Watch Wild Seven For Free

Better Late Then Never

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

I would give this film a 2 or a 3, but since the votes are stacked in the positive range, I figured I would give a 1 to help balance it out.I came in with an open mind, and knew nothing of the ratings when I watched this movie. I enjoyed it, for the first third of the movie. The cinematography was good, and the cast/plot seemed to be well thought out, until...I realized they weren't. After awhile, the vague and intriguing plot didn't pan out. It seemed like it was setting up to go somewhere, then never left the driveway. The actors and their relationships felt like they had potential, and I really wanted to enjoy them, but found I couldn't. All of the interactions between the under 30's were stale, lifeless, and forced. When was the last time you saw a group of guys who drink, hang out in bachelor apartments, and frequent topless bars (receiving a lap dance or two) say something like "hey man, when are you going to realize you can't treat women like that. Life is full circle man, that (dehumanizing women) is going to come back and bite you." Ouch. Once I realized how bad the interplay was between the characters, I couldn't stop noticing it.Also, I was reading into the plot and analyzing it throughout the whole movie more than I realized I needed to. The plot seemed open ended, and I kept pondering where it was headed and what the connections were. I actually thought, for most of it, that the younger friends were flashbacks of the older men, or symbolic at least of how their history panned out to make the older men who they were. I would have found that more interesting than what actually occurred... which was just two mildly interesting sub-plots (to no actual plot) taking place in parallel.Finally, the ending felt like it may have saved the movie, but it in fact killed it. I realize the writer was trying to cut it slightly short and leave it open-ended and up for the viewer to decide what happened, a "lady and the tiger" storyline... but I actually have no idea what happened at the end. It was cut so short, that I was left clueless as to what happened... and frankly, it took me about 3 minutes after the cut to black to stop caring. I'm trying to think of an analogy to the lady and the tiger here. Perhaps, if after the hero was in front of the two doors, trying to make his decision, we see him begin to quote Hamlet, and the princess pulls out a pistol and asks her father if it is loaded, then casually rests the pistol against her temple, then the story "fades to black," then we hear a pistol shot, Hamlet misquoted , and the sounds of a tiger in heat. Basically, after the story ends, you have no idea what happens. That is what I'm trying to convey with the analogy.While I really wanted to enjoy this movie, and maybe even keep it on the back shelf of my DVD collection, I really can't. The character interactions and the plot make it a large failure. Wes Anderson's "Bottle Rocket" is one of my favorite movies because of it's off-beat characters, but "Wild Seven" feels like a failed attempt to recreate the dynamic cast from "Bottle Rocket" other "group of friends" based movies.

Note: Only minor spoilers, there shouldn't be any plot revealing, but just a taste of what you might expect.I felt this was an okay film for an independent production. First of all I'm going to repeat what most people said, the older generation characters were very solid and probably makes the most of the 5 point score I'm rating this movie. The younger generation however, you need to understand that most or all of them are not really top actors at all. The one standout performance for me was Connor, played by Christopher Clark with spunk. I can imagine many people would find him annoying, but I thought his character was colorful and added much needed spice to what would be a fairly slow paced movie. He reminded me a lot of Zell from Final Fantasy 8, hot headed, immature, and I loved watching him spurt out crazy things to people and I found myself anticipating his actions.Another standout performance is from Mackey, played by Robert Loggia. It was obvious that his character was way over the top, and this is also where I was disappointed. At first I thought that he was blatantly racist in order to observe and analyse other people's reactions, and to see their true character. Unfortunately I had overestimated the intentions of the director and scriptwriter, and he was just a fool of an old man. Still, his character was interesting, and I found myself anticipating the messes he might get into.About the movie itself though, as mentioned by other people before, there seems to be many plot holes and ideas/twists that are very poorly executed. The movie tries to be deep, but just ends up being confusing and unnecessary. There is a lot of college level swearing and insults, that are quite amusing in short spasms. But all in all if you find yourself really bored and there's nothing to do on a Sunday afternoon, you could consider renting this one, but only if you have an open mind and don't expect to be wow'ed, or left thinking about the plot. You'd probably forget about it in a couple of hours.

This movie had the framework to be very good. It has a good cast with an interesting premise and I dug the gritty style. It starts out and you think this movie is gonna take off and then it slows down till the final scene. The older cast of actors led by Robert Forster take on roles you have never seen them in. Although I felt Robert Loggia was merely reprising the same role he had in Lost HIghway. I thought the script was interesting, I thought the full circle karma thing was pretty cool, and there was some foreshadowing through out the movie that you figure out towards the end. But as I said there is about 35 min of this movie That I could have dome with out. I think this movie could have been a mini series on HBO or something. Each episode would have been each one of the seven characters stories. It has a great different look and format which we are not used to seeing, but I thought wild seven could have use just a little fine tuning.

Whew, the movie started out pretty interesting but rapidly became down right brooding. Lots of holes are left in the story making you wonder just what the hell happened and why. Acting in the movie was pretty decent and shots were pretty cool, minus the director's repeated attempt at seizing the frame; i.e., always having a close-up shot of someone looking indirectly at the camera for no apparent reason... overdone.Other than the weak story and poor execution, the lighting in the film was good, acting (for the most part) was pretty decent, and sound was so so. I'd have to align this film more with Kalifornia or Lock, Stock, and Two-Smoking Barrels than to Pulp Fiction. Pulp Fiction actually brought all stories together eventually and it made sense, this was more of a simple "bank robbery gone bad" with some dumb acting added to *flesh the story out*.Stick with it if you can, but don't look for any answers at the end as there aren't any. The movie is quite slow during places, so this is a decent film to have on while multi-tasking other things... you won't miss anything and it'll save you the boredom of the slow, slow, slow, parts. Not a wild ride.