Alicia I love this movie so much

GamerTab That was an excellent one.

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Marva It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

tom van de Bospoort Totally brilliant, it feels like an Araki film or a van sant, then you see that the executive producer is Gus van Sant. The great merit given to the film, by a brilliant director, van sant, a good reward. The film follows weired shots, with extended pauses looking at the characters, normally annoying but this director, seems to make this add to each feeling of the scenes. really differently lit, specially on the toilet roll on tree scene.Brilliant a must see, I'm now going to look out more for this director. Weired, well shot, fitting music, dialogue and special effects make this a 9/10, and one of those few I can feel is brilliant.

pogostiks About the only thing I liked about this film is that there was JUST enough in it to keep me in my seat to the end... I kept thinking that maybe in the NEXT scene things would gel... Alas...Those who like Gus Van Sant's films - especially his later ones - will probably like this. Personally, I find van Sant's films to be dull, pretentious and facile. Well, he was an executive producer for this film, so it is no surprise that the film could almost have been made by him - although personally I actually liked this better than van Sant's latest efforts (e.g. Elephant).Contrary to many here, I did not think the film was difficult to understand or disjointed, I thought that above all it is a film that wishes to portray a certain mood - the mood of an adolescent moving slowly into the adult world - but so slowly that the changes are barely visible if at all. But I feel that the problem with the film is that "mood" is not enough... and not only that, but that the mood painted here is, to my mind, incorrectly chosen for the story that is supposedly happening. The dream-like quality, so closely linked to nature, is beautifully captured here, but it is a mood which belongs much more to a much younger child, one who really still does get totally caught up in watching nature unfold (waves on a beach, grasses and flowers, spiders etc). The rhythm of the film reminds me of my summers when I was about eight or nine. There is a LANGUOR to the film that is in opposition to what SHOULD be a very tense time in an adolescent life. When you are caught up in a crush on someone - or being the object of bullying at school - you are anything BUT languorous! There are only two moments that truly worked for me in the film...SPOILERS HERE - first when Logan drops the groceries and his mother throws a bit of a fit. The frustrations of an adult dealing with a klutzy kid - especially with no father present - seemed real to me.The second, and ONLY part of the film with any tension to it, were the scenes where "Leah" (Logan's re-creation of himself) phones Rodeo and tries to seduce him into phone-sex. The first reason I liked it is because the person who did the voice-over of "Leah" was the most convincing actor in the entire film. (It made me think of Claire Danes from My So-Called Life ...the voice even sounded like Claire.) She and Rodeo had the only scenes that seemed totally believable between the kids. And what I especially liked was the fact that Rodeo only pretended to play along... it was perhaps the best moment in the film as - finally! - we got some character development.All in all, a somewhat misplaced effort... we will have to see what he does in his next film before we can really say much about the director's possible talents. In the meantime, if he can get away from van Sant's influence, it might do him a world of good. Who is this director anyhow - one of van Sant's boy toys?

Ollie I really don't understand some of the reviews here when it comes to this film. It's not so much that people dislike Wild Tigers I Have Known, it's how some have justified it.I've seen the comparison to Mysterious Skin, and could only think 'God, why on Earth...?', because the movies are nothing alike. Mysterious Skin is quite straightforward in the way it delivers its story - the telling itself is pretty conventional.Wild Tigers is not within a country mile of resembling mainstream movie. It does not hand you a nice and clear plot, it doesn't make everything easy to understand or have a definitive answer to the questions it might make you ask, it doesn't have an obvious meaning to every shot. Some people have described it as glacial and it is slow to be sure, but to me that's like looking at a painting by Caravaggio and complaining that it doesn't move: being impatient with a film such as this is pointless.Certain films you don't watch so much as tune into; I think of Wild Tigers as being like mood music ... you can drift along with it if you choose and see where it will take you, but if you demand things of it, then you've already missed its purpose.On top of that, I didn't think the plot was either obscure or confusing. Sure, there were elements where I was unsure of the meaning - that's the stuff for me to think about - but the gist of a boy drifting through the currents of confusion that surround the awakening of a different sexuality was quietly simple.Random shots of the object of his infatuation looking into the camera, or the lead wandering through undergrowth may seem surreal, but they build into a mosaic of the thoughts and daydreams that add to the character development that some people don't seem to have seen/understood.And amidst the more difficult and questioning parts of the film, you have the moments of startling clarity and simplicity, beautiful moments, such as a scene where the protagonist reveals some of his inner self to his friend that he had been keeping at arm's length. It's not a loud moment, it's not an overly dramatic moment - and it sparkles for it.I wouldn't say I loved this movie. I'm not entirely sure it's a type of movie that I could love, and thus I feel that 7 is the highest rating I can give it. What I can say though is that it captivated me, it made me think, and will doubtlessly stay with me for a long time to come.Wild Tigers I Have Known is a challenging film, and whilst it may not contain the kind of defined story that many viewers may expect, for those that take the time to view it as an experience and as something to think about, it can be very rewarding indeed.

Jambie67 Wow, I hated this movie. The subject matter should have resulted in a really fine film, and the lead actor was definitely sensitive and talented enough to handle the topic, but the script - if there even *was* a script - is a mess. This is less a movie than a random slide show that goes nowhere. I'd say it goes nowhere fast, except that it's actually the longest 81 minutes you'll ever sit through. As I've mentioned, the lead actor is good. So is Faruza Baulk (SP?), as his sometimes-harsh-but-ultimately-loving-and-accepting mother. The film makers have a lot to answer for here, because this is a mess. A real shame,because I really wanted to like this movie, but it's basically out-takes from a movie that never got made. Skip this one - it wasn't even worth the $6 I shelled out for pay-per-view.