely bored by this film. I have a feeling that I would love it now for all of the reasons that I hated it then.Those reasons are the fact that it takes place in the Alaskan wilderness and is full of stunning visuals of the terrain and wildlife. And, it's a movie told largely without dialogue and spends large parts of its running time with one lone character. I'm fascinated by movies like that now, and so think it's worth giving "Never Cry Wolf" another try.Grade: B+

This is a great film. It succeeds on every level and really needs to apologize for nothing. The casting is exquisite - Charles Martin Smith is simply perfect as the somewhat overwhelmed academic who finds himself smack in the middle of his most anticipated/feared situation. Brian Dennehy is terrific as Rosie. "How do you beat boredom, Tyler? ... Adventure!". That may be one of my all-time favorite movie quotes. Many of us wish we had the nerve to accept this type of challenge and the self-awareness it will reveal. I have experienced the horror of finding myself lost, miles from any vestige of civilization, and the reaction of Tyler is spot on. Unlesss you've been there, you really can't get it. This film captures the experience of a man virtually alone in the wild as few have.