Man in the Wilderness

Audience Reviews

View More (35)

georgan g Have watched 3 versions of this true story. This is much shorter than the original novel and the other interpretations. It's aged by the crude special effects. Richard Harris had a "scar" on his face that lifted up in the middle. Also didn't like what looked like inhumane "tripping" of horses. Rated 3/5 Stars •  Rated 3 out of 5 stars 03/31/23 Full Review Audience Member Anyone who doesn't think this movie was great is nuts. Long periods of nothing but acting - no music, no sounds other than the sounds of nature, and so on. Much better than the DiCaprio remake. Rated 5/5 Stars •  Rated 5 out of 5 stars 02/06/23 Full Review dave s The first twenty minutes or so of Man in the Wilderness are pretty compelling – set in the early 1800s in America's Northwest, Zach Bass (Richard Harris) is mauled by a bear and left to die in the wilderness by his fur trapping partners. The remainder of the film consists of alternating scenes of the fur trappers dragging a large boat over a seemingly hostile terrain and Zach struggling to make his way back to civilization. The performances are good, as would be expected by Harris and John Huston, and the cinematography nicely shows off the spectacular scenery, but the film is marred by annoying flashbacks, some odd POV shots early on, a cloying music score, a laughably absurd scene of a reborn Bass reading a bible quote to an injured rabbit, and an ending that is sickeningly sentimental. Rated 2/5 Stars •  Rated 2 out of 5 stars 03/30/23 Full Review Audience Member No, this is not good. Which really sucks, seeing as you have both the great Richard Harris and the brilliant John Huston. But, Huston's greatest strength was directing, which unfortunately he did not do in this case. The actual director, Sarafian, made several little known films of no real regard, then worked mostly as an actor. So no real surprise that the movie isn't better, but the screenplay by DeWitt is also to blame. The story line is thin, the action very hokey and poorly choreographed as to be laughable at times, and the ending was too anticlimactic. 2 stars (no coincidence there) Rated 2/5 Stars •  Rated 2 out of 5 stars 01/26/23 Full Review Audience Member Fúria Selvagem (1971) #MovieReview 3,0 â­?ï¸? Após ser atacado por um urso, caçadores deixam homem semi morto para trás. Quase desfalecido, à (C) ajudado por índios , mais por pena que por esperança. Mas o homem sobrevive e segue em direção ao grupo. Bom filme! Rated 3/5 Stars •  Rated 3 out of 5 stars 02/25/23 Full Review ashley h Man in the Wilderness is an okay film. It is about a fur-trapper exacts revenge on his fellow companions who left him for dead. Richard Harris and John Huston give decent performances. The script is a little slow in places. Richard C. Sarafian did an alright job directing this movie. I liked this motion picture because of the drama and adventure. Rated 3/5 Stars •  Rated 3 out of 5 stars 03/31/23 Full Review Read all reviews

Man in the Wilderness

My Rating

Read More Read Less POST RATING WRITE A REVIEW EDIT REVIEW

Most Popular at Home Now