Did you people see the same film I saw?

Am I Missing Something?

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

We all know when humans try to manage ecosystems it all goes bad, Yellowstone was the perfect example. The film starts well, but fails to say why 1 man is set adrift in the wilderness or which organisation is to blame for such incompetence. At the end it just gets silly and pointless. True hunter / gatherers, fishermen and farmers do not cause adverse deprecation of wildlife, it's their livelihood to maintain those stocks. The hunter dog and cat breeds are even more inclined to avoid the large hunt, it's usually desperation of survival demands. Buffalo, Caribou, Deer along with Lions, Tigers, Elephants are the victims of sad city dwellers who think killing them from a safe distance makes them a big hunter. A certain US dentist comes to mind, but he killed the one that angered the host nation, that actually allows many more.

Charles Martin Smith is a fine actor, though he's usually thought of as a supporting player--such as his roles in "The Untouchables" and "American Graffiti". Here, however, he is not only the leading man but one of the ONLY people in the film. Clearly, it rests on him and his ability to carry his role--and he's more than up to the part and gives it his all...seriously! The film begins with an ill-prepared biologist heading to the middle of nowhere in Alaska. Why the middle of nowhere? Because--he wants to observe wolves in the wild. So, he takes an INSANE airplane flight into the wilderness and it's freezing cold--and you assume he'll just succumb to the elements. However, with a bit of help but an Inuit native, he's able to survive despite his lack of training. And, over time, he learns to respect the animals and care about them. In the meantime, there are lots of scenes that you'd think would be boring, but Smith and the film makers are able to make the audience care about him and these beautiful animals. My only reservation is about the ending. Obviously his character is supposed to 'go native'--but seeing him running around naked with the wolves was just plain weird--and something your mother-in-law would probably not appreciate as she watches this with you! While none of the nudity was gratuitous, it is interesting that a Disney film would show this much skin--and that he'd be doing this in Alaska! Still, it's well worth seeing and a fascinating tour de force by Smith.

A masterpiece film. Seemingly simultaneous portrayal of first and third person views of one person's accidental wilderness schooling. It is far from an accurate film version of the book, but an excellent film it is. It will move you. It is the only film I have ever seen that can somehow show the feeling one gets from wilderness solace. Carroll Ballard is so good at selecting the scenes and how to tell a story. The movie is not filled with dialog which would seem to me to be an obstacle to telling a story, but Carroll Ballard uses it as a tool. An example is a scene with light bulbs on a crate and the main character in the background. The focus is on the bulbs, but the real story is the character behind them. Very well done. I do not care for "group hug" movies and usually detest a director's attempt to "teach me a lesson" about life or to try to bring about emotion. This movie will inspire but does so without a good guy/bad guy plot, hero/heroin, shock scenes, eye candy getting rescued, or even a complicated plot, etc. Great acting and directing. Just a very well made movie that doesn't have to use the typical shock value, tear jerking, "tricks of the trade" so many other filmmakers have to rely on.

this film has haunted my memory since I saw it as a young boy. Whenever I feel overwhelmed by by the day to day troubles of 21st century life, I watch this movie and somehow it centers me. This film belongs on any thinking persons "desert island DVD" list.That being said, there is a scene from the film that I remember vividly, where Tyler is struggling to survive and he has no fire and in his desperation finds matches only to drop them in the river. That scene was left out of this Disney DVD version. I wish they had not tampered with the original version. With this one glaring example of meddling with the directors original vision on on the part of Disney studios, I agree with the previous commentator on how this film is atypical of a Disney film. This film rails against the Disneyfication of the world in an artful and satisfying way that makes it all the more shocking that Disney studios bothered to release it at all. I think that the fan base combined with the incredible cinematography and CMS's performance made it impossible to mothball, which I am sure was considered.