Alicia I love this movie so much

Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

Invaderbank The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

Amber Flowers Probably contains some spoilers, but the plot is so predictable it's not like there's much to spoil. I watched this film for the first time shortly after it was released in 2006, during the relative lull in Disney proper's output, between the end of the "Renaissance" with Tarzan and their return to the mainstream with Princess and the Frog and Tangled. During this time, Pixar flourished, but Disney came out with such flops as Home on the Range and Chicken Little. This is from a sub-studio of Disney (it's not part of the proper cannon). I recall watching this as a fairly young kid and deciding it was worse than the comparable Madagascar but not horrible. I'll start with the plot. YMMV, but I think it's exactly Madagascar with elements of Finding Nemo and the Lion King. I know Madagascar and The Wild came out at about the same time, but without question Madagascar won this fight. Madagascar didn't feel like it was ripping off other Dreamworks films, or Disney. Where Madagascar had characters I enjoyed being around, this gang seems too clichéd to be likable. Let's see, there's a koala (Nigel - Eddie Izzard) who was at times generally funny but kinda seemed like the creators were trying to push him to be this film's Olaf or Genie - pushing a breakout character is not a good idea, and I tired of Nigel quickly. There's a squirrel (Benny - Jim Belushi) that disappeared for some strange reason for about 20-30 minutes in the middle of the film and reappears in a weird way and time that I never really got to know. Then there's the only girl in the entire film, a giraffe (Bridget - Janeane Garofalo) acts like you expect the only girl to act, and that stupid snake (Larry - Richard Kind) weighed everything down, and the two of them disappear weirdly for another 20-30 minutes near the end. The heroes, lions Samson (Kiefer Sutherland) and Ryan (Greg Cipes) were generic and forgettable. I'll give them that the wildebeest dance team villains were at least something I've never seen before, but that doesn't make them good villains, which they aren't. The animation is kinda off putting - feels a little animal uncanny- valley-like. Nothing horrible, but nothing great. The comedy fell a little flat. Nigel was pushed as the comic center and thus became it as the only character with any real jokes. Samson, Ryan, and the others didn't feel like very good straight men as they weren't very good comics either. The one line I laughed at came from Bridget on the purpose of giraffes - when Nigel was miles away from them. All in all, not a very good film, but I'd say it's watchable. It's probably not worth your money, but maybe if it's on the Disney Channel. But don't expect anything that good. If you don't want to watch them both, watch Madagascar.

Atli Hafsteinsson The first two minutes or so of The Wild are very promising. They have a very snappy, cartoony style, culminating in a 14,000 foot wildebeest, and you think to yourself that you unfairly overlooked what's actually an entertaining cartoon comedy. But then what is revealed to be a mere opening (Kung Fu Panda style) ends and we are drawn into the movie's actual world.If you are unfamiliar with the term "uncanny valley", it refers to creepiness of features being very realistic but noticeably off the mark. That's The Wild's look style in a nutshell. The animals look semi-realistic but the way in which they are not is very visually jarring. The character design is very unappealing all around, and this movie looked average even when it came out in 2006.The setting might seem at first glance like a complete rip-off of Madagascar. The setting, not the storyline, centering on a lion and his friends in Central Park Zoo. The conflict here is about Samson the celebrated lion being separated from his son Larry, who runs away to the wild so he can overcome his total lack of a roar and thus live up to his father. The story about father and son is very touching and is definitely not to blame for this movie's shortcomings. Rather, how it's told is.Going back to Madagascar again, one of the strengths of those movies is that they know which characters are golden and keep us with them. Not the case with The Wild. Larry's friends the kangaroo and hippo had potential, and so did the sports team penguins, masters in the zoo's preferred sport of curling (which the movie honestly does a good job at making look exciting). But they all vanish practically instantly when our main gang leave on their journey. Even more of a shame, the alligators (one of whom is on the poster) barely even register, let alone induce a chuckle. They just appear and then they are gone, and you could easily imagine their scene being cut. What a waste of characters with potential! The main cast really don't get a lot to do. By far the most entertaining is Nigel the koala bear, hilariously voiced by Eddie Izzard. He's fed up with his popularity as a cute and cuddly koala bear plush, and his scatterbrained nature is the driving force for what little comedy the film can muster. The giraffe does nothing but complain all the way through, I was fed up with her quite quickly. Don't even get me started on the Dutch dung beetles, which stick out from this film's look style like a sore thumb but thankfully have even less screen time than the alligators.But what ultimately drags The Wild down is that its world is empty. Is anybody supposed to believe that New York City would ever be this empty, let alone Manhattan? They drive around, run around many streets, and there's just nobody there. Because it's nighttime? New York City is nicknamed the City that Never Sleeps, would some crowd simulations have hurt? There were lots of people in the zoo, so what's the excuse? This really kills one's believability in the film.What is in most regards a rather tame, pedestrian film is made even worse by squandering its few gold nuggets. The alligators get no time to be developed at all, and the hilarious special agent chameleons even can't save much. The biggest shame is that the visual and storytelling grandeur of the opening sequence is never touched upon again and upstages the feature presentation considerably. If that doesn't say something about what a missed opportunity The Wild is, I don't know what does.

Michael Nafekh Decent. This movie-if I were to summarize it in one word-would be decent. Before we progress, I'd like to mention that 5/10 stars is not as horrid as one might suppose. On my charts, it means that I moderately enjoyed the movie. With that in mind, 10/10 is almost impossible to reach, while 9/10 would be reserved to a movie so stellar, that I could watch it one-hundred times and still enjoy it. 1/10 would be so unsatisfactory that the mere sight of such an abhorrent disgrace to cinema would make children cry and grown men cringe. ---If you would like to skip to my summery,thus avoiding my very small spoiler and larger ramble, jump to the final paragraphLet's begin with the characters. Their portrayal was decent, even though for the most part, they were static (the snake, however, was unique… I liked the snake). What redeemed them were their lovable personalities, and the clear synergy between each of them while interacting; I personally enjoyed the odds and end gang. With that said, the dialogue was less diverse. I found myself cringing from time to time on the cliché lines uttered by Ryan and his father in particular, while Nigel was-on occasion-so obtuse that I couldn't help but sigh. But perhaps I'm downplaying this movie, as I've seen it through the eyes of an adult. Kids will probably find the dimwittedness of that particular Koala, Nigel, enjoyable and-unless well read-might not pick up on the clichés. However, we're talking about Disney here, and they have an impressive resume when it comes to making their movies enjoyable to both child and parent, without dumbing it down. This leads me to my next point. Since they were confronted by a shortcoming on some of the dialogue between Ryan and his father, they intended to make the movie appealing to us-the parents or older fans of Disney-through the use of mature humor. Though not as blatant as some other 'children movies' I've watched in the past, The Wild has its fair share. Thus is why I ask, confused, why the movie was rated G, and not PG. As for the latter, I have no say in such things, so let's move on.Now, onto the very fabric of the movie itself: I found it needed a few more original songs, and no, dear directors, 'I'm havin' a... really nice day, really nice day' repeated over and over does not count. I did enjoy the Coldplay song at the beginning, however. The storyline itself was jarring, and the use of transition to cover long durations of time was used too often. To counter my negative comment, however, I do applaud the director for attempting to encompass the viewers in the past and present- thus creating a more intimate connection between character and viewer. You would have achieved this wonderfully if only you fixed the pacing! And this leads me onto my final point. I really enjoyed Samson's background story. It was fresh, and when told fully, connected the dots and linked his strange behavior to a logical outcome of an event that transpired in his own childhood. I won't go deeper than that, least I spoil the story!---To conclude, I gave The Wild a 5/10, which is not so bad. It's animated nicely, has some great character chemistry and a good background story for Samson, but loses a few stars because of its occasional cliché lines, less than satisfactory original compositions, and jarred pace. This is by no means a Disney masterpiece, but rest assured that you and your child will find enjoyment in it!'If there be animals inside, expect a review!'~Mike

daler001 First rate animation with third rate writing. Not much imagination evident in the project. Father and son lions argue, the boy sulks in a truck and gets shipped to Africa. The father goes looking for him with a group of other zoo animals. The voice actors have talent, but none of it is on display here. Listen carefully as Keifer Sutherland cries out his son's name dozens and dozens of times(well it felt like that many)in anguish. Lazy writing. The animation is well done but the character design is uninteresting (they look exactly like the animals they're supposed to be), so the film has little style in design or storytelling. My two-year old lost interest also,which is a rarity for a computer animated film.