This Movie Can Only Be Described With One Word.

Lack of good storyline.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Not sure how, but this is easily one of the best movies all summer. Multiple levels of funny, never takes itself seriously, super colorful, and creative.

If you're looking at this as a "movie", you're lost to begin with. This is audio/visual poetry. It's pure feeling, pure experience. If you don't get it, that means you're just an average ordinary person. If you do get it, it means you're an artist. Either way doesn't make you right or wrong (these things are more difficult to quantify than 1 - 10) For me, a gay artist, this is one of the best and most moving films ever made. But most people aren't gay artists, so I get the "less than stellar" rating. Actually, it's a wonderful thing. I don't want to have the same middle-of-the-road taste as everyone else.If you love this movie, feel free to contact me at cody furguson dot come (without the spaces and with a .) I'm always interested in meeting fellow artists.

First of all, this film is GLACIALLY slow-moving, and I can see most viewers losing patience with it altogether in the first thirty minutes.The film's subject matter was one I think would form the basis of an excellent film; what was most lacking here was a plot that would advance the underlying themes.It's unfortunate, because in the hands of a writer like (say) Lanford Wilson, I think symbolism like a mountain-lion invading a school campus could take on great, Tragic proportions without being heavy-handed.I think, with a good script supporting the film, the same filmmaker, with the same tastes, and even with the same actors (who didn't really even get a chance to impress me), might have been able to present a meaningful and touching depiction of the pains and struggles that a boy goes through when he develops a powerful "crush" on an older boy that he admires.However, I'm sorry to say that without this foundation, and armed with a vague, dull-witted, and vastly uninteresting script, without any sort of plot in sight, and lacking any sort of sensible structure (for example, after viewing it, I believe you will find that you cannot point to climactic scenes, and instead, will find yourself enumerating "well, maybe that scene, or that one, were climaxes...")--the result is 95 minutes of tedium.Without a good plot, we never get terribly interested in any of the characters; their trials and difficulties are simply dull and boring.Without a good plot, dramatic devices and surrealistic directorial liberties become puzzling and confusing rather than enhancements to the story-line. I never really could believe, for example, the creation of "Leah" and I think that most viewers would be utterly baffled by the conventional way in which her telephone calls were filmed.As the film stands, I'm afraid it's one I cannot recommend at all. What I can never understand is why a film like THIS one isn't re-made by an enterprising film-maker...instead of all the mediocre remakes of films that were superlatively good in the first release! All it needs is a good script, written by good writers, and I think this film could be easily turned into an unforgettable classic about an aspect of male coming-of-age that is rarely treated in drama. All the elements that were so tedious and seemed so recherche in the film (the messages written on the boy's belly, the "Leah" scenes, the television-screen fantasies) could become rich if underpinned with a good STORYLINE.I see in quite a few comments that people are talking of this film as somehow being about a "gay" subject, and I think that's mistaken. Obviously, the "crush" depicted is that of a newly pubescent boy on an older adolescent boy, but the character of Logan is far too young to have settled on any particular sexual choices, and, indeed, in his depicted masturbation fantasies, we see all sorts of stimuli, sexual and non-sexual, as we would expect in a very young boy like him. I believe "crushes" such as Logan's are common among male youths who grow up to have a decided preference for female sex-partners.

I just recently saw Wild Tigers i have Known, i can only say it is one of the most beautiful and intelligent movies i have seen. Though i know most people have gotten confused over it or saying it was boring. I was very reluctant to see it after seeing some negative reviews. And by no means is this movie for everyone. It is considered an art film, and i couldn't agree with that more, it is very artsy filled with emotion and imagination all following our main Character defining himself.Relying mainly on lots of imagery and tones.The story revolves around Logan a misunderstood boy, who is unpopular and is gay as well. Lots of the imagery and voice over we see is all about him, the voice overs are what he's thinking inside, and the imagery his emotion, like him on the beach as a way to show he is calm, or when he's in the cave how dark it is and how it reflects, and sometimes he writes on his chest how he feels. Logan soon finds that he is attracted to the bad boy rebel in school Rodeo, they quickly become friends as he is also considered misunderstood and it is why they understand each other a lot problem is Rodeo isn't gay but Logan feels an attraction to him and would do anything to get him. Even by trying to become a woman, wishing he could be someone else.A lot of people have been saying it is a boring movie, i guess it depends on taste in that aspect, but i found myself intrigued, and understood most of what was going on. The acting is not the best but it's not over the top Oscar type either, it's just regular like if you were to talk to your friends or anyone around you.In the end i found myself to enjoy it much more then i thought i would and would say to most people to give it a try and see how they feel from there, in my opinion it was smart,engaging,sensitive and haunting at the same time, but not everyone will feel the same of course.Wild Tigers i Have known an excellent art film10/10

"Wild Tigers I have Known." It will only be showing in big cities, to be sure. It is one of those films SO artsy, that it makes no sense what so ever, except to the director! I HATE those! And all of those oh-so-alternative/artsy people try DESPERATELY to find "metaphors" in what is EVIDENT horseshit.There was NO plot, no story, no moral, no chronology, and nothing amusing or even touching. To me, it was a bunch of scenes thrown together that had nothing to do with one another, and were all for "show" to show how "artsy" and "visual" they could get. It was an ATTEMPT at yet ANOTHER teen angst film, but missed the mark on every level humanly possible. Then the credits roll! I was waiting for it to make SENSE! I was waiting for "the good part." I own about 60 independent films in my DVD collection, many of which could arguably be called "art house" films. This will NOT be amongst them. You will be very angry at yourself for paying to see this film, much less ever buying it on DVD.